http://www.nba.com/2011/news/feature...s=iref:nbahpt1
Before he left San Antonio for the summer, Gregg Popovich and R.C. Buford told him he had to keep working on his game and not be satisfied. Now that George Hill has been traded to Indiana, Neal says he was told to expect some minutes next season backing up Tony Parker at point guard.
Not exactly shocking news. But at least it gives us some potential insight into the front offices' plan. Maybe they won't go after an established backup, such as Watson. Maybe they'll turn to a less proven option, someone to just provide depth, rather than play regularly.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: that would be foolish. It sounds great in theory, because it would allow their best talent to play and it would make them significantly bigger on the perimeter. But there's two obvious problems with this . . .
1) Neal would have to consistently defend PG's, which is a recipe for disaster.
2) Even in the event he does an adequate job with that 1, what happens when Parker inevitably suc b to injury? Have Neal play 35 mpg at PG? Run Ginobili into the ground? They need an established PG, who's reliable enough to step in and play major minutes when Parker get's injured.
But if they sign an established PG to be in the rotation, then they'll be no room for one of Leonard or Anderson. What they need to do is alleviate the roster imbalance by getting rid of Jefferson and acquiring a starting PF (for financial reasons, the latter probably only happens if the former does). Which brings me to this . . .
1) McDyess/Blair for A. Johnson, Jefferson for Petro, Petro for Alabi
2) Jefferson/Blair for A. Johnson/Kleiza
Both are good trades for the Raptors. In 1, they save a lot of money, while getting back an equal player. In 2, they don't save money, but they improve at SF, improve their league worst three-point shooting and get a glass eater to replace Evans.
While 1 is obviously ideal for the Spurs, it probably only happens if the Nets strike out on their primary SF targets. Whatever the new cap is, the Nets will have tons of cap space, an owner willing to spend and they'll be desperate to do something of significance to convince Williams to stay. Considering their lack of trade assets, Jefferson may end up being as good as they can do. He would give them a third scorer and by trading Petro, they'd essentially get him for $6 million next season and $7.5 million the following season.
Even if the Raptors -- who don't have a single established C on the roster and will inevitably strike out on Chandler/Dalembert -- balk at Petro for Alabi, it's still worth it for the Spurs.
Bad news... That means Cory will be glued to the bench or playing for the Toros. And we're going to try to squeeze another SG as a PG. I just wish we would get a serviceable vet PG to back up Tony, and stop with these experiments that never worked for us.
I like it. Neal runs the PnR good enough. He can set people up and has a good game going to the basket.
Well,
Of course Neal is not ideal to defend PGs, but he will defend backup PGs mostly. And it's not like Neal will play a lot of minutes as a backup PG. I expect 10 to 15 min at most.
When Parker got injured, Hill did fine as a backup because Manu was the playing the point most of the time. There wasn't a disaster.
If Parker happens to be injured again, the same thing will happen.
And Neal receiving PG minutes won't stop the Spurs to sign a backup PG. Even with Hill, Parker, Manu and Neal, we signed Quinn. I just hope that this time we sign a better cheap backup PG, like Watson as you said.
OKC has 5 PGs. I don't think they will keep Royal Ivey. He would be my favorite to be our cheap backup PG.
I'm happy because it will give Anderson more minutes.
You can run the PnR as a SG. Manu made a living out of that. That's not really the problem. The problem is setting up the offense, calling and executing plays, and when the play you called didn't work, making lemonade. Basically, a lot of the things Hill was pretty weak at too.
I prefer Manu to play SG. It's his natural position, where he feels more comfortable with, and if he's going to have to give us reduced minutes (at this point mandatory, IMO), I rather he give us his best where he's better at.
It would be worth giving a try but I really hope they do not force it if its clear its not working.
This reminds me too much of what happened to Roger Mason. I would hate to see Neal get broken the way Roger did. Mason was hot until he was forced to play pg too much and then he became a s of his former self practically over night.
Agree completely.
Everyone seems to think being a PG is simply ball-handling and calling plays. That's about 20% of being a good offensive PG. The other 80% is about DECISION MAKING. There are several good PGs that make poor decisions but only a few that make very good ones. Nash is a good example of an excellent decision maker - he even was voted as the league MVP twice and he plays no defense; his offense was that stellar.
TP is one of the best PGs the Spurs have had because of how he manages the game, the choices he makes between driving, passing or hitting the 18ft jumper and deciphering matchups and positioning his teammates in the best manner to capitalize.
Neal can't do that - not because he doesn't want to, but because he has little experience doing so (nothing against him personally). The Spurs would be better off w/ Cory Joseph backing up TP - he'll make some mistakes/turnovers but will learn by fire (the same way TP did). The Spurs and Cory will be the better for it 3 years from now.
I think they took that into account, but I think Neal is head strong. Something tells me regardless of him playing the point or not he is going to continue to knock down shots. From everything i've seen so far Neal is pretty fearless. He's no where near the same makeup of a Roger Mason.
And I don't agree with TD21 saying it will be a disaster watching him guard PG's. At least he will be guarding players more his height. He doesn't play enough minutes to get into foul trouble, and only a portion of those minutes would be at point guard
Rmj ii
It's starting to look more and more like the team is going to need a new coach. Pop just refuses to learn from his mistakes. Every single person on this forum could see the lack of Splitter hurting this team months before it blew up in Pop's face.
Trying to force players to play out of position just won't work. Neal is going to have a down year as RMJ II when he's forced to play PG and out of his comfort zone.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
If they go with an established PG, I think it's 50/50 between Watson/Ivey. They could trade Green for him (it works, because the Thunder are way under the cap and other than re-signing Cook and maybe bringing in a minimum forward, they're set) or wait and see if he's waived. As you alluded to, there's clearly no room for him on the Thunder.
The Spurs may actually prefer Ivey to Watson, because he's been a non rotation player for much of his career, so he'd probably be more accepting of his role, if in fact they fail to move Jefferson and utilize Neal as the backup PG. And unlike Watson, he can defend SG's.
Neal playing PG may give Anderson more minutes, but what about Leonard? Ten man rotations are difficult for myriad reasons.
is delonte west serviceable? is he even a free agent?
Hopefully Neal doesn't follow Roger Mason Jr.'s lead after he started taking on point guard duties.
It isn't just RMJ... Hill couldn't turn into a serviceable PG and run an offense in 3 seasons either. This is the NBA. There's top talent out there. IMO, it's a problem to keep rolling experiments out there when the best players in your roster have a very short term expiration date.
This doesn't necessarily mean that the Spurs won't sign another PG. I'm sure Neal will get his chance at the position but I could see the Spurs bringing in a vet for the minimum as insurance and spot minutes. Definitely won't see them spending any of the MLE to get another guard though.
Cory Joseph can't play next season IMO. He will be with Austin the whole year regardless of what our PG situation is.
serious?
SERIOUS?
serious...
fck this RMJ v.20 failure experimental again
While I wouldn't discard that outright, I've been thinking they would do the same thing the last couple of seasons, and they have not (and I don't really consider Quinn a vet).
I think they feel that they can live with Manu playing backup PG if the need arises, but I personally think it's a poor decision (not that Manu couldn't, but I think we need Manu's limited legs to give us his best at SG)
I wouldn't read to much into this. The Spurs aren't even allowed to talk to their players right now because of the lockout, so I'm sure they talked to each guy individually and told him some things to work on (since they are locked out of the gym).
With the uncertainty of the new CBA and the lack of PG depth on the roster, I'm sure Gary was told to work on some of his PG skills (things he should probably work on either way).
Neal is a better ball handler, and can actually drive with the ball in his hands, and has a nice floater not like RM. Yeah I don't want to see Neal as an point guard, and do hope we get someone by trade or free agency. I think the SG will be cramped with Anderson starting,and Manu coming off the bench.
Not surprised and I like it.
This made too much sense with Hill's departure.
Spurs fans have to ask themselves this- Who do you want getting 15 minutes a game next year- James Anderson or another Chris Quinn?
It's a no brainer. Pop has to find significant minutes for Anderson and Leonard. Neal playing some back-up point guard is the only way that can happen.
Also, Neal has the ability to do just fine defending opposing back-up point guards for 12-15 minutes a game. Will he be able to put on a Bruce Bowen impression on the Russel Westbrooks or Chris Pauls? No way. Not even Parker or any point guard in the league can do that.
Even if you try to nitpick about this issue, does a Chris Quinn minimal type- point guard improve the defensive situation? No it does not. These minimum point guards will be just as good or worse than Neal defensively IMO. Therefore the Neal defensive issue is somewhat irrelevant.
In a nut s : Leonard+ Anderson getting 15-20 minutes each in the rotation>> Being pessimistic about Neal's defensive ability, when his replacement (other solutions) at back-up pg won't be much better.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 07-19-2011 at 12:56 AM.
Yeah, I think people are reading too much into this. "Some" does not mean all the backup minutes behind Tony. It seems like they think CJ is legit, so he'll likely be getting those minutes after he gets used to the system. Besides, Manu is usually playing with the backup PG anyway, so he assumes most of the responsibility for the offense.
RIP Neal.
Having only one true PG on the team would be very stupid. I hope Joseph makes the team and gets spot minutes at PG. Seems he is a good defender and we desperately need that. If Joseph isn't ready then we absolutely need a cheap vet PG. Neal/Manu could be ok for a few minutes but would be exploitable by quicker guards and if one of Parker or Manu goes down with an injury we would be a bad, unbalanced team.
I love how people think Pop made Mason suck. When in reality, Mason was just a really bad limited player, who had an initial hot streak when teams were unaware of his one strength (one dribble pull up off the pick and roll). Once teams took that out of Mason's game, Mason went down ter because he couldn't do anything else. He was a lost cause on the defensive end as well ( both mentally and physically), something Neal is not ( Neal is actually underrated in this regard).
They both play(ed) the same position and both could shoot, but Mason of 09' and Neal of 11' are totally different players. Watch some games.
I'm sure Mike D'Antoni made Mason suck this past year too. How dare he make him play the SF at times.
This was kind of discussed aswell in the Cory Joseph think tank thread. Basically, If Neal-Manu is the backcourt off the bench, there's enough playmaking that Neal can kindof play as a combo guard, and we don't have such a squeeze for minutes. He'll be masquerading as a PG, but it's probably fine with Manu, though maybe not so much with Neal-Anderson. It's probably worth it in terms of maximising team effectiveness(Leonard playing instead of Quinn)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
