Reply With Quote
Neal 4 good $ with Spurs.
Born: Oct 3, 1984
Height: 6-4 / 1.93
Weight: 210 lbs. / 95.3 kg.
Prior to NBA / Country: Towson / USA
Info
RFA
Neal 4 good $ with Spurs.
Depends on what the Spurs decide to do with their plethora of guards.
Ya I think they have to do somethin with DeColo cuz I dont see it.
If Manu doesn't retire, which is the most likely scenario, I would let Neal go. Green/Ginobili/De Colo is fine at SG.
is he REALLY 6'4?
I don't think he'll be worth keeping at the 3-4million that he'll probably get in free agency, especially with our guard depth.
A big edge of Neal for Spurs is that his cap hold is very low. Keeping bird rights on Neal would only eat $0.4M in cap space.
The biggest interest would be if Manu retires. Spurs would have something like $15M in cap space to throw at a bigman. After that big signing, they would re-sign Splitter and Neal with bird rights and a SF with the room exception. Green/Neal/De Colo is decent enough for me to hold the SG spot.
When healthy he is pretty valuable. If we are bringing him back just to put him at backup PG instead of Joseph, ditch him. But he's useful in case of a Manu injury or Manu retiring. His injury has to have brought his value down so it's possible he may return.
Not worth what he is going to want and we have to many little guys on this team.
I still think some team will throw him a poison pill contract if the Spurs offer him a QA.
That is, if he's eligible for one.
Gary Neal probably doesn't need to be brought back unless Manu retires.
I hope he gets a decent offer from a team looking for shooting. He really is a nice player, hes just had a bad year largely due to some unfortunate injuries. But hes hit enough game winners for me to overlook the rough patch.
Ah the enigma that is Gary Neal. Pop loves having that Eddie House type player who provides instant offense off the bench, and after may failed attempts (mighty mouse comes to mind) he finally found it in Neal. And for good reason, Neal has gotten the team out of some rough patches with he lethal shooting. I like Gary.
Then on the other hand, there are may open issues. Poor defense, inability to play PG, and the glut of SGs on the team. It is also unclear what he will fetch in the open market, but you have to think Gary is gonna look to maximize his earnings. Don't blame him.
Right now, I come down on the side of letting him walk. If the spurs are serious about developing Cojo, Nando, and even Hanga, Neal's minutes will be key. I'm also assuming Mills doesn't leave money on the table by opting out this summer.
The thing is a healthy Neal can be a scary offensive force but the roster is unbalanced with too many midgets and only two SF and one center and a half (the half being Baynes since he's not being put on the court).
Then again with Manu's frequent injuries, if there a position that should be tripled it's SG but De Colo can do that like Bruno said.
I think they have to be smarter about the way they construct the roster next year to have a better balance between the different positions so yeah I like him a lot but it doesn't really make sense to re-sign him unless we win a championship and want to bring back everyone or Manu retires.
This is goin to be bout what $ neal wants and if the spurs have it to do it but if they can get him for a good $ then you have to do it. Jackson 2.
Pass on both of them both , get taller, younger, and better.
Why? He's outstanding Ginobili insurance (when he's injured, if they don't have Neal, they'll lack firepower in the back court), as well as insurance in case Joseph isn't ready to be the primary backup PG. He's also restricted, will be coming off a sub par season (which decreases the likelihood of someone making an astronomical offer) and they have a good amount of financial flexibility. Letting him walk would be throwing away a solid asset for no real reason.
Do not want. We have too many guards.
To open playing time for Joseph and De Colo.
They can have their cake and eat it too. If one of them drastically outplays him throughout camp/preseason, then they can have the job and he becomes quality insurance, similar to Blair. Of course he'll be unhappy, but so what? That's not a good enough reason to throw away a quality asset. Besides, one or both of them could easily falter and Ginobili will get at least two injuries. If by some miracle the opposite happens, then they'll have a solid trade asset.
Stockpilling players just because they are good and because otherwise they would be lost assets is a poor way to manage a roster.
For example, if you have some worthwhile projects, you can't repeatedly put solid vets in front of them and just ask them to outplay them. Projects need playing time to get better, and, if there are solid vets in front of them, they won't get it and, so, won't get better.
Neal isn't even a good insurance because Spurs biggest uncertainty in their backcourt is the backup PG slot and Neal sucks at PG. Neal would be the third string SG on the team behind Ginobili and Green and, even if Spurs third string SG will play more than the typical this stringer because of Ginobili's injuries, you don't need a player as good as Neal to fill that spot. With what he has shown as a rookie, De Colo could cover that spot in his sop re season.
Last edited by Bruno; 03-18-2013 at 09:42 PM.
Neal is a situational player on this roster and Pop doesn't really know how to use situational players (Neal, Bonner, Blair); Pop either plays them too many minutes in stretches and/or doesn't use them when a situation calls for them.
Other than shooting he can't really do anything; isn't a good ball handler, passer, rebounder, defender, etc. With the age of the big 3 now, we need more versatile players with size.
Neal and Blair are two players that just don't give us what we need which is being athletic and a good defender. They are both tweeners playing out of their positions and we can do better by replacing them by draft or free agency.
It depends on the situation. Blair, it makes sense to let go; Neal, it doesn't.
They may be worthwhile projects, but what's the upside? I see a competent 4th (Joseph) and 5th (De Colo) guard, who wouldn't be a good fit together offensively, since neither is a scorer. Their upside isn't high enough to justify handing one or the other a rotation spot on a team with serious aspirations and a team that can't afford to throw away rotation spots. The Heat/Thunder can do that with the likes of Cole and Jackson, because of the presence of James/Durant and the fact that their cores, in general, can play virtually unlimited minutes.
Of course you don't need a player as good as Neal to be a third string SG, but if you can have it, you don't necessarily throw it away just because the player is overqualified for the position (for example, the Heat didn't need Allen, because they already had Miller, but they added him anyway). If Joseph and/or De Colo drastically outplay him in camp/preseason and prove themselves as a rotation player, then it makes sense to shop him.
That seems like a waste of money to me. Mills is on the books for cheap, and he fills the instant-offense, deep-bench scorer role pretty well. If Mills opts out and leaves, then it would make sense to give Neal a look. But I wouldn't give him more than the qualifying offer. Re-signing every half-decent player is what got Memphis into trouble. It's what is going to be Denver into trouble in a couple of years.
Worst comes to worst, they can just draft a scorer. That's about the most common skill set players coming out of college have.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
