I was pointing out how Fox shoulders the blame for not winning by a lot of fans while other players like Murray are praised for their play even though it hasn’t lead to winning.
I think a lot of it is a "grass is always greener" situation with him. He had a longer development process than a lot of other players in his class but watching Murray now, he looks like a stud. So does Fox, aside from his falling off from below average shooter to complete non-factor at range this season -- and it's not like Murray is a knock down shooter either. The biggest difference between them this season is that Fox has to share a backcourt with Hali and Mitchell so he gets less chances to run the offense and even when he does, it's not much of an offense.
I was always a Murray believer so I'm thrilled he's now looking like the player I projected him to be but it's also hard to ignore that Murray got experience playing in games
that matter early in his career (the post-season is a whole other learning curve) and he gets to work with a hall of fame coach every day instead of our revolving door of mediocrity. If their situations were reversed it seems likely we'd be pining for the Spurs version of Fox while lamenting that Murray isn't good enough to carry a winning team.