KINGS PICKING 4TH IN 2022 NBA DRAFT!
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
- Status
I agree with most of this. Murray is the pick who makes the most sense on paper. He plays a premium position and he contributed at an elite level on both ends of the court this past season. He's a smart team defender who should slide easily into that free safety role and make everyone else on the floor better defensively. When Sabonis has the ball in the high post he's a mismatch on the low block for most defenders which should lead to better shots for our guards and wings. And there's also an x-factor with Murray that is hard to quantify but shows up if you watch his games -- he makes smart reads at game speed and finds ways to contribute that aren't dependent on his scoring.
He's not the elite shot blocker that most probably want next to Sabonis but with Queta and Jones already in the rotation, I don't see that as a big need for us anyway. We already have interior shot blocking, what we don't have is a combo forward who can defend other wings and forwards and rotate off the ball to stop dribble penetration while our bigs get into position. Guys like Sochan and Eason could also fill that role or we could try to trade for somebody or we could wait a year until we get the cap space to sign somebody in free agency but one way or another we need that player if we want to be in the top half of the league in team defense.
The reason I think Ivey is worth considering regardless of fit is that guards with the ability to beat defenders one-on-one are usually much better in the NBA compared to NCAA. The floor spacing, the presence of better shooters throughout the rotation, and the officiating heavily favoring smaller ballhandlers means that guards who can get into open space and force defensive rotations are currently very hard to stop. His path to stardom is clearer than anyone else in this draft and drafting a star player at this spot is going to change our fortunes more than anything else.
You make a good point though that there is a downside to drafting Ivey. If he's not a star he basically just gives us more depth at a position where we don't need depth and that leaves big holes elsewhere -- primarily at the wing positions. I don't think that's a serious issue if Ivey is at least a reliable scorer and solid defender as we have other paths (trades, free agency) for addressing our lack of wings. I hope we draft a star here but we also can't afford to swing and miss completely so the relative downside of each pick may weigh more heavily on this decision than their upside.
He's not the elite shot blocker that most probably want next to Sabonis but with Queta and Jones already in the rotation, I don't see that as a big need for us anyway. We already have interior shot blocking, what we don't have is a combo forward who can defend other wings and forwards and rotate off the ball to stop dribble penetration while our bigs get into position. Guys like Sochan and Eason could also fill that role or we could try to trade for somebody or we could wait a year until we get the cap space to sign somebody in free agency but one way or another we need that player if we want to be in the top half of the league in team defense.
The reason I think Ivey is worth considering regardless of fit is that guards with the ability to beat defenders one-on-one are usually much better in the NBA compared to NCAA. The floor spacing, the presence of better shooters throughout the rotation, and the officiating heavily favoring smaller ballhandlers means that guards who can get into open space and force defensive rotations are currently very hard to stop. His path to stardom is clearer than anyone else in this draft and drafting a star player at this spot is going to change our fortunes more than anything else.
You make a good point though that there is a downside to drafting Ivey. If he's not a star he basically just gives us more depth at a position where we don't need depth and that leaves big holes elsewhere -- primarily at the wing positions. I don't think that's a serious issue if Ivey is at least a reliable scorer and solid defender as we have other paths (trades, free agency) for addressing our lack of wings. I hope we draft a star here but we also can't afford to swing and miss completely so the relative downside of each pick may weigh more heavily on this decision than their upside.
Last edited:
His USG rate was 30%. There isn’t a snowballs chance in hell he’s gonna get the rock that often in the pros especially on our team with Fox/Ox. IOW his scoring numbers will plummet. Also a lot of his blocks were him sagging off his defender leaving them wide open which will never work in the pros. We don’t need another role player
Last edited:
I think you're misinterpreting what USG rate is measuring. It's not a measure of how much time a player has the ball in their hands, it's a measure of how many shot attempts they put up relative to the team total (adjusted for playing time). So since we have a PG and C who are both capable of averaging 7apg, that's a lot of shots that someone else is taking. Guys like Murray who catch and shoot or cut to the basket to finish lobs can carry a relatively high usage rate in the NBA without needing to pound the ball. On Phoenix, for instance, Booker, Cameron Payne, JaVale McGee, and DeAndre Ayton all had higher usage %'s than Chris Paul. All Murray has to do is take Buddy Hield's shots from the last few years to get into the 23-27% range which is not going to sustain 23 ppg but it could sustain 19-20 ppg if he continues to improve as an outside shooter and gets to the line at a league average rate.
Ivey had a 28.7% USG rate so what's your point? Bad take. If your contention is Murray won't get the same role, then Ivey won't either. Even moreso on a team with Fox/Mitchell/DDV getting guard minutes. If Ivey has to take a step back, what is he contributing?
Also, Murray has absolutely no ego to his game. He played off Garza/Wieskamp/Bohannon and was a high level role player next to them, especially on defense. When his team needed him to step up, he put up the best offensive season in the country.
Also, Murray has absolutely no ego to his game. He played off Garza/Wieskamp/Bohannon and was a high level role player next to them, especially on defense. When his team needed him to step up, he put up the best offensive season in the country.
It is, it's just a bad one. Ivey's archetype is an on-ball slasher/scorer; that and his physical profile/athleticism are why you're drafting him. He's not a defender, he's not a C&S spacer, he's an ok enough playmaker for a 2. So if you're taking Ivey, his value is tied to his on-ball scoring creation.
So my question is why you Murray's USG matters to his future value when he provides actual value without the ball in his hands (shooting, defense, his whole freshman year being a role player), and Ivey's archetype doesn't? If you think Murray's scoring plummets, then Ivey's will plummet even further because of how he gets his points.
So my question is why you Murray's USG matters to his future value when he provides actual value without the ball in his hands (shooting, defense, his whole freshman year being a role player), and Ivey's archetype doesn't? If you think Murray's scoring plummets, then Ivey's will plummet even further because of how he gets his points.
Not totally disagreeing, but I don’t think it’s totally fair to put Ivey in that box. He may have some cutting and movement through screen sets that don’t require the ball, can play off of Sabonis’ strengths and open up looks and lanes for others. I don’t think he needs to pound the ball to be effective.
He's not a finished product, and as always, defending in the NBA right now is largely dependent on physical abilities. His upside is why he's seen as BPA at 4 and why some think he should go in the top 3. That's his value. I think if you draft Murray teams want to see what he does now. There will be leeway with Ivey due to age, and those super athletic tools. Murrays usage absolutely matters for the reasons in the videos I posted above. While in the triple threat position, what is he giving you? He's shown potential but he's struggled against NBA athletic ability on drives already. Perhaps the spacing will help him, but when he meets these Tucker types, what's his answer? If you have two Barnes types that need time to work in iso does that work in the context of the a team game with Fox/Sabonis? Maybe it will. It actually could be a huge advantage if he can score as well as Barnes w/o help so that's certainly a tick in Murrays favor IMO. If it's to shoot over the top he's going to need plenty of touches to show that potential because the games where his usage and shot attempts dip those percentages might dip as well.
Screw that. When it comes to the hustle plays like charges taken this team should be in the top 10 next year. They should do a complete 180. Forget the minimalist incremental expectations. This team needs a RADICAL change in their mental approach to the game. They won't get to the Miami level in one year, but Miami Grit should be the ideal to which they all strive.
Sabonis and Fox are barely entering their prime. I'm not worried about being cemented into anything at this point, especially with the 4th pick in the draft that will either net a 19 or so year old or a young vet in trade. You're trying to get to the top of Mt. Everest before you even reach Mt. Whitney.
Right, there's some off-ball talent there. But let's not be mistaken, we aren't drafting him to be that Klay/Buddy Hield/Duncan Robinson archetype that doesn't dribble the ball. We're drafting him that he becomes the next Donovan Mitchell/Zach Lavine that's a potential #1 scoring option that finds a way to be passable on defense and provide secondary playmaking.
Sure, but I guess I'm just sick of guys who are bad defensively and we just magically hope they become good when there isn't a lot in the profile or prospect film to suggest it. That's what we've been looking at Fox to do for the last 5 years. Ivey obviously has the frame/athleticism to be an elite defender, but it really does worry me how much he was hunted on the defensive end and in general just showed really poor defensive IQ.
I don't want to say you can't become a good defender at the NBA level after being horrible as a prospect, but it's pretty dang rare or it takes forever to manifest (Steph Curry as a prime example). I can't think of many guys who were just flat out bad defenders at the NBA level in their first 2 or 3 years and turned it around to become high-level defensive contributors.
I don't want to say you can't become a good defender at the NBA level after being horrible as a prospect, but it's pretty dang rare or it takes forever to manifest (Steph Curry as a prime example). I can't think of many guys who were just flat out bad defenders at the NBA level in their first 2 or 3 years and turned it around to become high-level defensive contributors.
There is upside to every player but where is the upside with Ivey's defense other than wishful thinking? He's either the worst defender or one of the worst defenders in the draft. It's kind of like saying a 20% 3pt shooter has upside when it comes to his shooting range. It's not impossible to improve but it's very improbable.
It's improbable that any college player develops a skill in the NBA that they didn't have in college. I think it's wishful thinking to just assume that they'll develop any type of skill if they haven't shown any of it by draft time.
I'd say he has a better shot at developing into a good defender since he's athletic and has good lateral foot speed over a slow unathletic player but I still wouldn't say he has anything other than improbable odds of getting there since he hasn't shown much of anything on the defensive end other than a possession here and there.
I'd say he has a better shot at developing into a good defender since he's athletic and has good lateral foot speed over a slow unathletic player but I still wouldn't say he has anything other than improbable odds of getting there since he hasn't shown much of anything on the defensive end other than a possession here and there.
Randy Jackson commentary aside, it's easy to see the appeal. In a draft that's light on game-changing talent, Ivey is that one guy who can change the whole tone of the game in a few possessions. When he has the ball he attacks and he's going to wear defenses down if he can continue to apply that level of pressure throughout the game.
He wouldn't be my first choice or even my second choice (he's probably #3 unless we trade down) but it's fun to imagine a gameplan where Mike Brown just unleashes 48 minutes a night of Fox, Ivey, and Mitchell tag-teams on opposing guards and we watch those unfortunate souls gasp for air mid-way through the third quarter. If you want to talk about a nightmare match-up, what if I told you that your defensive assignments are going to be Fox and Ivey and then on the other end of the court you'll have Davion Mitchell hounding you relentlessly? That'll keep you up at night.
He wouldn't be my first choice or even my second choice (he's probably #3 unless we trade down) but it's fun to imagine a gameplan where Mike Brown just unleashes 48 minutes a night of Fox, Ivey, and Mitchell tag-teams on opposing guards and we watch those unfortunate souls gasp for air mid-way through the third quarter. If you want to talk about a nightmare match-up, what if I told you that your defensive assignments are going to be Fox and Ivey and then on the other end of the court you'll have Davion Mitchell hounding you relentlessly? That'll keep you up at night.
The Kings still need a #1 option. History being the indicator, Fox can give spurts of greatness, but can't sustain it. If the Kings draft Ivey and his game is similar to Fox, but he has more fight, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Whichever guard can't adapt to the new team dynamics gets traded at the deadline and you keep moving forward with making the team better.
I'm coming around more and more to draft any of the big 3 if one happens to fall into Kings lap but otherwise has to be Ivey. Simply because he's obviously top 4 or top 5 in this draft. Who ranks tops after that roll of the dice, much more of a debate. But biggest reason to take Ivey major insurance policy. If Fox cannot carry the torch forward to the playoffs then send him packing and give the torch to Ivey. The theory Haliburton wasn't working with Fox much less of a salient argument than the Kings got big time prize for him in NBA all-star Sebonis. Fox and the Ox and Ivey onward to the playoffs. Go Kings!
Last edited:
How many guards that only score end up having elite impacts? Donovan Mitchell might be the closest thing but he’s not quite elite. Even if Murray turned out to be a role player I’d still rather have that than a guard that scores, but isn’t a good playmaker. Very few guards 6’4” and under have big defensive impacts and we know he was terrible in college so it isn’t happening in the nba. The 6’4” and under guard that scores but can’t be your primary playmaker just isn’t all that valuable to winning basketball. 33 points per 100 possessions isn’t elite scoring volume either.
For what it’s worth my three favorite players in this draft are Chet, Murray and Eason.
For what it’s worth my three favorite players in this draft are Chet, Murray and Eason.
Last edited:
I don't get the dog mentality. Why? Because he goes fast? Nevermind the fact that Murray was, quite literally, a one man wrecking crew on his team. Everyone knew he was their whole offense and he still put up crazy numbers efficiently.
Additionally, people bash Murray for his age when Ivey is only a year younger. Somehow Murray is too old to learn new tricks but somehow, magically, someone a year younger has all the neuroplasticity in the world.
Additionally, people bash Murray for his age when Ivey is only a year younger. Somehow Murray is too old to learn new tricks but somehow, magically, someone a year younger has all the neuroplasticity in the world.
- Status