Analyzing the Murray pick (Split from the Welcome thread)

[pdxKingsFan]

This is a reasonable point. A "generational" talent is very likely to succeed no matter the situation into which they're drafted. Luke Doncic is already great. He certainly would have been great if he had been drafted by an organization with a stellar rep, like Miami or San Antonio. And he would still have been great if he had been drafted by an organization with a terrible rep, like Sacramento. Thus, in spite of themselves, the Kings still would have a yearly shot at playoff success had they drafted Luka.

Unfortunately, when you're drafting promising but less than "generational" talent, it's often important for a franchise to have a strong culture of development and a reasonable level of stability in order for that young talent to flourish. Until recently, it was very easy to argue that the Kings would fail to develop any of their young talent and fail to harness that young talent to win because of extreme organizational instability. I'm of the belief that they've turned the corner on that particular issue with the McNair-Brown partnership. So we'll see what they can do with young talent like Keegan Murray and Davion Mitchell.

I would argue that the current Dallas organization is a s-show. They fired long term GM and coach for Luka after completely botching major moves to surround him with complimentary talent in a fashion that only the Lakers have mishandled their roster post-AD, but they have two super max guys not one.

To that end, you could argue that Vlade made the right choice not picking a player likely to get him fired. He just picked the completely wrong guy that got him fired much sooner.

 

[QWERTYLICIOUS]

Show me a coach, who doesn’t defend their players. Here’s coach K on Bags after his draft:

“He wants to learn, he has no demons, he's a great kid, he's smart, and has an incredible motor,” said Blue Devils coach Mike Krzyzewski. “He never has a bad day. He's a treasure, really. He's going to be one of the great players in the NBA during his time."

What could also be missing from the equation when interpreting Coach K's thoughts on Bagley is the simple fact that, most of the time, one's college career doesn't necessarily travel with him when he gets to the big leagues. More than likely, a player is to see a steep decline in production once he gets to the big leagues. Only the very best are able to either replicate their college success, or if we're lucky enough, improve upon it.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Say what you will, that still doesn't discount the fact that he knows more than any of you.

Personally, if someone randomly stops me on the street and asks me how I feel about kb02, or anyone on this board and if I really have nothing nice to say, most diplomatically I'd just say, "I guess you can find out yourself...?"

before daddy started taking shots at the coach and FO, I think a lot of what Coach K rang true. I think K is a used car salesman, not at a Calipari level, but still one of the best of all time at the modern recruiting hustle and the two of them are far and away the best at the one and done NBA pipeline. So of course he wants to insure his guys are picked early and often, but I don't think he could have anticipated what happened next.

 

[KainLear]

 

[kb02]

Say what you will, that still doesn't discount the fact that he knows more than any of you.

Personally, if someone randomly stops me on the street and asks me how I feel about kb02, or anyone on this board and if I really have nothing nice to say, most diplomatically I'd just say, "I guess you can find out yourself...?"

Thanks for the laugh.

 

[Padrino]

I would argue that the current Dallas organization is a s-show. They fired long term GM and coach for Luka after completely botching major moves to surround him with complimentary talent in a fashion that only the Lakers have mishandled their roster post-AD, but they have two super max guys not one.

I don't disagree. Dallas really blew their early attempt to build around Luka. And that's kind of my point. They've still made the playoffs each year after his rookie season in the league. And they won over 50 games this season with a roster that's not as talented around Luka as it needs to be. Doncic is carrying the Mavericks to success in spite of their poor management decisions, because that's what generational talents do.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I never could, for the life of me, figure out why the hell Reke playing at the Small Forward position was even remotely a good idea. Nothing about that made any sense to me back then. Who even came up with that idea to begin with????

It was either the Maloofs or Paul Westphal.

Oddly enough I think whoever it was was somewhat right that the position they were trying to cram Reke into was going to be the hottest most desirable position in the league soon, but he didn't have the shooting touch to make the transition.

 

[kb02]

What could also be missing from the equation when interpreting Coach K's thoughts on Bagley is the simple fact that, most of the time, one's college career doesn't necessarily travel with him when he gets to the big leagues. More than likely, a player is to see a steep decline in production once he gets to the big leagues. Only the very best are able to either replicate their college success, or if we're lucky enough, improve upon it.

I'm not going to hold it against a coach for hoping his player will transition. You never know, right? Grant Napear said more than once that teams will know after the first few Summer League practices whether they made the right choice in the draft. He specifically mentioned Throb, but that could be applied to Bagley as well. Yhall remember Throb getting rejected by the rim a few times during SL? Or Bags trying to take his SL opponent in the post, turning into him, getting unbalanced, and then losing the ball? Trust the eye test. We'll know within the first few games whether Murray was the right choice.

The stuff that I think it's fair to mock the college coaches on are the stuff about work ethic, the coachability, the demons...Those things are unforgivable. Whether its in public or private.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I don't disagree. Dallas really blew their early attempt to build around Luka. And that's kind of my point. They've still made the playoffs each year after his rookie season in the league. And they won over 50 games this season with a roster that's not as talented around Luka as it needs to be. Doncic is carrying the Mavericks to success in spite of their poor management decisions, because that's what generational talents do.

I knew you weren't lumping them in with the really well run organizations, I just think it's really funny how bad Dallas has been off the court since acquiring Luka. They really should have not tried to hot shot things with the KP deal and instead given Luka a few seasons to blossom while maintaining their picks and cap room to build around the more finished product.

 

[QWERTYLICIOUS]

It was either the Maloofs or Paul Westphal.

Oddly enough I think whoever it was was somewhat right that the position they were trying to cram Reke into was going to be the hottest most desirable position in the league soon, but he didn't have the shooting touch to make the transition.

I agree with the part of your post that I have bolded. If it were me, though, I would have probably gone after a true SF (either via the draft, free agency, or a trade) as opposed to trying to cram our PG into a new position.

 

[Livinthedream]

I still think Bagley was the wrong pick and his dad was likely going to be a problem no matter what and I maintain his unwillingness to play through small injury - despite everything I just said about Reke(!) - is why it was never going to work out for him when the next 3 players picked don't come with all that baggage. But still - the mismanagement between coach and FO, the subsequent hiring of a coach that would not play Bagley when healthy and who was an idiot, all of that greatly contributed to his downfall and the possibility that he has a monster year on his new team and makes us all look dumb as bricks.

Specifically to Bagley, my understanding is Bagley was told he'd start midway through his rookie season. Joerger backed out of that. Presumably because team was doing ok. Then Joerger proceeded to praise Luka and forget Bagley's name in public. That set the wheels in motion. Injuries and Walton sealed the deal.

As a bench player in Detroit, father and son have been happy as can be. Whether Bagley succeeds or not, I don't know. But his family knew he didn't have a fighting chance in Sacramento.

 

[QWERTYLICIOUS]

I'm not going to hold it against a coach for hoping his player will transition. You never know, right? Grant Napear said more than once that teams will know after the first few Summer League practices whether they made the right choice in the draft. He specifically mentioned Throb, but that could be applied to Bagley as well. Yhall remember Throb getting rejected by the rim a few times during SL? Or Bags trying to take his SL opponent in the post, turning into him, getting unbalanced, and then losing the ball? Trust the eye test. We'll know within the first few games whether Murray was the right choice.

The stuff that I think it's fair to mock the college coaches on are the stuff about work ethic, the coachability, the demons...Those things are unforgivable. Whether its in public or private.

Or, it could just be that these kids bring good work ethic, the ability to be coached, and the ability to overcome their demons with them on day 1 when they report to "class", end up taking their ability to bring those to the table for granted, and simply just fail (or refuse) to adjust each once they leave college, and get to the big league(s).

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I agree with the part of your post that I have bolded. If it were me, though, I would have probably gone after a true SF (either via the draft, free agency, or a trade) as opposed to trying to cram our PG into a new position.

Did we draft IT2 the year after Reke or the year after Cousins? Because I am sure that might have played into it too.

If the Kings were even competently run from 2009-2012 we'd be challenging the Dubs year after year right now.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Specifically to Bagley, my understanding is Bagley was told he'd start midway through his rookie season. Joerger backed out of that. Presumably because team was doing ok. Then Joerger proceeded to praise Luka and forget Bagley's name in public. That set the wheels in motion. Injuries and Walton sealed the deal.

As a bench player in Detroit, father and son have been happy as can be. Whether Bagley succeeds or not, I don't know. But his family knew he didn't have a fighting chance in Sacramento.

I'm one of the few people who hasn't allowed the last 3 years to remind me what a little heel Joerger turned into that final year.

"never should have fired him" my arse.

 

[QWERTYLICIOUS]

Did we draft IT2 the year after Reke or the year after Cousins? Because I am sure that might have played into it too.

If the Kings were even competently run from 2009-2012 we'd be challenging the Dubs year after year right now.

Cousins. We drafted IT in 2011, the same year we also drafted that one kid, Jimmer.

 

[kb02]

Or, it could just be that these kids bring good work ethic, the ability to be coached, and the ability to overcome their demons with them on day 1 when they report to "class", end up taking their ability to bring those to the table for granted, and simply just fail (or refuse) to adjust each once they leave college, and get to the big league(s).

Yea, we're not too far off. One of the hardest things to figure out is the ability to survive vs. the ability to thrive. The output indicators are the same. Take two 7 foot kids from the hood. Both have the same disadvantages on paper. Both make it to the NBA. One thrives, the other is out of the league in 4 years.

It is one of the reasons why sons of former NBA players tend to do well. They've seen the habits that are necessary to thrive in the league. So they copy it from day one in the league. That's a 20+ yr developmental/experience head start on their peers without dads, who played in the NBA.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Cousins. We drafted IT in 2011, the same year we also drafted that one kid, Jimmer.

like I said...

there's a reason I didn't want to revisit this timeline

 

[QWERTYLICIOUS]

like I said...

there's a reason I didn't want to revisit this timeline

I hear ya. I'm hanging on to the (extremely) slight hope that this franchise will shock us all one day, and become a dynasty. I'm just hoping that, if it does, I/we are still around to witness it.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Yea, we're not too far off. One of the hardest things to figure out is the ability to survive vs. the ability to thrive. The output indicators are the same. Take two 7 foot kids from the hood. Both have the same disadvantages on paper. Both make it to the NBA. One thrives, the other is out of the league in 4 years.

It is one of the reasons why sons of former NBA players tend to do well. They've seen the habits that are necessary to thrive in the league. So they copy it from day one in the league. That's a 20+ yr developmental/experience head start on their peers without dads, who played in the NBA.

The other part of it is everyone who reaches an NBA level of success put in a lot of hard work to get to a better place. For a kid who grew up even upper middle class, signing that first contract was perhaps the payoff. For the kid whose dad played they are just getting started.

 

[captain bill]

It’s hard to really grade this pick too significantly because it’s a natural result of the Sabonis trade. Drafting Ivey means we’re (again) tanking Fox’s value right when we would need to move him.

Would Ivey and Haliburton or Haliburton + any of the top 5 be better to build around is the only real question but since we’re living in the Fox/Sabonis timeline this seems like the best possible player in the draft to slot in

 

[serbiangoat]

I'm not going to hold it against a coach for hoping his player will transition. You never know, right? Grant Napear said more than once that teams will know after the first few Summer League practices whether they made the right choice in the draft. He specifically mentioned Throb, but that could be applied to Bagley as well. Yhall remember Throb getting rejected by the rim a few times during SL? Or Bags trying to take his SL opponent in the post, turning into him, getting unbalanced, and then losing the ball? Trust the eye test. We'll know within the first few games whether Murray was the right choice.

The stuff that I think it's fair to mock the college coaches on are the stuff about work ethic, the coachability, the demons...Those things are unforgivable. Whether its in public or private.

The greatest SL performance had to be Big Papa post up attempts.

 

[SacTownKid]

He reportedly grew an inch over the last year, which is why he’s listed at 6’9” now. (He didn’t test at the combine so he could possibly be even bigger than that). Reportedly has a 7 foot wingspan but his arms actually look longer than that.

Yeah, he's got narrow shoulders but this arms are closer to someone around 7 feet tall. That would be my guess.

 

[SacTownKid]

Not sure if this is the right thread but does Collins fit next to Murray?

No.

 

[ESP47]

Not sure if this is the right thread but does Collins fit next to Murray?

Offensively Collins can fit in just about anywhere due to his 3pt shot.

Defensively depends on Murray's defense. Collins is a known poor defender. His best defensive position is the 4. He can move his feet better than most 4s but he absolutely cannot defend as a small ball center and is still a poor defender, even when he's being used perfectly at the 4.

Can Murray defend 3s? I'd say he should be able to defend a decent chunk of them. The issue may arise if teams go small. But if they go small, that could potentially give Murray a chance to dominate them down low. If his interior work translates against smaller players and his defense is passable against quicker 3s, then he could potentially nullify a small ball lineup with his own offense and therefore cause the other team to have to react to him instead of the Kings always being on their heels reacting to other teams.

 

[SacTownKid]

Offensively Collins can fit in just about anywhere due to his 3pt shot.

Defensively depends on Murray's defense. Collins is a known poor defender. His best defensive position is the 4. He can move his feet better than most 4s but he absolutely cannot defend as a small ball center and is still a poor defender, even when he's being used perfectly at the 4.

Can Murray defend 3s? I'd say he should be able to defend a decent chunk of them. The issue may arise if teams go small. But if they go small, that could potentially give Murray a chance to dominate them down low. If his interior work translates against smaller players and his defense is passable against quicker 3s, then he could potentially nullify a small ball lineup with his own offense and therefore cause the other team to have to react to him instead of the Kings always being on their heels reacting to other teams.

I think you have to have Murray inside a bit to get full value. They could technically switch offensive roles but I think at the end of the day, they both kind of operate in the exact same area inside. Barnes seems like a much better fit considering out of all 3 he's the closest to a true wing in terms of style and abilities.

Yeah, Murray defending wings as a true SF is the question. As a switch defender in pick and roll, it's another question but if they commit and allow him to full rotate without stopping he could be OK maybe? Squaring up NBA level athlete PG's/wings is a huge question mark.

 

[Gguod]

Offensively Collins can fit in just about anywhere due to his 3pt shot.

Defensively depends on Murray's defense. Collins is a known poor defender. His best defensive position is the 4. He can move his feet better than most 4s but he absolutely cannot defend as a small ball center and is still a poor defender, even when he's being used perfectly at the 4.

Can Murray defend 3s? I'd say he should be able to defend a decent chunk of them. The issue may arise if teams go small. But if they go small, that could potentially give Murray a chance to dominate them down low. If his interior work translates against smaller players and his defense is passable against quicker 3s, then he could potentially nullify a small ball lineup with his own offense and therefore cause the other team to have to react to him instead of the Kings always being on their heels reacting to other teams.

Lineup with Fox, Murray, Sabonis, Collins would be so bad defensively that we would never be actuall contenders. And thats pretty much guaranteed. Hard no on giving up anything significant on Collins.

 

[sactowndog]

No disrespect to Chet (would have loved to have him), but he kind of has that same goofy look as the giraffe from Madagascar movies! Again, no disrespect I think he will be great as long as he maintains good health and stays injury free.

i have never seen a dude with such narrow shoulders.

 

[kb02]

The greatest SL performance had to be Big Papa post up attempts.

Lolzzzz

 

[TaxMan]

This is a reasonable point. A "generational" talent is very likely to succeed no matter the situation into which they're drafted. Luke Doncic is already great. He certainly would have been great if he had been drafted by an organization with a stellar rep, like Miami or San Antonio. And he would still have been great if he had been drafted by an organization with a terrible rep, like Sacramento. Thus, in spite of themselves, the Kings still would have a yearly shot at playoff success had they drafted Luka.

Unfortunately, when you're drafting promising but less than "generational" talent, it's often important for a franchise to have a strong culture of development and a reasonable level of stability in order for that young talent to flourish. Until recently, it was very easy to argue that the Kings would fail to develop any of their young talent and fail to harness that young talent to win because of extreme organizational instability. I'm of the belief that they've turned the corner on that particular issue with the McNair-Brown partnership. So we'll see what they can do with young talent like Keegan Murray and Davion Mitchell.

I completely agree with this, especially after hearing Mike Brown's press conference. Maybe I've put my purple colored glasses one time too many, but I really do think they have actually turned that corner, but the national media won't recognize this for another two years.

 

[kb02]

I think you have to have Murray inside a bit to get full value. They could technically switch offensive roles but I think at the end of the day, they both kind of operate in the exact same area inside. Barnes seems like a much better fit considering out of all 3 he's the closest to a true wing in terms of style and abilities.

Yeah, Murray defending wings as a true SF is the question. As a switch defender in pick and roll, it's another question but if they commit and allow him to full rotate without stopping he could be OK maybe? Squaring up NBA level athlete PG's/wings is a huge question mark.

In a vacuum, I agree on needing Murray or Collins inside. Just to keep the defense honest. That said, I think Collins to the Kings is no longer a viable option. In theory, you have Domas occupying that high post spot, Fox doing his two man roll game with Domas, and either one of them attacking the hole if there’s an opening. Murray’s going to be camped in the corner as an outlet and will swing from corner to corner depending on what side of the floor they’re on. And later, Brown will hopefully allow Murray to use Domas as a screen, curl, n shoot. Not quite sure where Collins would fit into that three man matrix. Barnes, if he’s around next year, will be able to plug n play much because of his ability to face up, drive, n create/score from anywhere on the floor.

On defense, this team is still short on two perimeter defenders. McNair should be targeting someone like Okogie in FA and maybe Trey Murphy via trade (NO is loaded with young wings).