Analyzing the Murray pick (Split from the Welcome thread)
- Thread starter KainLear
- Start date
I mean, he faced up and blew by his guy multiple times in that game. He even had a nice drive into a step back three that had his man jumping around looking for him. Does he need to get better with his ball handling and dribbling in traffic? Definitely. But no player is perfect.
He shoulders the entire load for his offense and still comes back and plays defence. He has the most blocks, second most steals, highest DWS, second highest DPM, and highest defensive rating on his team.
To say Ivey has more potential, when he has far more flaws to his game, is ridiculous. A notion based on the fact that he can run faster and jump higher. Athleticism gets vastly overrated. He'll, the team that won the championship isn't full of athletic freaks, and a lot of them were 21 on draft day.
Monte clearly has a player type he likes, namely high iq players. People say you can't teach athleticism, but you also can't teach high basketball iq. The rare player is the one that has a high level of both. Murray is definitely not a terrible athlete, he was in the 95th percentile for transition scoring, while also playing the best defense on his team. That takes a lot of drive, and stamina.
Murray may not appear to have a high dog/36 ratio because he doesnt yell after every dunk, but he clearly is an insane competitor with a chip on his shoulder.
He shoulders the entire load for his offense and still comes back and plays defence. He has the most blocks, second most steals, highest DWS, second highest DPM, and highest defensive rating on his team.
To say Ivey has more potential, when he has far more flaws to his game, is ridiculous. A notion based on the fact that he can run faster and jump higher. Athleticism gets vastly overrated. He'll, the team that won the championship isn't full of athletic freaks, and a lot of them were 21 on draft day.
Monte clearly has a player type he likes, namely high iq players. People say you can't teach athleticism, but you also can't teach high basketball iq. The rare player is the one that has a high level of both. Murray is definitely not a terrible athlete, he was in the 95th percentile for transition scoring, while also playing the best defense on his team. That takes a lot of drive, and stamina.
Murray may not appear to have a high dog/36 ratio because he doesnt yell after every dunk, but he clearly is an insane competitor with a chip on his shoulder.
Last edited:
Just from watching highlights he reminds me of young Antwan Jamison/Kyle Anderson mix, Jamison in the shooting and athletic ability and Kyle Anderson with the dribbling style/build. Interesting player not really sure what to make of him since I don't watch full games. Does he have the nasty floaters/one hand runners Jamison had?
I thought both Ivey and Murray were in the same tier as Mathurin, Daniels…so I really don’t care about the Ivey higher ceiling comparison. Murray is going to be solid, because of his shot, movement to create spacing, and his awareness on defense. He’s not going to come in and be Jason Tatum. Can he develop that type of game later? Maybe. But people thinking they’re going to see Tatum 2.0 inSL are better off watching Orlando’s games.
Here's what I would say about Murray's offensive outlook....
With Fox and Sabonis here already we don't want or need Murray to be a #1 option. In contrast, Paulo Banchero is probably going to be the #1 option by default in Orlando and I think that's probably the worst possible situation for his career because he's going to learn nothing but bad habits dominating the offense for a last place team. What I hope to see from Murray is an approach similar to how Kawhi Leonard was developed in San Antonio -- have him learn to score within the offense as the 3rd or 4th option flanking Fox, Sabonis, Mitchell, and Barnes. Mostly he'll be spotting up, running the floor and finishing on fast breaks, and ducking into the paint to catch passes from Sabonis or Fox. Within a few years if he has the go-to scorer mentality and the work ethic to develop his handle and mid-range jumper he will naturally grow into more of a #1 or #2 role like Kawhi did.
Personally, I don't think you can do what Keegan did in college this season (lead the nation in PPG as a sophomore) if you don't have that. But if it never develops for him he's still a solid complimentary player that helps us on both ends and won't actively hurt us by forcing bad shots or turning the ball over.
With Fox and Sabonis here already we don't want or need Murray to be a #1 option. In contrast, Paulo Banchero is probably going to be the #1 option by default in Orlando and I think that's probably the worst possible situation for his career because he's going to learn nothing but bad habits dominating the offense for a last place team. What I hope to see from Murray is an approach similar to how Kawhi Leonard was developed in San Antonio -- have him learn to score within the offense as the 3rd or 4th option flanking Fox, Sabonis, Mitchell, and Barnes. Mostly he'll be spotting up, running the floor and finishing on fast breaks, and ducking into the paint to catch passes from Sabonis or Fox. Within a few years if he has the go-to scorer mentality and the work ethic to develop his handle and mid-range jumper he will naturally grow into more of a #1 or #2 role like Kawhi did.
Personally, I don't think you can do what Keegan did in college this season (lead the nation in PPG as a sophomore) if you don't have that. But if it never develops for him he's still a solid complimentary player that helps us on both ends and won't actively hurt us by forcing bad shots or turning the ball over.
Yeah, similar but I'm not sure he'll get to that level with his face up game. The thing about Murray is how they use him. Like I mentioned with Brand, they have very similar post games. They both use angles well and have a really good, subtly smooth drop step in a spin off the left and right block. I think it can translate and that will be a great option for him to continue to rack up points and get to the line. Also just like Brand he's one of those rare PF's with skill that is racking up blocks and steals with his length even though he's undersized (not so much today) at 6'8" and not a bouncy above the rim athlete like a Shawn Marion type.
Yeah for sure. Probably soon too. I keep coming back to the 3 point shooting, Sabonis, Fox and Mitchell are guys who figure to get lots of minutes that arent volume 3pt shooters, so I see lots of attempts on the table out there for his taking --- if Murray can he convert on those ample opportunities hes gonna have to hit 3's it stands to reason he's gonna become a reliable source of offense very quickly (and a threat for ROY).
and once the 3pt shot becomes reliable for him it'll open up the rest of his game in the halfcourt. What he does in transition is always gonna be there.
Murray was shooting such rediculously high percentages at the rim in college that it didnt make much sense for him to be taking crazy amounts of 3's every game, but that doesnt mean its not within his capacity to take and make a bunch... this is why Murray himself has compared his game to Khris Middleton, he knows that if he gets the NBA 3ball down consistently it'll open the rest of his offensive repitoire.
They've gotta give this kid a shot at being one of those top scoring options.. The Kings will not be good enough to play .500 ball otherwise.. The Kings have a guard in Fox, they have 2 forwards in Sabonis and Barnes, the way I see it they need Murray to be 'that' SF to really take the squad to the next level (this is also why I think the Ivey pick didnt make much sense, it have been spinning the tires in mud type situation).. Hiding / Coddling Murray also gets them nowhere they want to be..
and once the 3pt shot becomes reliable for him it'll open up the rest of his game in the halfcourt. What he does in transition is always gonna be there.
Murray was shooting such rediculously high percentages at the rim in college that it didnt make much sense for him to be taking crazy amounts of 3's every game, but that doesnt mean its not within his capacity to take and make a bunch... this is why Murray himself has compared his game to Khris Middleton, he knows that if he gets the NBA 3ball down consistently it'll open the rest of his offensive repitoire.
They've gotta give this kid a shot at being one of those top scoring options.. The Kings will not be good enough to play .500 ball otherwise.. The Kings have a guard in Fox, they have 2 forwards in Sabonis and Barnes, the way I see it they need Murray to be 'that' SF to really take the squad to the next level (this is also why I think the Ivey pick didnt make much sense, it have been spinning the tires in mud type situation).. Hiding / Coddling Murray also gets them nowhere they want to be..
Last edited:
For that to happen, he's likely going to need a lot of play on the block.
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/23644627/Keegan_Murray_Stats__Shot_Chart___Iowa_Hawkeyes___CBB_Analytics__2_.jpg)
He hit a highest percentage of his 3's off catch and shoot, and that should be a part of the game plan but it was his post game and inside game that set him apart in college. The lack of a mid-range game isn't a problem for a modern 4, but for anyone expecting him to be a wing that's going face up teams, well, that part of his game is mostly missing. A lot of times in his face up game you'll notice he has a tendency to turn away from his man and back them down as well.
He hit a highest percentage of his 3's off catch and shoot, and that should be a part of the game plan but it was his post game and inside game that set him apart in college. The lack of a mid-range game isn't a problem for a modern 4, but for anyone expecting him to be a wing that's going face up teams, well, that part of his game is mostly missing. A lot of times in his face up game you'll notice he has a tendency to turn away from his man and back them down as well.
Yeah, if the same moves worked for Brand then in todays game with less size there's serious potential. If they try and turn him into a wing then they could ruin this kid. It's worth a shot but give up his drop step and you're losing a ton of his offense.
First two plays:
And there's the drop step spin:
It's honestly crazy how close they were statistically in college as well. Filled up all categories without showing a ton of passing/playmaking.
First two plays:
And there's the drop step spin:
It's honestly crazy how close they were statistically in college as well. Filled up all categories without showing a ton of passing/playmaking.
For that to happen, he's likely going to need a lot of play on the block.
He hit a highest percentage of his 3's off catch and shoot, and that should be a part of the game plan but it was his post game and inside game that set him apart in college. The lack of a mid-range game isn't a problem for a modern 4, but for anyone expecting him to be a wing that's going face up teams, well, that part of his game is mostly missing. A lot of times in his face up game you'll notice he has a tendency to turn away from his man and back them down as well.
He hit a highest percentage of his 3's off catch and shoot, and that should be a part of the game plan but it was his post game and inside game that set him apart in college. The lack of a mid-range game isn't a problem for a modern 4, but for anyone expecting him to be a wing that's going face up teams, well, that part of his game is mostly missing. A lot of times in his face up game you'll notice he has a tendency to turn away from his man and back them down as well.
He was also leaking out and doing a lot of cherry picking, lots of those buckets in the paint were from transition..
The idea he's some 4man who needs to be in the paint, i think thats totally unrealistic and if they did do that its setting themselves up for failure.... Thats not what the Kings need, thats what Sabonis is there for..
The way the Kings can get the most value out of Murray is having him flourish at the SF spot.. There's a massive hole in the roster on the wing..
For that to happen, he's likely going to need a lot of play on the block.
He hit a highest percentage of his 3's off catch and shoot, and that should be a part of the game plan but it was his post game and inside game that set him apart in college. The lack of a mid-range game isn't a problem for a modern 4, but for anyone expecting him to be a wing that's going face up teams, well, that part of his game is mostly missing. A lot of times in his face up game you'll notice he has a tendency to turn away from his man and back them down as well.
He hit a highest percentage of his 3's off catch and shoot, and that should be a part of the game plan but it was his post game and inside game that set him apart in college. The lack of a mid-range game isn't a problem for a modern 4, but for anyone expecting him to be a wing that's going face up teams, well, that part of his game is mostly missing. A lot of times in his face up game you'll notice he has a tendency to turn away from his man and back them down as well.
But that's what he is and what he was in college. Like I brought up before, on defense he actually played a lot of 5. I was watching a lot of Khris Middleton last night as well. I see some of that with Keegan, but instincts take over. Very rarely does Middleton turn form his defender. He's also much more effective off the dribble. Keegan has more size and length. He's got long strides and his drop step once he's turned can get him from the free throw line to the basket in one motion.
They played Zone defense, he would play all over.... IDK I was watching Keegan Murray's Sophomore year from the opening salvo.. Word preseason was he was about to have a monster season, and they werent kidding, his first handful of games he breaks his career high in scoring many times over... I definitely watched like 15 games of his live, no one In college was a better player than him..
IDK I refuse to believe this idea that he's going to contribute more from the 4 spot than he is from the 3... Especially when we have Harrison Barnes here... Why would Harrison Barnes not be playing the 4 and Murray playing the 3... Doesnt make sense to me.. What the Kings need is consistent production on the wing, thats the whole point of why Jaden Ivey didnt fit here, he'd leave the kings with a few forward a few guards and like not much at all on the wing...
Like Elton Brand? Elton Brand was like 40 pounds heavier than Murray.. Elton Brand was 250lbs in highschool.. I dont wanna be combative but it's difficult for me to believe someone making that comparison watched many Iowa games last season..
IDK I refuse to believe this idea that he's going to contribute more from the 4 spot than he is from the 3... Especially when we have Harrison Barnes here... Why would Harrison Barnes not be playing the 4 and Murray playing the 3... Doesnt make sense to me.. What the Kings need is consistent production on the wing, thats the whole point of why Jaden Ivey didnt fit here, he'd leave the kings with a few forward a few guards and like not much at all on the wing...
Like Elton Brand? Elton Brand was like 40 pounds heavier than Murray.. Elton Brand was 250lbs in highschool.. I dont wanna be combative but it's difficult for me to believe someone making that comparison watched many Iowa games last season..
Watch the vids I posted above.
Well, now that I can see an example of a similar offensive game in Brand working out pretty well because Murray has an elite drop step and Barnes doesn't. haha. Also, Murray has much more length to get over defenders.
I actually watched a lot leading up to the draft. Brand might have been heavier but yeah, 6'8" PF's with a drop step as their go to? Similar. And Brand didn't physically overwhelm anyone. He used angles to get by defenders so his weight didn't really effect his play except maybe his ability stop players in the post, but even in that era, he was undersized. I don't know what Murrays weight is right now but I doubt he's below 230 during the season. Brand was heavy most of his career, he had a bigger base, but I'd bet when he got into shape and had his best years with the Clipps he was around 240-245. He didn't stay that weight for long though, and he got injured so.
Well, now that I can see an example of a similar offensive game in Brand working out pretty well because Murray has an elite drop step and Barnes doesn't. haha. Also, Murray has much more length to get over defenders.
I actually watched a lot leading up to the draft. Brand might have been heavier but yeah, 6'8" PF's with a drop step as their go to? Similar. And Brand didn't physically overwhelm anyone. He used angles to get by defenders so his weight didn't really effect his play except maybe his ability stop players in the post, but even in that era, he was undersized. I don't know what Murrays weight is right now but I doubt he's below 230 during the season. Brand was heavy most of his career, he had a bigger base, but I'd bet when he got into shape and had his best years with the Clipps he was around 240-245. He didn't stay that weight for long though, and he got injured so.
I think your pigeon-holing him... He did a lot of damage in the paint on the move... In transition.. after broken plays, or flying in and timing offensive rebounds/ putbacks.'
Tony Parker used to get tons of points in the paint too, doesnt mean he was a Forward/Big... Murray got a lot of his points in that paint where he'd start on the perimeter and discard the first defender/break the defense, then get into the paint and finish ---- thats what the Kings need him for after the 3pt shooting, its something severly lacking on the roster ---- Look at the other wings Sacramento has --- Justin Holiday, DiVicenzo, Mo Harkless, Tereence Davis --- These guys cant do that they are Jump shooters... I think there's really a big failure of understanding what Murray can do, and what the Kings need, going on here..
The idea that he doesnt have guard skills and is some 4 is completely absurd, and ur setting urselves up for a big surprise, look at how he faces up.. He's got excellent balance and feet... Iowa needed to use him at the rim so much because he was a matchup problem VS COLLEGE players there, in the NBA it's not gonna be that way... Did u not see Wiggins bother Tatum so much in the finals..
Tony Parker used to get tons of points in the paint too, doesnt mean he was a Forward/Big... Murray got a lot of his points in that paint where he'd start on the perimeter and discard the first defender/break the defense, then get into the paint and finish ---- thats what the Kings need him for after the 3pt shooting, its something severly lacking on the roster ---- Look at the other wings Sacramento has --- Justin Holiday, DiVicenzo, Mo Harkless, Tereence Davis --- These guys cant do that they are Jump shooters... I think there's really a big failure of understanding what Murray can do, and what the Kings need, going on here..
The idea that he doesnt have guard skills and is some 4 is completely absurd, and ur setting urselves up for a big surprise, look at how he faces up.. He's got excellent balance and feet... Iowa needed to use him at the rim so much because he was a matchup problem VS COLLEGE players there, in the NBA it's not gonna be that way... Did u not see Wiggins bother Tatum so much in the finals..