Keegan Murray
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
There's people here talking like they have expertise on subjects they dont know crap about... Someone compared KM to Elton Brand on this forum...
It happens every year... the NBa fans who dont really watch college basketball all of a sudden become experts on the players involved during the summer..
Meanwhile their just parroting 2nd hand information they got from the media or youtube, didnt watch a single game of Keegan Murray at Iowa.. they are like children just looking for a response and to confirm their previous biases, they dont bring anything worthwhile to the conversation. What has influenced their opinion is easily identified.. Often, these types are bigger fans of their own opinion than the team or basketball.. They are the lonely ones, seeking feelings of being understood.. I'm here just to be a fan and root on my team and favorite players.. The whole pessimism thing is childish and stupid and for losers IMHO.
people take comfort in numbers, and this manifests itself in many absurd ways on basketball forums.... so you have this faction of people whos confidently ignorant when they have their advanced stats to back them up --- yet they will do everything possible to avoid discussing the conditions in which those stats are collected and what can affect and skew them... they dont want to talk about actual skills that players have, their moves and fakes and stuff they actually practice. They want to talk about lists, and which order they should be in. Its preposterous, its not basketball, its wanna-be intellectualism.. then conditions change and they act surprised! like wow the staff all of a sudden turned andrew wiggins into a good player after years of him being a dog.. its the machinations, being swept into the throws of the media whos job is to set expectations and then revisit them, many get swept into that undertow.. so for me I'll put those types of zombies on ignore with the quickness around here.. I'm no salesman, im not trying to convince people that im right and their wrong, ill just ignore you and keep being a fan. You wanna sit on a teams forum and preside over the negativity? Now thats loneliness.
It happens every year... the NBa fans who dont really watch college basketball all of a sudden become experts on the players involved during the summer..
Meanwhile their just parroting 2nd hand information they got from the media or youtube, didnt watch a single game of Keegan Murray at Iowa.. they are like children just looking for a response and to confirm their previous biases, they dont bring anything worthwhile to the conversation. What has influenced their opinion is easily identified.. Often, these types are bigger fans of their own opinion than the team or basketball.. They are the lonely ones, seeking feelings of being understood.. I'm here just to be a fan and root on my team and favorite players.. The whole pessimism thing is childish and stupid and for losers IMHO.
people take comfort in numbers, and this manifests itself in many absurd ways on basketball forums.... so you have this faction of people whos confidently ignorant when they have their advanced stats to back them up --- yet they will do everything possible to avoid discussing the conditions in which those stats are collected and what can affect and skew them... they dont want to talk about actual skills that players have, their moves and fakes and stuff they actually practice. They want to talk about lists, and which order they should be in. Its preposterous, its not basketball, its wanna-be intellectualism.. then conditions change and they act surprised! like wow the staff all of a sudden turned andrew wiggins into a good player after years of him being a dog.. its the machinations, being swept into the throws of the media whos job is to set expectations and then revisit them, many get swept into that undertow.. so for me I'll put those types of zombies on ignore with the quickness around here.. I'm no salesman, im not trying to convince people that im right and their wrong, ill just ignore you and keep being a fan. You wanna sit on a teams forum and preside over the negativity? Now thats loneliness.
Last edited:
(Lurker here.)
I just can't go all in on Murray just yet. The NBA is full of tough, mean, brutal big guys that will beat down grandma for a win. Murray is going to have to hold up to that factor. Bagley couldn't do it along with many others.
I hope nothing bad happens but, in this NBA game, it is always a possibility. Go Murray! (And take care.)
I just can't go all in on Murray just yet. The NBA is full of tough, mean, brutal big guys that will beat down grandma for a win. Murray is going to have to hold up to that factor. Bagley couldn't do it along with many others.
I hope nothing bad happens but, in this NBA game, it is always a possibility. Go Murray! (And take care.)
Last edited:
Is a smart player.
Makes the right decisions quickly (usually).
Is a better shooter than everyone realized.
Does most of his damage within the flow of the offense.
Is the most ambitextrous player I've seen.
Is good at anticipating on defense.
Is the largest 6'8 player I've seen.
Has no conscience.
Is a nice guy.
Makes the right decisions quickly (usually).
Is a better shooter than everyone realized.
Does most of his damage within the flow of the offense.
Is the most ambitextrous player I've seen.
Is good at anticipating on defense.
Is the largest 6'8 player I've seen.
Has no conscience.
Is a nice guy.
Well about the only college games that I watch are USC, UCLA and Ohio state unless it’s March madness.
For instance I liked isaiah better than Evan Mobley and also liked Bagley so thats how much I know talent. I depend on others that have a better picture than I do and in a couple of years I hope we have made the right decisions (But so far so good).
For instance I liked isaiah better than Evan Mobley and also liked Bagley so thats how much I know talent. I depend on others that have a better picture than I do and in a couple of years I hope we have made the right decisions (But so far so good).
I agree with you totally. Obviously I watch a ton of college basketball, which can be very laborious at times. The word ugly springs to mind! But, I find myself disagreeing with the so called experts and their mock drafts all the time. I had Murray ahead of Ivey from about a third of the college season on. To my mind, it was a no contest. But that's just me and my eye test. I think a lot of mock drafts create a current that starts to pull everyone in, and if you go against that current, you look like an idiot.
When you get down to it, it's subjective! The question is, how much of your subjective opinion is actually based on what you saw, or is it based on what you've read or heard. In a court of law, that's called hearsay, and it's inadmissible. Highlight video's don't count, or at least should only count for about 25% of an opinion. When I'm judging a player, I try to look for all the things he does well, and in particular, at least one thing he does that's special. I can find the negatives later. I want to know what he can do, not what he can't do! The world is loaded with people that can't do. I do use a numerical scale of individual traits, like athleticism, ballhandling, shooting etc. I also place a huge emphasis on feel for the game, how quickly a player makes his reads and his reaction time off those reads. Court vision and how good of hands a player has. Anyway, I think you get the picture.
Point is, its a labor of love, and it's a time consuming process and much more complicated than reading a mock draft. And with all that, you can still be wrong. Usually because you can't get inside the players mind and find out how much desire he has. I've always said that 50% of success is mental. It's the difference of a hitter going up to the plate hoping he gets a hit, to a hitter going up to the plate knowing he's going to get a hit. The latter has the best chance of success. Those are the guys I'm looking for, and Murray has that trait.
When you get down to it, it's subjective! The question is, how much of your subjective opinion is actually based on what you saw, or is it based on what you've read or heard. In a court of law, that's called hearsay, and it's inadmissible. Highlight video's don't count, or at least should only count for about 25% of an opinion. When I'm judging a player, I try to look for all the things he does well, and in particular, at least one thing he does that's special. I can find the negatives later. I want to know what he can do, not what he can't do! The world is loaded with people that can't do. I do use a numerical scale of individual traits, like athleticism, ballhandling, shooting etc. I also place a huge emphasis on feel for the game, how quickly a player makes his reads and his reaction time off those reads. Court vision and how good of hands a player has. Anyway, I think you get the picture.
Point is, its a labor of love, and it's a time consuming process and much more complicated than reading a mock draft. And with all that, you can still be wrong. Usually because you can't get inside the players mind and find out how much desire he has. I've always said that 50% of success is mental. It's the difference of a hitter going up to the plate hoping he gets a hit, to a hitter going up to the plate knowing he's going to get a hit. The latter has the best chance of success. Those are the guys I'm looking for, and Murray has that trait.
Even just wanting the Kings to draft Ivey is to set the team back 3 years at minimum, you have to reset EVERYTHING and try to build around Ivey, trade Fox, and convince Sabonis not to walk.
I'll never understand why people even wanted Ivey in the first place. He is probably going to be a fantastic player, Murray is definitely going to be a fantastic player. And Murray doesn't set your team back 3+ years, he aligns with what you're doing.
It wasn't a pick for fit, it was a pick that fit.
I'll never understand why people even wanted Ivey in the first place. He is probably going to be a fantastic player, Murray is definitely going to be a fantastic player. And Murray doesn't set your team back 3+ years, he aligns with what you're doing.
It wasn't a pick for fit, it was a pick that fit.
Maybe. Jabari looked about how I expected in Summer League - aggressive and switchable on defense and a bit of an afterthought on offense since self-creation isn't a strength of his at this point and Summer League games don't have the offensive structure to consistently get him good looks.
I was surprised that he shot it poorly but again, I want to see how he does at the NBA level for a full season before making any real judgement.
I do think the Kings would have been a better fit for him than the Rockets, at least for his rookie season since he would have been a great fit as a floor spacer and wouldn't have had to do too much with Fox and Sabonis controlling the offense.
I was surprised that he shot it poorly but again, I want to see how he does at the NBA level for a full season before making any real judgement.
I do think the Kings would have been a better fit for him than the Rockets, at least for his rookie season since he would have been a great fit as a floor spacer and wouldn't have had to do too much with Fox and Sabonis controlling the offense.
I domt understand how adding another potential allstar sets any team back. That's crazy logic. Ivey doesn't just drive to the basket he shoots a nice 3 as well. He also has much needed playmaker skills we sorely lack on this team. Let's stop this narrative it's rediculous.
We have Murray and that's that but let's not act like he was the only selection that would make the team better. Any coach worth a dam could make those two fit
We have Murray and that's that but let's not act like he was the only selection that would make the team better. Any coach worth a dam could make those two fit
Even watching the game and a quarter he played, he showed a little more as a playmaker than some were yelling he couldn’t do. Yeah, just summer league and an absolutely tiny minuscule sample size but a lot of folks were pretty steadfast on him being a subpar playmaker.
Like you said, we have Murray and the praise can go both ways. He did a helluva lot more than I thought he could too.
Like you said, we have Murray and the praise can go both ways. He did a helluva lot more than I thought he could too.
I think anyone who watched Ivey at Purdue knew he was a very good secondary playmaker. I think the question was whether he could be a full time point guard. I don't think he should be used that way, but that's part of what makes Detroit a much better fit for him than the Kings. He pairs with Cunningham and the rest of the Detroit core much better than he would with Fox & Sabonis IMO.
my biggest thing regarding fit which I brought up in pre draft discussions is there are very few historically successful backcourts that feature two primary scorers. That’s especially true if both have questionable 3 point shooting. The only really elite tandem is Dame and CJ and one could argue CJ looks better now that he is is not paired with Lilllard. I fully expect Ivey to be a good maybe even great player and I think he landed in a good spot out in Detroit.
There is only 1 ball. Ask Westbrook and the Lakers how multiple ball dominant players work together.
There are probably 5x as many examples of this failing than it working, and thats probably being generous. I'll just leave it at that.
Mathurin and Daniels and Eason would have been better picks for Sac than Ivey, but you would need a trade down package for either of those to make any sense.
There are probably 5x as many examples of this failing than it working, and thats probably being generous. I'll just leave it at that.
Mathurin and Daniels and Eason would have been better picks for Sac than Ivey, but you would need a trade down package for either of those to make any sense.
The TS% of 65% is what excites me - very efficient for a 20+ scorer. He could be a 3rd option next year, which I would view as a big win for the Kings. I like the fact that he's not coming into a team bereft of talent, which would put pressure on him to be the savior. He should be able to play his game and slowly but surely improve, while not having to do too much. I don't want to see him lose minutes to Barnes. I continue to hope that Barnes will be traded for a legit 3 so that Murray can comfortably take that stretch 4 position with +/- 30 minutes per game. The question that I'm curious about is whether Brown will play him at the center position against smaller lineups, the Warriors for example.