Uncle Keegs

#91
Funny - we’ve mostly avoided the Keegan comp to Peja. But he might be that dude.
It's been brought up a time or two. I still see a cross between maybe Abdur-Rahim and Peja. Peja was a little faster with the ball whereas Keegan tends to use a little more body like Reef did.
 
#92
I've thought about the Peja comparison, Keegan's dead-eye 3pt shooting does invite that.

Besides the shooting, Peja had all sorts of off-ball game. Back cuts were as much a Peja trademark as the 3 point shot.

Caveat, my memory of Peja starts in 2002, after he had a few years in the league.
 
#94
Whoa, I think you're misremembering some of Peja's game, although he probably didn't have the guard skills to truly carry any team which is why Artest was such a step up for the Kings needs. Then again, Pejas back probably played a part as well.

that shot is ridiculous. It’s crazy he had a year where he took 425 free throws and only missed 31
 
#97
that shot is ridiculous. It’s crazy he had a year where he took 425 free throws and only missed 31
Peja is one of greatest shooters of all time that often isn’t brought up when the topic of greatest shooters is discussed amongst mainstream media (and players).

The dude averaged over 40% from three for his career. That lasted 13 seasons and included nearly 4400 attempts.

Unfortunately he played during an era when players weren’t jacking up 2-3x as many attempts. Most attempts he ever averaged during a single season was 6.8. Some players hit that volume of shots in 1-2 quarters nowadays.

I can only imagine what Peja’s numbers would look like playing today. But my guess is he’d be among the all-time leaders and only surely behind Steph Curry. But perhaps not that far behind. Same goes for Dirk Nowitzki. And Larry Bird.

Peja would be the ultimate stretch 4 in today’s game, at close to 6-10, but with the ability to easily take defenders off the dribble when they run out to him.
 
Last edited:
Peja is one of greatest shooters of all time that often isn’t brought up when the topic of greatest shooters is discussed amongst mainstream media (and players).

The dude averaged over 40% from three for his career. That lasted 13 seasons and included nearly 4400 attempts.

Unfortunately he played during an era when players weren’t jacking up 2-3x as many attempts. Most attempts he ever averaged during a single season was 6.8. Some players hit that volume of shots in 1-2 quarters nowadays.

I can only imagine what Peja’s numbers would look like playing today. But my guess is he’d be among the all-time leaders and only surely behind Steph Curry. But perhaps not that far behind. Same goes for Dirk Nowitzki. And Larry Bird.

Peja would be the ultimate stretch 4 in today’s game, at close to 6-10, but with the ability to easily take defenders off the dribble when they run out to him.
He was definitely ahead of his time since it was still a "two big" era. I thought Murray was a good comp in terms of role on the team, and if he can ascend to his full potential and prime while Fox and Domas still have gas in the tank we're golden.
 
Yet another example of someone placing an invisible, made up ceiling on a player’s potential and development.

I seem to remember quite a few fans on this site making similar claims back when Keegan was drafted.

Let the backpedaling begin….
As I always say these guys are paid to make content, not to be right. The commentator world makes so much more sense when you look at it that way.

He lost nothing by being "wrong" in the first place. In fact he may have gained by stating an "edgy" opinion and irking Kingsfans at first, only to "apologize" later. They only care about being right (occasionally) in so much as it floats an air of credibility so that people don't tune them out completely.

We have FAR better basketball minds posting on this board for free everyday.
 
As I always say these guys are paid to make content, not to be right. The commentator world makes so much more sense when you look at it that way.

He lost nothing by being "wrong" in the first place. In fact he may have gained by stating an "edgy" opinion and irking Kingsfans at first, only to "apologize" later. They only care about being right (occasionally) in so much as it floats an air of credibility so that people don't tune them out completely.

We have FAR better basketball minds posting on this board for free everyday.
This is true for like 95% of basketball commentators, but I like Vecenie a lot. He at least tries to back up his claims and is an absolute tape-fiend with watching games. Has a great understanding of analytics too.

Big difference between a guy like Vecenie and Hollinger/Duncan is at least Vecenie is willing to walk back a take. Hollinger/Duncan think they're god's gift to basketball analysis and won't capitulate on any bad take they've made. And then there's just absolute doofus commentators like Rose/Perkins/Stephen A who know next to nothing about the NBA outside of the 3 big markets.
 
This is true for like 95% of basketball commentators, but I like Vecenie a lot. He at least tries to back up his claims and is an absolute tape-fiend with watching games. Has a great understanding of analytics too.

Big difference between a guy like Vecenie and Hollinger/Duncan is at least Vecenie is willing to walk back a take. Hollinger/Duncan think they're god's gift to basketball analysis and won't capitulate on any bad take they've made. And then there's just absolute doofus commentators like Rose/Perkins/Stephen A who know next to nothing about the NBA outside of the 3 big markets.
Good on him. There are a few good ones it seems.
 
Yet another example of someone placing an invisible, made up ceiling on a player’s potential and development.

I seem to remember quite a few fans on this site making similar claims back when Keegan was drafted.

Let the backpedaling begin….
I can understand the initial pessimism in regards to his ceiling though. Most stars (not all) are elite at creating their own shot, playmakers for others and have either elite size or athleticism or in many cases both.

If Keegan becomes a star it will be because of the elite shooting, high BBIQ and plus positional size ( if he establishes himself as a wing)

I think he could potentially be an all star but at the very least I’d like him to become a top 3 player on a contender.
 
Out of boredom/ curiosity, I rewatched the Box and One's draft scouting video on Keegan Murray and felt the skill breakdown was pretty accurate. Think I prefer insight into how players will and won't contribute rather than guesses at who will or won't be a loosely defined star.

Also feel if Keegan went to a team like Houston, where it's everyman for himself on offence, or Sacramento circa 2021, he would've been pretty pedestrian. Some might say that more creation reps would accelerate his development, but feel playing with Domas really bought out his movement shooting and gave him something to hang his hat on in his rookie year.
 
Out of boredom/ curiosity, I rewatched the Box and One's draft scouting video on Keegan Murray and felt the skill breakdown was pretty accurate. Think I prefer insight into how players will and won't contribute rather than guesses at who will or won't be a loosely defined star.

Also feel if Keegan went to a team like Houston, where it's everyman for himself on offence, or Sacramento circa 2021, he would've been pretty pedestrian. Some might say that more creation reps would accelerate his development, but feel playing with Domas really bought out his movement shooting and gave him something to hang his hat on in his rookie year.
Yeah it's extremely hard to impact winning as a rookie. It's even more difficult to impact winning on a good playoff team. Keegan played 27 MPG in the playoffs this year... next closest?

Braun: 13 MPG
Roddy: 12.7 MPG

Next closest after that? Max Christie at 3.7 MPG in 9 games.

That shouldn't be understated. He not only started for a good playoff team, but was actually relied upon in the playoffs as a core rotation player. While being one of the best shooters in the NBA, not just among rookies.

Basically, there's a lot of directions his development can go in. He certainly has the base to develop into a star/generational shooter. Maybe he tops out just a little bit higher and settles in as a MPJ level contributor.
 
As I always say these guys are paid to make content, not to be right. The commentator world makes so much more sense when you look at it that way.

He lost nothing by being "wrong" in the first place. In fact he may have gained by stating an "edgy" opinion and irking Kingsfans at first, only to "apologize" later. They only care about being right (occasionally) in so much as it floats an air of credibility so that people don't tune them out completely.

We have FAR better basketball minds posting on this board for free everyday.
I wholeheartedly agree. Which is why I almost never read any opinion based content on news media anymore and couldn’t even tell you who the person that made that claim is. I avoid most podcasters as well, as 95% of them are utter garbage. Anybody can do it nowadays. It’s saturated the market and created an ocean of diarrhea.

I was commenting on it more wrt a faction of our member base here at KF that subscribe to the exact same practice. Keegan Murray is latest in a long line of examples of fans inventing and placing ceilings on players when they truly don’t have the first damned clue.

Steve Nash, Tom Brady, Steph Curry, etc, all had invisible ceilings placed upon them due to their supposed lack of size and/or athleticism yet all developed into MVP’s. And very few of the geniuses that just knew they had low ceilings would admit to it now.

Keegan Murray clearly isn’t in an MVP category as yet, and may not even develop into an all-NBA talent or all-star. But he’s already pushing through this ridiculous ceiling he had placed upon him by the unimaginative.
 
Last edited:
I wholeheartedly agree. Which is why I almost never read any opinion based content on news media anymore and couldn’t even tell you who the person that made that claim is. I avoid most podcasters as well, as 95% of them are utter garbage. Anybody can do it nowadays. It’s saturated the market and created an ocean of diarrhea.

I was commenting on it more wrt a faction of our member base here at KF that subscribe to the exact same practice. Keegan Murray is latest in a long line of examples of fans inventing and placing ceilings on players when they truly don’t have the first damned clue.

Steve Nash, Tom Brady, Steph Curry, etc, all had invisible ceilings placed upon them due to their supposed lack of size and/or athleticism yet all developed into MVP’s. And very few of the geniuses that just knew they had low ceilings would admit to it now.

Keegan Murray clearly isn’t in a MVP category as yet, and may not even develop into an all-NBA talent or all-star. But he’s already pushing through this ridiculous ceiling he had placed upon him by the unimaginative.
Reminds me of that old saying: never go fishing in an ocean of diarrhea.
 
As I always say these guys are paid to make content, not to be right. The commentator world makes so much more sense when you look at it that way.

He lost nothing by being "wrong" in the first place. In fact he may have gained by stating an "edgy" opinion and irking Kingsfans at first, only to "apologize" later. They only care about being right (occasionally) in so much as it floats an air of credibility so that people don't tune them out completely.

We have FAR better basketball minds posting on this board for free everyday.
Don't write off GameTheory. It's a great podcast. They do a great job. And they are absolutely knowledgeable. They do not follow only Sacramento however. But I listen to every episode with great interest.
 
I believe that nuance is the approach to use with siutations like this vs. the broad brush of national media always disses the Kings. Sam Veccenie is probably the top media NBA scout in the world. His draft guide for the Athletic is the most lengthy and detailed thing I have every seen.

Now, this doesn't mean he's automatically correct. But, as we know, teams of people paid Millions of dollars annually by Billonaires to make these decicisions get it wrong all of the time. Let's just look at 75% of Kings picks since 1989.

That being said, instead of lambasting him for walking it back or whatever has been said in this thread is just silly. This guy has no dog in the fight. He expresses his opinions based on extensive video scouting AND when he's wrong, he admits it.

Seems like what we should want every media member to do.
 
I believe that nuance is the approach to use with siutations like this vs. the broad brush of national media always disses the Kings. Sam Veccenie is probably the top media NBA scout in the world. His draft guide for the Athletic is the most lengthy and detailed thing I have every seen.

Now, this doesn't mean he's automatically correct. But, as we know, teams of people paid Millions of dollars annually by Billonaires to make these decicisions get it wrong all of the time. Let's just look at 75% of Kings picks since 1989.

That being said, instead of lambasting him for walking it back or whatever has been said in this thread is just silly. This guy has no dog in the fight. He expresses his opinions based on extensive video scouting AND when he's wrong, he admits it.

Seems like what we should want every media member to do.
Exactly. In a media world where most talking heads just pretend they never uttered their previous bad takes (or worse yet, double down on them) Veccenie generally admits when he's wrong.

The Ringer draft guys (KOC and J Kyle Mann) are similar in that they freely admit who they misjudged. But IMO Veccenie is a better judge of talent and how it will translate to the NBA.

I honestly don't understand why anyone bothers listening to guys like Skip Bayless and Stephen A Smith when there's much more nuanced sports discussion to be had.
 
I believe that nuance is the approach to use with siutations like this vs. the broad brush of national media always disses the Kings. Sam Veccenie is probably the top media NBA scout in the world. His draft guide for the Athletic is the most lengthy and detailed thing I have every seen.

Now, this doesn't mean he's automatically correct. But, as we know, teams of people paid Millions of dollars annually by Billonaires to make these decicisions get it wrong all of the time. Let's just look at 75% of Kings picks since 1989.

That being said, instead of lambasting him for walking it back or whatever has been said in this thread is just silly. This guy has no dog in the fight. He expresses his opinions based on extensive video scouting AND when he's wrong, he admits it.

Seems like what we should want every media member to do.
Exactly. In a media world where most talking heads just pretend they never uttered their previous bad takes (or worse yet, double down on them) Veccenie generally admits when he's wrong.

The Ringer draft guys (KOC and J Kyle Mann) are similar in that they freely admit who they misjudged. But IMO Veccenie is a better judge of talent and how it will translate to the NBA.

I honestly don't understand why anyone bothers listening to guys like Skip Bayless and Stephen A Smith when there's much more nuanced sports discussion to be had.
Ok ok! I stand corrected. I walk back my walk back of the walk back.

Apparently I am just as prone to being wrong as some of the talking heads. :p

I don't get paid to be right either! I get paid in Sauce to post outrageous takes!
 
Last edited:
Exactly. In a media world where most talking heads just pretend they never uttered their previous bad takes (or worse yet, double down on them) Veccenie generally admits when he's wrong.

The Ringer draft guys (KOC and J Kyle Mann) are similar in that they freely admit who they misjudged. But IMO Veccenie is a better judge of talent and how it will translate to the NBA.

I honestly don't understand why anyone bothers listening to guys like Skip Bayless and Stephen A Smith when there's much more nuanced sports discussion to be had.
Yup, I'd put KOC a close second on both those counts.