Welcome Keegan Murray!
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
Murray is the type of player I'd normally be against drafting. He's fairly old for a rookie, scored a lot inside against younger, weaker players, not an elite athlete and while very solid in a lot of ways, he has some holes in his game that could prevent him from being a great player.
But I'm okay with the pick just because of the growth he's shown the last few years. It gives me hope that he will have a bigger development curve than most players his age generally do once they reach the NBA.
For that to be the case, Murray will have to have a few things happen:
1. His outside shooting will need to translate. I think that's pretty likely to happen.
2. He'll have to become more of a secondary option and develop his passing/playmaking. I think there's a good chance he does.
3. He'll need to improve his handle considerably so that he can improve as a shot creator. IMO this is the least likely to happen.
But he'll have a successful rookie season if he can just hit outside shots, play decent defense, rebound a bit, and make smart cuts off ball. Whether he develops beyond being a solid, complimentary piece will depend on if his game can take another jump. I hope so.
But I'm okay with the pick just because of the growth he's shown the last few years. It gives me hope that he will have a bigger development curve than most players his age generally do once they reach the NBA.
For that to be the case, Murray will have to have a few things happen:
1. His outside shooting will need to translate. I think that's pretty likely to happen.
2. He'll have to become more of a secondary option and develop his passing/playmaking. I think there's a good chance he does.
3. He'll need to improve his handle considerably so that he can improve as a shot creator. IMO this is the least likely to happen.
But he'll have a successful rookie season if he can just hit outside shots, play decent defense, rebound a bit, and make smart cuts off ball. Whether he develops beyond being a solid, complimentary piece will depend on if his game can take another jump. I hope so.
This fan base has been so abused by poor leadership in the past that I understand why everyone is freaking out. But Keegan is gonna be a very good player and we are lucky to have moved up to get him. Smart and hardworking. He’s got a good shot from range that should translate. And his block and steal numbers all show he’s motivated to play defense. The dude was shooting 40% from three on like 5 attempts a game. Having less pressure by being a third option is gonna open up his game. He switchable on D. Really loving the pick.
“Yeh, I always have a chip on my shoulder. I mean, three years ago I was an unrated recruit going to Iowa and I’ll never forget that feeling. So for me I’ll always have that chip on my shoulder no matter what. I know that greatness takes time and I have a long way to go in my development as a basketball player”
Keegan Murray on proving the doubters wrong on being picked over Ivey
Keegan Murray on proving the doubters wrong on being picked over Ivey
This is another one of the reasons that consternation amongst the fanbase over the pick is confusing me. Murray has a very high basketball IQ. He's smart and well-spoken. And he's got that drive/chip on his shoulder to prove his doubters wrong. Most would agree that, prior to Monte's hiring, the Kings were seriously lacking winning talent with grit, drive, and determination. With the Mitchell and Murray picks, as well as the Sabonis and DDV acquisitions, Monte has done some good work to shore up the team's toughness quotient.
There are some real dogs on the team now. Dogs who want to win, and who also possess high IQ's and premium skills. Jaden Ivey may have been the sexier "upside" pick, but the lesson to learn from the Bagley fiasco isn't that you should follow mock draft consensus, it's that you don't pass up elite skills at premium positions in favor of athleticism, no matter how flashy that athleticism is.
None of this is to say that Murray has a Luka-like trajectory in his future (he almost certainly does not), or that Ivey won't be a star (he very well could be). It's simply to state that you're more likely to have a true BPA on your hands when you bet on skill. Playoff teams in the modern NBA are chock full of skilled, high IQ players with a bit of fight to them.
There are some real dogs on the team now. Dogs who want to win, and who also possess high IQ's and premium skills. Jaden Ivey may have been the sexier "upside" pick, but the lesson to learn from the Bagley fiasco isn't that you should follow mock draft consensus, it's that you don't pass up elite skills at premium positions in favor of athleticism, no matter how flashy that athleticism is.
None of this is to say that Murray has a Luka-like trajectory in his future (he almost certainly does not), or that Ivey won't be a star (he very well could be). It's simply to state that you're more likely to have a true BPA on your hands when you bet on skill. Playoff teams in the modern NBA are chock full of skilled, high IQ players with a bit of fight to them.
We're just fans on a board, amirite? None of our predictions represent much of a "limb" to venture out on.
I'm saying that I FULLY expect Keegan Murray to be a very good player for the Kings. Give him a moment to acclimate to the NBA game, his teammates, and what's specifically asked of him - his rookie season, say -and fully expect most everyone to be happy that he's a King. The exceptions being those few among his current critics who'll never admit they were wrong or the ones who wanted someone drafted later (Ivey, Mathurin, Sharpe, etc.) who might be shining even more brightly.
I'm saying that I FULLY expect Keegan Murray to be a very good player for the Kings. Give him a moment to acclimate to the NBA game, his teammates, and what's specifically asked of him - his rookie season, say -and fully expect most everyone to be happy that he's a King. The exceptions being those few among his current critics who'll never admit they were wrong or the ones who wanted someone drafted later (Ivey, Mathurin, Sharpe, etc.) who might be shining even more brightly.
I've been told by NCAA experts that Fran is a terrible coach who didn't understand how to use Murray so him giving praise to the Kings organization for doing our homework and saying we're knocking on the door of the playoffs, is that a good or bad thing?
But also told not to listen to Coach K (who I personally despise, but is definitely a good coach).
But also told not to listen to Coach K (who I personally despise, but is definitely a good coach).
Fran is a classic college coach that can get kids to buy in and play their asses off for him. His offensive schemes are -most;y cribbed from the 1980s (put your best player in the post with his back to the basket all game to make it easier for him to get touches!). I’d argue he’s not exactly the best recruiter outside of the Midwest but Iowa’s not exactly a strong enough program -to be drawing in huge names (he’s lucky in that the Murray twins are from Iowa and played against his kid in AAU). All in all, he’s not a terrible college coach but I’m not sure his opinion on Keegan matters one way or the other.