Author Topic: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?  (Read 19238 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #60 on: May 05, 2016, 09:55:28 AM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
I like Murray much better. He's a great scorer both on the ball and off the ball. CBS will have a field day running him off multiple screens, he can catch + shoot but then he can also make a play off the dribble or a quick pass if the shot isn't there. CBS has never had a guy who can do that - AB doesn't have the playmaking, IT doesn't have the length to get the shot off, nobody else is a good enough shooter. He just seems to be legitimately good at basketball.

Brown is far, far away from making an impact. He just doesn't know how to score efficiently right now, he is not a good shooter, he is a disappointingly average defender given his tools. I don't see how he's going to playable on a playoff team this year with his total lack of shooting, defense, BBIQ, every single thing you need from a role player. He needs to go to a rebuilding team that can play him through his growing pains.

I worry about Murray because I think if he ever became a starting caliber player, we'd need to trade either him or IT4 - or try to convince once of them to come off the bench.  There is no way we could start those two guys alongside each other, because we would have probably the worst defensive backcourt in the entire NBA. 

We need a guy who can shoot, but we also need a guy who can play at least respectable defence - which is why if we did pick a guard I would be going for either Hield or Dunn.

I know both guys are on the older side for rookies (both 22 years old), but we are a playoff team.  If we can't hit a home run with a Simmons/Ingram, then we really need to go for guys who can contribute and help us win ASAP rather than taking gambles on guys who don't really fit the team.

I think Murray is a nice guy for Philly if they get unlucky and slip to #3 because they desperately need offence and guards, and are already have a solid defensive frontcourt in Noel and Embiid. 

I look at Murray and I pretty much see Michael Carter Williams a jump shot.

If Turner leaves, Murray can slide into that 4th guard slot playing mostly next to Smart. If he becomes too good to bring him off the bench, well, that will be a great problem to have.

I don't think a scenario where your two best guards are completely incompatible is, by any stretch of the imagination, a great problem to have.

I also don't see why you'd want to waste a top 3 pick on another bench guard when we already have the likes of Rozier, Smart and (if he comes back) Turner.

I don't much understand why anybody would take Murray over Hield outside of simply age.  Hield is just as good an outside shooter, has similar size, has better length, has better athleticism and actually shows some signs of having potential as a defensive player.  He also seems to have arguably the best intangibles of any player in the draft - tireless work ethic, winners mentality, and he's pure clutch.

In my eyes Hield is an EASY #3 after Simmons and Ingram.  Pretty much the only major negative for Hield is that he is 22 years old, but older rookies have excelled in this league before and I go for outright talent over outright youth any day (sorry James Young). 

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #61 on: May 05, 2016, 09:58:49 AM »

Offline Tr1boy

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27260
  • Tommy Points: 867
I like Murray much better. He's a great scorer both on the ball and off the ball. CBS will have a field day running him off multiple screens, he can catch + shoot but then he can also make a play off the dribble or a quick pass if the shot isn't there. CBS has never had a guy who can do that - AB doesn't have the playmaking, IT doesn't have the length to get the shot off, nobody else is a good enough shooter. He just seems to be legitimately good at basketball.

Brown is far, far away from making an impact. He just doesn't know how to score efficiently right now, he is not a good shooter, he is a disappointingly average defender given his tools. I don't see how he's going to playable on a playoff team this year with his total lack of shooting, defense, BBIQ, every single thing you need from a role player. He needs to go to a rebuilding team that can play him through his growing pains.

I worry about Murray because I think if he ever became a starting caliber player, we'd need to trade either him or IT4 - or try to convince once of them to come off the bench.  There is no way we could start those two guys alongside each other, because we would have probably the worst defensive backcourt in the entire NBA. 

We need a guy who can shoot, but we also need a guy who can play at least respectable defence - which is why if we did pick a guard I would be going for either Hield or Dunn.

I know both guys are on the older side for rookies (both 22 years old), but we are a playoff team.  If we can't hit a home run with a Simmons/Ingram, then we really need to go for guys who can contribute and help us win ASAP rather than taking gambles on guys who don't really fit the team.

I think Murray is a nice guy for Philly if they get unlucky and slip to #3 because they desperately need offence and guards, and are already have a solid defensive frontcourt in Noel and Embiid. 

I look at Murray and I pretty much see Michael Carter Williams a jump shot.

If Turner leaves, Murray can slide into that 4th guard slot playing mostly next to Smart. If he becomes too good to bring him off the bench, well, that will be a great problem to have.

I don't think a scenario where your two best guards are completely incompatible is, by any stretch of the imagination, a great problem to have.

I also don't see why you'd want to waste a top 3 pick on another bench guard when we already have the likes of Rozier, Smart and (if he comes back) Turner.

I don't much understand why anybody would take Murray over Hield outside of simply age.  Hield is just as good an outside shooter, has similar size, has better length, has better athleticism and actually shows some signs of having potential as a defensive player.  He also seems to have arguably the best intangibles of any player in the draft - tireless work ethic, winners mentality, and he's pure clutch.

In my eyes Hield is an EASY #3 after Simmons and Ingram.  Pretty much the only major negative for Hield is that he is 22 years old, but older rookies have excelled in this league before and I go for outright talent over outright youth any day (sorry James Young).

The age factor could be too much

Murray freshman year production is as good as it gets for a sg

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #62 on: May 05, 2016, 10:22:07 AM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
I like Murray much better. He's a great scorer both on the ball and off the ball. CBS will have a field day running him off multiple screens, he can catch + shoot but then he can also make a play off the dribble or a quick pass if the shot isn't there. CBS has never had a guy who can do that - AB doesn't have the playmaking, IT doesn't have the length to get the shot off, nobody else is a good enough shooter. He just seems to be legitimately good at basketball.

Brown is far, far away from making an impact. He just doesn't know how to score efficiently right now, he is not a good shooter, he is a disappointingly average defender given his tools. I don't see how he's going to playable on a playoff team this year with his total lack of shooting, defense, BBIQ, every single thing you need from a role player. He needs to go to a rebuilding team that can play him through his growing pains.

I worry about Murray because I think if he ever became a starting caliber player, we'd need to trade either him or IT4 - or try to convince once of them to come off the bench.  There is no way we could start those two guys alongside each other, because we would have probably the worst defensive backcourt in the entire NBA. 

We need a guy who can shoot, but we also need a guy who can play at least respectable defence - which is why if we did pick a guard I would be going for either Hield or Dunn.

I know both guys are on the older side for rookies (both 22 years old), but we are a playoff team.  If we can't hit a home run with a Simmons/Ingram, then we really need to go for guys who can contribute and help us win ASAP rather than taking gambles on guys who don't really fit the team.

I think Murray is a nice guy for Philly if they get unlucky and slip to #3 because they desperately need offence and guards, and are already have a solid defensive frontcourt in Noel and Embiid. 

I look at Murray and I pretty much see Michael Carter Williams a jump shot.

If Turner leaves, Murray can slide into that 4th guard slot playing mostly next to Smart. If he becomes too good to bring him off the bench, well, that will be a great problem to have.

I don't think a scenario where your two best guards are completely incompatible is, by any stretch of the imagination, a great problem to have.

I also don't see why you'd want to waste a top 3 pick on another bench guard when we already have the likes of Rozier, Smart and (if he comes back) Turner.

I don't much understand why anybody would take Murray over Hield outside of simply age.  Hield is just as good an outside shooter, has similar size, has better length, has better athleticism and actually shows some signs of having potential as a defensive player.  He also seems to have arguably the best intangibles of any player in the draft - tireless work ethic, winners mentality, and he's pure clutch.

In my eyes Hield is an EASY #3 after Simmons and Ingram.  Pretty much the only major negative for Hield is that he is 22 years old, but older rookies have excelled in this league before and I go for outright talent over outright youth any day (sorry James Young).

The age factor could be too much

Murray freshman year production is as good as it gets for a sg

I do understand the age concern, but Hield's produced at near historically epic levels this year. 

25 PPG on 50% / 46% / 88% shooting (1.54 PTS / FGA) is just plain ridiculous.  Those are Kevin Durant type scoring numbers .  Throw in his pretty impressive athleticism, excellent length, elite motor and the fact that he has improved pretty much every year.  Even at 22, his upside is still through the roof.

Hield has the potential to be a real dark horse, and could end up being the best player in this draft 2-3 years from now.  He's got the potential to become a legitimate two way superstar.

Of course Hield does have some concerns (ball handling and passing limitations may limit him overall) but as a sheer scorer / shooter he's about as good as it gets in this draft, and shooting/scoring are two of the things we are in most dire need of.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2016, 10:31:07 AM by crimson_stallion »

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #63 on: May 05, 2016, 12:14:54 PM »

Offline loco_91

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2087
  • Tommy Points: 145

I don't think a scenario where your two best guards are completely incompatible is, by any stretch of the imagination, a great problem to have.

I also don't see why you'd want to waste a top 3 pick on another bench guard when we already have the likes of Rozier, Smart and (if he comes back) Turner.

I don't much understand why anybody would take Murray over Hield outside of simply age.  Hield is just as good an outside shooter, has similar size, has better length, has better athleticism and actually shows some signs of having potential as a defensive player.  He also seems to have arguably the best intangibles of any player in the draft - tireless work ethic, winners mentality, and he's pure clutch.

In my eyes Hield is an EASY #3 after Simmons and Ingram.  Pretty much the only major negative for Hield is that he is 22 years old, but older rookies have excelled in this league before and I go for outright talent over outright youth any day (sorry James Young).

To be clear, I don't advocate taking Murray at #3. But I do think he's a much better prospect than Hield, who is old and wasn't good until this year. You cannot ignore the age gap between a freshman and a senior. Murray has better feel for the game than Hield does even though he's way younger, and he is far more likely to improve on his weaknesses than Hield is.

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #64 on: May 05, 2016, 12:19:36 PM »

Offline alldaboston

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4170
  • Tommy Points: 324

I don't think a scenario where your two best guards are completely incompatible is, by any stretch of the imagination, a great problem to have.

I also don't see why you'd want to waste a top 3 pick on another bench guard when we already have the likes of Rozier, Smart and (if he comes back) Turner.

I don't much understand why anybody would take Murray over Hield outside of simply age.  Hield is just as good an outside shooter, has similar size, has better length, has better athleticism and actually shows some signs of having potential as a defensive player.  He also seems to have arguably the best intangibles of any player in the draft - tireless work ethic, winners mentality, and he's pure clutch.

In my eyes Hield is an EASY #3 after Simmons and Ingram.  Pretty much the only major negative for Hield is that he is 22 years old, but older rookies have excelled in this league before and I go for outright talent over outright youth any day (sorry James Young).

To be clear, I don't advocate taking Murray at #3. But I do think he's a much better prospect than Hield, who is old and wasn't good until this year. You cannot ignore the age gap between a freshman and a senior. Murray has better feel for the game than Hield does even though he's way younger, and he is far more likely to improve on his weaknesses than Hield is.

I think Murray will be a good NBA player. He's better than Hield was in his freshman year. I'd go
Murray
Hield
Brown
I could very well see the Hawks... starting Taurean Prince at the 3, who is already better than Crowder, imo.

you vs. the guy she tells you not to worry about

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #65 on: May 05, 2016, 01:04:27 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
I just have never gotten the point of view that its better to draft a 19 year old with potential over a 22 year old with potential. 22 years old isn't old. Players, especially ones taken at the top of the draft that you want to become stars, get better every year. There simply is no age where a player with elite talent stops developing.

Also, its not like a team is going to have a 19 year old on their team all that much longer than a 22 year old. Both the 19 year old and the 22 year old get 4 year rookie contracts. If they are superstars, they both get 5 year extensions. If they are still good they get another contract. BTW, very seldom do players, even the best of players, stay with the same team over 9 years. So saying its advantageous because at the end of 9 years one player is 28 and the other is 31 makes little difference, most likely that player still won't be on the team.

And bringing up examples is ridiculous. There are as many busts of teenagers as there are success stories of 4 year college players becoming great. There are as many examples of 19 year olds becoming stars as 22 year olds that stagnate and never become better in the pros.

Honestly, draft a player based on talent, transferable skills, and how much room you feel that player has to grow. Hield may be the better player than Murray or Brown right now, but he may also have the highest upside even though he has less to go to reach his highest upside whereas both Murray and Brown may not be as good right away but could have lower upsides and may take longer to even reach those lower upsides.

Younger doesn't mean better, it just means younger.

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #66 on: May 05, 2016, 08:13:26 PM »

Offline loco_91

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2087
  • Tommy Points: 145
I just have never gotten the point of view that its better to draft a 19 year old with potential over a 22 year old with potential. 22 years old isn't old. Players, especially ones taken at the top of the draft that you want to become stars, get better every year. There simply is no age where a player with elite talent stops developing.

Also, its not like a team is going to have a 19 year old on their team all that much longer than a 22 year old. Both the 19 year old and the 22 year old get 4 year rookie contracts. If they are superstars, they both get 5 year extensions. If they are still good they get another contract. BTW, very seldom do players, even the best of players, stay with the same team over 9 years. So saying its advantageous because at the end of 9 years one player is 28 and the other is 31 makes little difference, most likely that player still won't be on the team.

And bringing up examples is ridiculous. There are as many busts of teenagers as there are success stories of 4 year college players becoming great. There are as many examples of 19 year olds becoming stars as 22 year olds that stagnate and never become better in the pros.

Honestly, draft a player based on talent, transferable skills, and how much room you feel that player has to grow. Hield may be the better player than Murray or Brown right now, but he may also have the highest upside even though he has less to go to reach his highest upside whereas both Murray and Brown may not be as good right away but could have lower upsides and may take longer to even reach those lower upsides.

Younger doesn't mean better, it just means younger.

It's a good point that rookie contracts are 4 years no matter how old you are; there's a lot of value in taking a guy who's near NBA ready, so you get 4 years of production on a cheap contract. But this early in the draft you are drafting for superstar potential, for guys that you are going to sign to a max deal in UFA. For two players with similar production, you'd way rather take the freshman over the senior; way more likely to reach super-max level good.

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #67 on: May 05, 2016, 08:53:02 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
I just have never gotten the point of view that its better to draft a 19 year old with potential over a 22 year old with potential. 22 years old isn't old. Players, especially ones taken at the top of the draft that you want to become stars, get better every year. There simply is no age where a player with elite talent stops developing.

Also, its not like a team is going to have a 19 year old on their team all that much longer than a 22 year old. Both the 19 year old and the 22 year old get 4 year rookie contracts. If they are superstars, they both get 5 year extensions. If they are still good they get another contract. BTW, very seldom do players, even the best of players, stay with the same team over 9 years. So saying its advantageous because at the end of 9 years one player is 28 and the other is 31 makes little difference, most likely that player still won't be on the team.

And bringing up examples is ridiculous. There are as many busts of teenagers as there are success stories of 4 year college players becoming great. There are as many examples of 19 year olds becoming stars as 22 year olds that stagnate and never become better in the pros.

Honestly, draft a player based on talent, transferable skills, and how much room you feel that player has to grow. Hield may be the better player than Murray or Brown right now, but he may also have the highest upside even though he has less to go to reach his highest upside whereas both Murray and Brown may not be as good right away but could have lower upsides and may take longer to even reach those lower upsides.

Younger doesn't mean better, it just means younger.

It's a good point that rookie contracts are 4 years no matter how old you are; there's a lot of value in taking a guy who's near NBA ready, so you get 4 years of production on a cheap contract. But this early in the draft you are drafting for superstar potential, for guys that you are going to sign to a max deal in UFA. For two players with similar production, you'd way rather take the freshman over the senior; way more likely to reach super-max level good.
I dont think college production has anythin to do with determining which player has higher upside potential. You have to take a look at tranferable skills, athleticism to succeed at the next level and mental makeup and determine what the players can learn so,they can develop to their fullest. Stats in college mean mostly squat when determining a players ability to succeed in the NBA.

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #68 on: May 05, 2016, 09:42:39 PM »

Offline loco_91

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2087
  • Tommy Points: 145
I just have never gotten the point of view that its better to draft a 19 year old with potential over a 22 year old with potential. 22 years old isn't old. Players, especially ones taken at the top of the draft that you want to become stars, get better every year. There simply is no age where a player with elite talent stops developing.

Also, its not like a team is going to have a 19 year old on their team all that much longer than a 22 year old. Both the 19 year old and the 22 year old get 4 year rookie contracts. If they are superstars, they both get 5 year extensions. If they are still good they get another contract. BTW, very seldom do players, even the best of players, stay with the same team over 9 years. So saying its advantageous because at the end of 9 years one player is 28 and the other is 31 makes little difference, most likely that player still won't be on the team.

And bringing up examples is ridiculous. There are as many busts of teenagers as there are success stories of 4 year college players becoming great. There are as many examples of 19 year olds becoming stars as 22 year olds that stagnate and never become better in the pros.

Honestly, draft a player based on talent, transferable skills, and how much room you feel that player has to grow. Hield may be the better player than Murray or Brown right now, but he may also have the highest upside even though he has less to go to reach his highest upside whereas both Murray and Brown may not be as good right away but could have lower upsides and may take longer to even reach those lower upsides.

Younger doesn't mean better, it just means younger.

It's a good point that rookie contracts are 4 years no matter how old you are; there's a lot of value in taking a guy who's near NBA ready, so you get 4 years of production on a cheap contract. But this early in the draft you are drafting for superstar potential, for guys that you are going to sign to a max deal in UFA. For two players with similar production, you'd way rather take the freshman over the senior; way more likely to reach super-max level good.
I dont think college production has anythin to do with determining which player has higher upside potential. You have to take a look at tranferable skills, athleticism to succeed at the next level and mental makeup and determine what the players can learn so,they can develop to their fullest. Stats in college mean mostly squat when determining a players ability to succeed in the NBA.
Totally disagree. Models using stats + measurements alone have significantly outperformed actual draft order over the last 25 years. Don't advocate to evaluate using stats alone, but it's idiotic to ignore stats (or only use them when they support your hypothesis). http://www.tothemean.com/tools/draft-models/

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #69 on: May 05, 2016, 10:59:52 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
I just have never gotten the point of view that its better to draft a 19 year old with potential over a 22 year old with potential. 22 years old isn't old. Players, especially ones taken at the top of the draft that you want to become stars, get better every year. There simply is no age where a player with elite talent stops developing.

Also, its not like a team is going to have a 19 year old on their team all that much longer than a 22 year old. Both the 19 year old and the 22 year old get 4 year rookie contracts. If they are superstars, they both get 5 year extensions. If they are still good they get another contract. BTW, very seldom do players, even the best of players, stay with the same team over 9 years. So saying its advantageous because at the end of 9 years one player is 28 and the other is 31 makes little difference, most likely that player still won't be on the team.

And bringing up examples is ridiculous. There are as many busts of teenagers as there are success stories of 4 year college players becoming great. There are as many examples of 19 year olds becoming stars as 22 year olds that stagnate and never become better in the pros.

Honestly, draft a player based on talent, transferable skills, and how much room you feel that player has to grow. Hield may be the better player than Murray or Brown right now, but he may also have the highest upside even though he has less to go to reach his highest upside whereas both Murray and Brown may not be as good right away but could have lower upsides and may take longer to even reach those lower upsides.

Younger doesn't mean better, it just means younger.

It's a good point that rookie contracts are 4 years no matter how old you are; there's a lot of value in taking a guy who's near NBA ready, so you get 4 years of production on a cheap contract. But this early in the draft you are drafting for superstar potential, for guys that you are going to sign to a max deal in UFA. For two players with similar production, you'd way rather take the freshman over the senior; way more likely to reach super-max level good.
I dont think college production has anythin to do with determining which player has higher upside potential. You have to take a look at tranferable skills, athleticism to succeed at the next level and mental makeup and determine what the players can learn so,they can develop to their fullest. Stats in college mean mostly squat when determining a players ability to succeed in the NBA.
Totally disagree. Models using stats + measurements alone have significantly outperformed actual draft order over the last 25 years. Don't advocate to evaluate using stats alone, but it's idiotic to ignore stats (or only use them when they support your hypothesis). http://www.tothemean.com/tools/draft-models/
Read that link and the whole thing is highly questionable. Sorry, we will have to agree to disagree. Some stats from college show transferrable NBA skills(rebounding stats and some shooting stats) most others from college are just white noise and completely useless in determining a player's pro ceiling.

In the case of a 19 year old like Murray vs a 22 year old like Hield, I just dont see college stats as a reason to choose one over the other. Age be danged. Take the player your coaching and scouting staff has determined has the highest upside.

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #70 on: May 05, 2016, 11:49:02 PM »

Offline Fred Roberts

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1534
  • Tommy Points: 102
Jalen Brown if we don't get Simmons at 2. #beastmode2.0

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #71 on: May 06, 2016, 02:27:02 AM »

Offline rollie mass

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4270
  • Tommy Points: 1233
how does jaylen compare to winslow -we all know how danny liked him-may give some insight to who he picks or favors-

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #72 on: May 06, 2016, 11:15:04 PM »

Offline Tr1boy

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27260
  • Tommy Points: 867
If jaylen could only shoot with consistency. Would be consensus #3

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #73 on: May 14, 2016, 10:09:37 PM »

Offline footey

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15964
  • Tommy Points: 1833
Ford said Jaylen Brown was terrible in interviews, and could very well drop out of the top 10.   Wow, I really had high hopes for him. 

Re: Jaylen Brown or Jamal Murray?
« Reply #74 on: May 14, 2016, 10:13:40 PM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
Ford said Jaylen Brown was terrible in interviews, and could very well drop out of the top 10.   Wow, I really had high hopes for him.

We'll see if the Celtics even bring him in for a workout.