Author Topic: The Jamal Murray Thread  (Read 9011 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: The Jamal Murray Thread
« Reply #45 on: May 23, 2016, 05:06:38 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15742
  • Tommy Points: 1386
The only issue I'd have with the Celtics taking Murray is we have an abundance of guards. That said, we can always trade somebody else.

Avery Bradley for Ibaka straight up?

This makes sense to me and I would much prefer to trade Bradley in a move like this than as a needless throw-in to an equal value trade.

Re: The Jamal Murray Thread
« Reply #46 on: May 24, 2016, 02:15:13 AM »

Offline KG Living Legend

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8635
  • Tommy Points: 1136
How can anyone compare Young with Murray, other than the fact that they were both freshmen at Kentucky.



 I'm with you again all Boston, Murray is a better prospect than Booker and that's saying something.

Re: The Jamal Murray Thread
« Reply #47 on: May 24, 2016, 03:29:55 AM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
How can anyone compare Young with Murray, other than the fact that they were both freshmen at Kentucky.

1. Both had limitations with their ball handling
2. Both had limitations with their playmaking
3. Both had physical limitations (Murry even more-so then Young)
4. Both were high level scorers who's offensive games depended very heavily on outside shooting

The main differences between the two players are that Murray has better intangibles and has a stronger physique, while Young had better size and was more athletic (which isn't saying much).

They also both played for Kentucky, so similar team environment as well.

They may not be 'clones' of each other, but there are quite a lot of parallels.

Re: The Jamal Murray Thread
« Reply #48 on: May 24, 2016, 03:33:38 AM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
How can anyone compare Young with Murray, other than the fact that they were both freshmen at Kentucky.



 I'm with you again all Boston, Murray is a better prospect than Booker and that's saying something.

Booker averaged 13 PPG, 2 RPG and 2 APG as his rookie whilke shooting 42% / 34% / 84%...on the 4th worst team in the NBA. 

Not saying he lacks potential or that he didn't have a good rookie year - not by any means.  But it's not exactly like he tore up the league either.

Re: The Jamal Murray Thread
« Reply #49 on: May 24, 2016, 03:48:14 AM »

Offline crimson_stallion

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Tommy Points: 875
He's more of a point guard than a shooting guard, but he played where his team needed him to because Ullis couldn't play off ball. The highlights of the USA-Canada games shows how he can distribute.

He's a better ball-handler than Hield, and probably a better passer. I don't agree that he can't defend, either. I think his defense won't be elite, but neither will Hield's.

Murray averaged 2.5 assists per 40 minutes and 2.7 turnovers per 40 minutes. 

Over his first four seasons Hield has averaged a combined 2.4 assists per 40 minutes and 2.7 turnovers per 40 minutes. 

Practically identical PG numbers - though Hield's numbers got worse this year as a result of his extra offensive responsibility (which saw his turnovers increase by around 50%).

Murray might be a slightly better ball handler and perhaps a slightly better passer then Murray.  If so there is very little in it, and it's pretty much irrelevant given that neither really has the ball handling or passing ability to be a long term solution at the PG spot. 

 
Quote
Oh, and there is a big difference between 14 ppg and 20 ppg - the difference between Young's scoring and Murray's.

You should consider the minutes.

Murray averaged 22 points per 40 minutes, Young averaged 18 points per 40 minutes.  Significant difference yes, but Young was also sharing the ball with Julius Randle - who is pretty much a black hole on offence.

 
Quote
Anyone with a basketball eye can see that Murray has finishing ability, floaters, pull-ups, and a three point game, all as the 2nd (?) youngest player in the draft.

Against college competition, sure. 

What about when he gets into the NBA, where just about every single player he faces is going to be quicker, taller, longer and/or more athletic?

If he's starting in the NBA then he is going to have a physical disadvantage almost every time he steps on the floor, regardless of whether he plays the PG spot or the SG spot. 

NBA SG's will shoot over him, and NBA PG's will blow straight by him.  He doesn't even have the lateral mobility to be an above average defender at the college level - NBA players are going to murder him.

 

Re: The Jamal Murray Thread
« Reply #50 on: May 24, 2016, 03:58:42 AM »

Offline KG Living Legend

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8635
  • Tommy Points: 1136

 Crimson stop, your going to eat crow on Murray. Don't compare him to Young, it's Ludicrous. Young had one athletic moment In college, One. The Dunk In the tournament.

 Young's handles are garbage. Murray can play minutes in the NBA at PG. Young's Fg% and 3p% were worse. Murray is a bonafied shooter.

 All young can do Is shoot at an Avg %. Murray has the total game.

Re: The Jamal Murray Thread
« Reply #51 on: May 24, 2016, 04:36:51 AM »

Offline playdream

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1665
  • Tommy Points: 88
He's more of a point guard than a shooting guard, but he played where his team needed him to because Ullis couldn't play off ball. The highlights of the USA-Canada games shows how he can distribute.

He's a better ball-handler than Hield, and probably a better passer. I don't agree that he can't defend, either. I think his defense won't be elite, but neither will Hield's.

Murray averaged 2.5 assists per 40 minutes and 2.7 turnovers per 40 minutes. 

Over his first four seasons Hield has averaged a combined 2.4 assists per 40 minutes and 2.7 turnovers per 40 minutes. 

Practically identical PG numbers - though Hield's numbers got worse this year as a result of his extra offensive responsibility (which saw his turnovers increase by around 50%).

Murray might be a slightly better ball handler and perhaps a slightly better passer then Murray.  If so there is very little in it, and it's pretty much irrelevant given that neither really has the ball handling or passing ability to be a long term solution at the PG spot. 

 
Quote
Oh, and there is a big difference between 14 ppg and 20 ppg - the difference between Young's scoring and Murray's.

You should consider the minutes.

Murray averaged 22 points per 40 minutes, Young averaged 18 points per 40 minutes.  Significant difference yes, but Young was also sharing the ball with Julius Randle - who is pretty much a black hole on offence.

 
Quote
Anyone with a basketball eye can see that Murray has finishing ability, floaters, pull-ups, and a three point game, all as the 2nd (?) youngest player in the draft.

Against college competition, sure. 

What about when he gets into the NBA, where just about every single player he faces is going to be quicker, taller, longer and/or more athletic?

If he's starting in the NBA then he is going to have a physical disadvantage almost every time he steps on the floor, regardless of whether he plays the PG spot or the SG spot. 

NBA SG's will shoot over him, and NBA PG's will blow straight by him.  He doesn't even have the lateral mobility to be an above average defender at the college level - NBA players are going to murder him.
This