Jamal Murray. 79/100 threes

[RedClaw33]

I've been all over the place on this forum...Pro Heild, Pro Bender, Pro Brown and over the past few days increasingly in favor of Murray. 

The way I see it Murray has the best of all worlds....great upside, youth, scoring ability, outside shooting, ball handling, experience, confidence and is very unlikely to be a bust.

Having another guard to add to the mix certainly doesn't look good on paper but if he is the BPA we have to take him.   

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/celtics/celtics_insider/2016/06/murrays_shot_is_true_in_celtics_workout_0

interview w/ celtics media
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWoJ38GoAxU

[kozlodoev]

These percentages are silly.  Murray isn't going to be Curry or Kyrie.  Bender and Brown do have some upside where they can maybe get up somewhere near that level. You can keep your halfassed Kyrie.

It's funny how people equate "is young and not that good" with "having some upside". SMH.

[KG Living Legend]

 Murray could easily become better than Irving. I can't stand him. Irving is the definition of no defense.

[PaulP34]

Shame he is a guard.

If he was European, enigmatic, and playing in an obscure overseas league he'd be the consensus top pick in the draft.

I think Timothe Luwawu has just as much upside as Murray. Its to bad He's not a higher prospect.

[Ilikesports17]

These percentages are silly.  Murray isn't going to be Curry or Kyrie.  Bender and Brown do have some upside where they can maybe get up somewhere near that level. You can keep your halfassed Kyrie.

It's funny how people equate "is young and not that good" with "having some upside". SMH.

But thats not what people are doing.

Brown is the best athlete in the draft as far as I can tell, and Bender, is 7ft tall and can shoot and ACCORDING TO MANY SCOUTING REPORTS able to defend the perimeter.

Thats where the upside is from.

I have long believed that one of the biggest problems in politics today is that both sides believe the other is stupid and full of idiots who just havent seen the beautiful truth.

Intelligent people believe Bender and Brown have upside.

[PickNRoll]

I've been all over the place on this forum...Pro Heild, Pro Bender, Pro Brown and over the past few days increasingly in favor of Murray. 

The way I see it Murray has the best of all worlds....great upside, youth, scoring ability, outside shooting, ball handling, experience, confidence and is very unlikely to be a bust.

Having another guard to add to the mix certainly doesn't look good on paper but if he is the BPA we have to take him.   

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/celtics/celtics_insider/2016/06/murrays_shot_is_true_in_celtics_workout_0

Welcome aboard the Murray bandwagon! 

Quick rant on "positionless" basketball.  Can you imagine what it would be like if positionless basketball were a real thing.  Boogie sharing ballhandling duty with Rondo.  Lineups with 5 7-footers.  Coaches who don't care if it's a PF setting a screen or a PG.  Kelly Olynyk running around like Ray Allen curling off of 3 screens.  Bogut guarding Westbrook at the top of a 2-3 zone.  Dwight Howard ISO's that start 30 feet from the hoop.  Could be fun, now that I think of it.

There is a guy in the league that does a lot of things well.  His name is Draymond Green.  That's it.  Basketball is not positionless and it never can be.

[walker834]

These percentages are silly.  Murray isn't going to be Curry or Kyrie.  Bender and Brown do have some upside where they can maybe get up somewhere near that level. You can keep your halfassed Kyrie.

It's funny how people equate "is young and not that good" with "having some upside". SMH.

But thats not what people are doing. 

Brown is the best athlete in the draft as far as I can tell, and Bender, is 7ft tall and can shoot and ACCORDING TO MANY SCOUTING REPORTS able to defend the perimeter.

Thats where the upside is from.

Brown can be a SF which is also a huge plus.  Bender is also a SF/PF as it stands.   I think we have to take one of those guys.

[Ilikesports17]

These percentages are silly.  Murray isn't going to be Curry or Kyrie.  Bender and Brown do have some upside where they can maybe get up somewhere near that level. You can keep your halfassed Kyrie.

It's funny how people equate "is young and not that good" with "having some upside". SMH.

But thats not what people are doing. 

Brown is the best athlete in the draft as far as I can tell, and Bender, is 7ft tall and can shoot and ACCORDING TO MANY SCOUTING REPORTS able to defend the perimeter.

Thats where the upside is from.

Brown can be a SF which is also a huge plus.  Bender is also a SF/PF as it stands.   I think we have to take one of those guys.

Forget the SF stuff. If Bender is gonna be successful hes gonna need to put on 30 pounds and be a full fledged big. If he tries to be this big time 7 foot tall guard type BS thats how hes gonna end up being a bust.

[walker834]

These percentages are silly.  Murray isn't going to be Curry or Kyrie.  Bender and Brown do have some upside where they can maybe get up somewhere near that level. You can keep your halfassed Kyrie.

It's funny how people equate "is young and not that good" with "having some upside". SMH.

But thats not what people are doing. 

Brown is the best athlete in the draft as far as I can tell, and Bender, is 7ft tall and can shoot and ACCORDING TO MANY SCOUTING REPORTS able to defend the perimeter.

Thats where the upside is from.

Brown can be a SF which is also a huge plus.  Bender is also a SF/PF as it stands.   I think we have to take one of those guys.

Forget the SF stuff. If Bender is gonna be successful hes gonna need to put on 30 pounds and be a full fledged big. If he tries to be this big time 7 foot tall guard type BS thats how hes gonna end up being a bust.

I agree with that.  I'm liking Brown though too.  Both those guys are too good imo to not take one.  Murray and some of these guards are good players but not what we need.  I don't think you pass on a guy like Brown unless there is just some reason I'm missing.  Bender could be it.   I don't see Murray as that.

[PhoSita]

I think Murray is far more likely to be C.J. McCollum or Kevin Martin than Steph Curry.  Far, far, far more likely.

[saltlover]

I think Murray is far more likely to be C.J. McCollum or Kevin Martin than Steph Curry.  Far, far, far more likely.

Would you not want CJ McCollum on the Celtics?

I don't think we'll see another Steph for a decade, anyway.  No reason to look for one.

[PhoSita]

I think Murray is far more likely to be C.J. McCollum or Kevin Martin than Steph Curry.  Far, far, far more likely.

Would you not want CJ McCollum on the Celtics?

I don't think we'll see another Steph for a decade, anyway.  No reason to look for one.

I like C.J. a lot.  If that's the kind of player you get with a top 3 pick, that's not so bad. 

He is a one-way player though.  A really nice one way player, but still one-way.

What the Celts really need is guys that can make an impact on both ends.  I want to see the Celts try and add one with the #3 pick.

[RedClaw33]

I've been all over the place on this forum...Pro Heild, Pro Bender, Pro Brown and over the past few days increasingly in favor of Murray. 

The way I see it Murray has the best of all worlds....great upside, youth, scoring ability, outside shooting, ball handling, experience, confidence and is very unlikely to be a bust.

Having another guard to add to the mix certainly doesn't look good on paper but if he is the BPA we have to take him.   

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/celtics/celtics_insider/2016/06/murrays_shot_is_true_in_celtics_workout_0

Welcome aboard the Murray bandwagon! 

Quick rant on "positionless" basketball.  Can you imagine what it would be like if positionless basketball were a real thing.  Boogie sharing ballhandling duty with Rondo.  Lineups with 5 7-footers.  Coaches who don't care if it's a PF setting a screen or a PG.  Kelly Olynyk running around like Ray Allen curling off of 3 screens.  Bogut guarding Westbrook at the top of a 2-3 zone.  Dwight Howard ISO's that start 30 feet from the hoop.  Could be fun, now that I think of it.

There is a guy in the league that does a lot of things well.  His name is Draymond Green.  That's it.  Basketball is not positionless and it never can be.

I guess thats fair.....

I have to say I watched him early in the season with Kentucky and wasn't impressed at all...those few games really shaped my opinion....since I have watch some games through youtube, some workout sessions, and of course lots of interviews.   Most of the analysts seem to be very high on Murray and have been for some time....I'm certainly new to the party.

[LarBrd33]

Shame he is a guard.

If he was European, enigmatic, and playing in an obscure overseas league he'd be the consensus top pick in the draft.

TP! But you forgot non-athletic!

Well, there is not "if" on the non-athletic part for Murray so it seems it was left out.

He's average. As a minimum, considerably better than Hield. Given his age and production, I'd love to have him at 3.

Problem is he's an awful defender, struggles offensively versus athletic defenders, and his assists (2.2) to turnovers (2.1) is horrible for a player that projects as a combo guard. Kevin O'Conner is really down on him and has him much lower than others.

What was Hield doing at the same age?

I don't like this kind of comparison.  To me, you draft based on the known talent and perhaps a bit of projection but not too much.

I like that kind of comparison.   Say two kids graduate high school the same year.

One is a 17 year old who finished his Senior year with 3.6 GPA
The other is a 21 year old who finished his Senior year with a 3.8GPA, after failing Senior year 3 times.

Which do you expect will have a better shot of succeeding in College?

You know that comparison is flawed.

It does not matter where Hield was two years ago with respect to Murray. Only with respect to Hield. Maturation is impossible to predict. In one thread someone suggested Ben McLemore might average 50 ppg had he stayed in college. this is obviously ridiculous.

Age is a factor but you cannot apply it like this.

Plus Hield isnt a bit better than Murray like your arbitrary 3.8 vs 3.6 suggests, he has a 4.0.

Lastly, everyone know age is a factor.

You evaluate Hield as a 21 year old with 4 years of experience and Murray as a 19 year old with 1.

Hield will be 23 next season.  And no, I don't think it's flawed to look at it like that.   I don't trust numbers from Seniors on the College level.  There's plenty examples of guys who dominated as Seniors on the College level and were mediocre on the NBA level.  The extra years of experience give them a major advantage.  It doesn't mean they are closer to beating NBA competition.  It just means that they finally figured out, after four attempts, how to win on that amateur level.   

If some kid failed senior year of high school 3 times and finally aced it on his 4th attempt, I wouldn't assume he's closer to mastering the College level.  I'd just assume he finally figure out how to past the tests he failed the first 3 times.

[RedClaw33]

Coach Cal thinks he should be #1 .... go figure.

http://espn.go.com/nba/draft2016/story/_/id/16052499/kentucky-head-coach-john-calipari-says-philadelphia-76ers-take-wildcats-guard-jamal-murray-no1-pick-nba-draft