Jamal Murray Versus 2016 guards
- Thread starter Cats Gone Wild
- Start date
true dat. The kid seems like a man on a mission to score points. His mentality and maturity is awesome.
Yes I would......Yes I would.....After I typed that it sounded like something Mathew Mcconaughey would say doesn't it LMAO. But yeah dude definitely. J-Man's my dawg. He's the real deal. I wouldn't take anybody over him. I was so mad when we didn't get Newman but thank God things turned out the way they did. Murray>>>Newman.
I'd take Jackson (if you consider him a 2), Monk and Dennis Smith Jr over him just purely as prospects, but not for the role we need filled on this year's team.
I think he belongs in that next tier of Fultz, Fox, Alkins, and Frank Jackson although again, his game may translate better to the college game and for our needs than anyone available in 16.
I think he belongs in that next tier of Fultz, Fox, Alkins, and Frank Jackson although again, his game may translate better to the college game and for our needs than anyone available in 16.
Last edited:
Smith and Monk certainly have higher ceilings given their athleticism. Right now, Murray is just better at playing basketball than either of them. The thing with super athletic players is that alot of them are/were so much more talented than their peers that they didn't have to learn how to actually play.
Look at Andrew Wiggins, one of the nastiest athletes I've ever seen, he's still learning how to play basketball. Watched him play live when Kansas got ousted by Stanford in the tourney, he was killing his own team, he couldn't function in a half court set. That's why I would take Murray over Smith or Monk, especially in college where each possession is critical. Athleticism translates to the league, its way easier to neutralize in college.
Last edited:
Monk is so much more than just an athlete though. That's why he's such a ridiculous prospect. He shoots it and handles it so well for a kid that has those physical tools. He's like what Deuce Bello could have been.
Also, you can stifle athleticism somewhat in the college game, but not THAT kind of it. It's like with John Wall. He was an all american with a weak jumper. Monk has a good stroke that keeps getting better.
In fact, I'd argue the opposite about athleticism, especially when you're talking about quickness and ability to defend/finish at the rim. The truly elite guys can do it, and it's their physical gifts that let them.
Why would you argue the opposite and then cite Deuce Bello? Because for every Monk there is a Bello. For every T Jones, there's a CJ Leslie, for every AD (as if there were multiple players at his level, but you catch my drift) there's a Quincy Miller. Bello, Leslie, and Miller could make the stupid athletic plays that will make you jump out of your seat, but where are they now? They never learned how to play the game properly, despite having every tool to succeed. I want the basketball players. The Markelle Fultzs, the Murrays, the Isaac Humphrieses. They may not have comparable highlight reels but they know how to win. I want winners.
I just love that you mention Duece Bello, I love it, every time I hear or read his name I think of an interview of his from high school where the guy says something like:
"You go by Deuce, but how do you pronounce your given name? [Quddus]"
He replies: "Deuce"
Last edited:
I tend to agree with the last post. Murray might not rate as high based on his lower level of athleticism. However, his feel for the game combined with his skill level is unmatched by any guard I've seen in a while. He's like both Harrison twins mixed with Brandon Knight.
That's why I said what he could have been. Could have been.
I don't even know what you're arguing. Are you saying that Malik Monk isn't skilled or doesn't know how to play the game? This isn't an either/or. It's a both versus one. Watch him play. Look at his numbers. Check out his pedigree of performances.
None of that is a slight to Murray. Monk is just a freak. Not many 17 year olds have that kind of game to go with that kind of athleticism.
Dude my reading comprehension is off the charts, I know you say "could've been", you don't have to repeat it for me. I'm not really arguing with you, I hope you don't see it like that. I'm not putting down what you are saying at all. I'm just saying why I prefer a player like Murray over a player like Monk. I've seen Monk play, I've seen Monk play live actually. I want Monk AND Fultz to come to UK.
You've stated a pretty compelling case for why you would take a Monk type player, while I've stated a good case for a Murray type player. We don't have to agree. I'm not saying Monk lacks skill. I think it was Jerry Meyer who said something to the effect of, Monk is a highlight reel king, while Fultz is a more skilled player and possibly a better overall basketball player.
Last edited:
So as far as from a prospect standpoint, I couldn't agree with you more. But we both know disgustingly athletic prospects do not always pan out. That doesn't mean I think Monk will be a bust or that he can't be better than Fultz or Murray. If they are only going to be here a year anyway, I want the known commodity, the guys I know will win us games.
Who was the more successful PG in college John Wall or Marquis Teague? It definitely depends on how you define success, but if we are looking at just the NCAA Tournament I will take Teague's 2012 performance (which is so underrated) over John Wall's 2010 performance. Who has had the better NBA career? Now there is no comparison.
Who was the more successful PG in college John Wall or Marquis Teague? It definitely depends on how you define success, but if we are looking at just the NCAA Tournament I will take Teague's 2012 performance (which is so underrated) over John Wall's 2010 performance. Who has had the better NBA career? Now there is no comparison.
Last edited:
Jamal Murray is better than any Gaurd I can remember coming out of HS... What he has done against top US talent that doesn't include NBA stars has been amazing. .. I could give a rats ass if he has a 40 inch Vertical or runs like I deer, I just love the fact the kid puts the ball in the basket and sets his teammates up at a very high level. ..
If it was all about being a athlete, EJ Floreal would be an all american!
I tend to shade in that direction but it should be noted (for those getting antsy about this discussion) that we're comparing top 10 picks across the board - including Murray. Folks say Murray doesn't match the ceiling of a kid like Monk, but it's not really true, unless we're only using leaping ability as a measurable. Murray could actually become, and likely will become, a better decision maker, better shooter, and better finisher than he currently is. His leaping ability won't improve on a grand scale, but that hasn't stopped a handful of current NBA guards from having All-Star level success, including Curry.
I see what you're saying though.
Last edited:
If Floreal actually had a foundational skillset to work with, you'd be correct. Monk can actually shoot; Jackson can slash on an elite level; and Smith Jr. can finish around the rim at will.
Beginning with those actual skillsets, when combined with elite athleticism, they each have the makings of a high potential prospect, which is what Gonzo was saying. Murray is no slouch, however. He's a pretty decent athlete and has the potential to become a very lethal scoring machine in the NBA. I think he has an incredibly high ceiling (potential NBA All-Star), with or without the extremely rare Westbrook factor.
Last edited:
No. People have actually watched Murray stud out in competitive basketball.
Great post, as usual.
All i will say is give me a Murray type player over a Monk type every day of the week as Murray is a lock for a NBA starter with his mind set and ability .
Right, and just like I said earlier, the fit is as important as the ability. I think Murray is a better fit for our team this year, while Monk is a better pro prospect. Although 2012 would have been pretty decent with Wall running the show.
Lord, I just thought about that.
Or even last year, when D'Angelo Russell was a better version of the same type of player.
I really wish we wouldn't do this as a fanbase. These extremes don't accomplish anything productive, and they get kids slaughtered on here if they aren't All Americans.
Jones, Teague, Goodwin, the twins, and I think this year it'll probably be Briscoe, but if Murray has a couple of games where those step back threes aren't going in, posters will rush to call for Hawkins or a two guard lineup with Poythress at the 3 or something similar.
He's a fantastic player, but people are throwing out stuff like him being a great defender or having Larry Bird-like vision, and that's just ridiculous.
There may prove to better guards from the past 10 years of classes, but I watched every single one of those Pan-Am games and the Nike Hoop summit game. The kid is the real deal. He's as good as anyone I've ever seen that was 18 years old....and hasn't even played a college game yet. To have that kinda of confidence and poise to go with the God given ability at that age is very very rare.
I'd take Murray over any guard in the 2015 and 2016 class. How could you choose anybody else after watching him in the Pan am games and the hoop summit game.
Murray was great in the PanAm games, no doubt. Except for the times when he wasn't.
Against the U.S.A. Murray was a relative non-factor until the 4th quarter (he did dish out a few assists earlier). However, it was his teammates, most notably Andrew Nicholson, who kept the game close until then. So for 75% of the game Murray struggled to contribute. If that happens at UK then there will be a lot of unhappy fans with bloated expectations for this kid. He can run hot and cold, and sometimes his shot won't fall. I love his feel for the game, and the way he embraces big moments. But he's not walking on water, he will have limitations and growing pains.
Not going to lie, I've watched a lot of intergalactic basketball over the years and Murray is the best guard I've seen hands down!!
In all seriousness he's a great player and I expect big things. I have learned to try and temper my expectations a little. It is possible he will have a learning curve however. If he's as good as the consensus on this thread thinks then our squad next year will be hands down better then last years IMO.
In all seriousness he's a great player and I expect big things. I have learned to try and temper my expectations a little. It is possible he will have a learning curve however. If he's as good as the consensus on this thread thinks then our squad next year will be hands down better then last years IMO.
I think it's a relatively small fraction of our fans who put the weight of the world on these kids. That said, it's hard not discuss "ceiling" when kids are so hyped coming out of high school. I mean, we discussed Wiggins' ceiling and potential college impact ad nauseam during his recruiting process. Same can be said of a multitude of players. Within the framework of this thread, you've even managed to do it regarding Murray and how he projects verses Smith, Jackson, and Monk.
It's the nature of the beast and it happens with baseball prospects and it happens on NFL Draft day. I feel like the majority of our fans understand that not every kid is going to perform on a transcendent level. We've had a plethora of Randolph Morris, Keith Bogans, Rodrick Rhodes and Marquis Teague-types to teach us that valuable lesson over the years.
Murray looks like the most ready guard that Cal has recruited while at Kentucky from an offensive standpoint. Tyler will play a bunch, but Murray is going to end up being that dude with the ball when we need a bucket. Offensively, I think he will hands down be better than any of Cal's guards. His defense and defensive ceiling are not at the level of most of his predecessors. Team defense is the only thing I worry about with our team this season. We won't be bruisers or have the superior size we have grown accustom too. Our most proven defender, Alex is coming off injury and playing undersized at the 4.
i have one question to ask? it has to deal with your basketball knowledge. just answer this question. what was the most talented N.B.A team ever assembled and why didn't they win a championship? i ask this question because it pertains too U.K
I don't know if there is one "correct" answer to either question, but I'm just too curious to hear your brilliant insight on the matter given your wonderful first post.
At any rate, I'll say the most talented NBA team ever assembled would be the 2004 Lakers. Kobe/Shaq both in their prime, Karl Malone and Gary Payton both still at a high level although in the twilight of their careers. Derek Fisher, Rick Fox, Devean George, and Bryon Russell. They didn't win a title because Karl Malone was injured and Kobe and Shaq hated each other.
I think once his one year college career is over and the dust settles, Jamal Murray will be a player that will be a first team All American, a National Champion, Top 5 NBA Draft Pick, future Max Contract franchise player. Yes that is an insane statement, but I truly believe it. I think he will be the best player to ever come from Canada.
I don't like putting that kind of pressure on players but this guy seems to have a basketball IQ level beyond his years. I don't understand where people are coming from when they say he's not that athletic. There doesn't seem to be any wasted motion or energy with his game. Kind of the same attribute that Tayshaun Prince had. The game runs at a different speed for him. It's very deceiving.
I don't like putting that kind of pressure on players but this guy seems to have a basketball IQ level beyond his years. I don't understand where people are coming from when they say he's not that athletic. There doesn't seem to be any wasted motion or energy with his game. Kind of the same attribute that Tayshaun Prince had. The game runs at a different speed for him. It's very deceiving.
Last edited:
Thank you gonzo! That's the point. We have seen him live a few times. He's looked good. I Will gladly eat crow if he turns out to be the Oscar Robertson-esk player he's already portrayed to be, but it's unfair to label him with such unreasonable expectations thus far. Some people on here talking him up, will be the first to tear him down if he plays poorly one game.
Who??? Based on highlight reel plays Im assuming. ... I will give you D Rose, but no one else in that class has the Basketball IQ and Skill level as Murray....
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Several former Cats in running for NBA awards....- Latest: true blue1
