Image ImageImage Image

Jamal Murray

Moderators: HomoSapien, Tommy Udo 6 , dougthonus, GimmeDat, DASMACKDOWN, Payt10, kulaz3000, fleet, RedBulls23, AshyLarrysDiaper, Ice Man

User avatar
Leslie Forman
General Manager
Posts: 8,654
And1: 4,101
Joined: Apr 21, 2006
Location: 1700 Center Dr, Ames, IA 50011

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#21 » by Leslie Forman » Tue Sep 1, 2020 8:28 pm

Murray really isn't this good. His numbers are obviously unsustainable and the bubble is having a huge effect on not just him but shooters as a whole.

The bubble playoffs are basically gonna March Madness some guys' stock, and then everyone will be just shocked that they're actually right back to being the same guys they always were when they're playing a normal schedule in full stadiums again.
User avatar
greenl
Starter
Posts: 2,400
And1: 1,469
Joined: Mar 08, 2012

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#22 » by greenl » Tue Sep 1, 2020 8:34 pm

Ugly Duckling wrote: Murray's playing rn is further evidence that maybe a traditional PG isn't needed. Maybe Coby could be our PG of the future and we could use this pick on a wing or frontcourt player


I think the presence of Jokic makes that possible more than any other factor for the Nuggets.
"Children are smarter than any of us. Know how I know that? I don't know one child with a full time job and children." - Bill Hicks
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 47,353
And1: 7,429
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#23 » by dougthonus » Tue Sep 1, 2020 8:49 pm

Leslie Forman wrote:Murray really isn't this good. His numbers are obviously unsustainable and the bubble is having a huge effect on not just him but shooters as a whole.

The bubble playoffs are basically gonna March Madness some guys' stock, and then everyone will be just shocked that they're actually right back to being the same guys they always were when they're playing a normal schedule in full stadiums again.


We already have Jamal Murray, and his name is Zach LaVine. Scores in higher volume with better efficiency and is a similar caliber passer, better shooter, and more athletic. I don't think LaVine is a superstar, but that's sort of the point.
MoSalad
Ballboy
Posts: 4
And1: 3
Joined: Aug 26, 2020

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#24 » by MoSalad » Tue Sep 1, 2020 9:09 pm

Jamal Murray made a decent jump from year 1 to year 2 but has basically been the player for 3 years now I would argue LaVine is better offensively. Guys who don't get to the free throw line need to be elite at other things to matter. There really isn't such thing as a great scorer who shoots 3 FTs a game.
MrSparkle
RealGM
Posts: 16,037
And1: 5,562
Joined: Jul 31, 2003
Location: chicago

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#25 » by MrSparkle » Tue Sep 1, 2020 9:16 pm

coldfish wrote:This is somewhat related.

The traditional PG is dead. Every person on the court should be able to handle the ball, shoot and be a willing passer. Maybe you can have a defensive only big but even that would be a concern. If you have a PG who can't score or shoot, he is a liability.

The idea of a PG who comes down the court and distributes the ball to people standing in their preferred spots is extraordinarily antiquated.


Well, I think guys like Price, Stockton, Mark Jackson, Mookie Blaylock, Kenny the Jet would've been great in today's league. Lowry reminds me of that type of all-around, excellent classic PG. I think they'll always have a role. Plus these guys could all shoot that 3P, albeit they did it on much lower volume. But I think of them as traditional PGs.

But small guys just generally handle and shoot the ball better, and with more weight on 3Ps, the small scorers are more dominant than they used to be. I imagine KJ, Payton or even Cassell would've perhaps been more dominant in today's league.

So anyway, I still think the trad. PG has a big role to play, but I think the weight of their defensive importance and passing came down, while the weight of their shooting is much greater. So, bad news for guys like Dunn, Livingston, Rubio -- or older generation of that vein, Eric Snow, Nate McMillan. But then again, like then and now, these guys can still be excellent 6th man or low-minute starting guards. I think Dunn has a role in the league - sure isn't playing alongside Arci, Coby, Thad and Kornet.

But I think Magic and Kidd, for however great they were, set the misconception that you can be a dominant superstar PG without being a great shooter. They were anomalies, and really had a third eye plus some impeccable scoring tricks despite their below-average jumpshots. White Chocolate had an overall very bad career (statisatically) despite being one of the most electric passers EVER. Rondo worked with the Big 3; he delivered mail to an all-time elite 3P shooter, another sniper in Pierce and a superstar big man.

I'd gladly take Lonzo, Rubio, or Lamelo for a 6th man role or if they came at the price of Sato's free agency. Drafting at #4 or trading a scorer for them to be a full-time starter is where I pause.
User avatar
Chicago-Bull-E
RealGM
Posts: 10,862
And1: 3,299
Joined: Jun 27, 2008

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#26 » by Chicago-Bull-E » Tue Sep 1, 2020 10:35 pm

coldfish wrote:This is somewhat related.

The traditional PG is dead. Every person on the court should be able to handle the ball, shoot and be a willing passer. Maybe you can have a defensive only big but even that would be a concern. If you have a PG who can't score or shoot, he is a liability.

The idea of a PG who comes down the court and distributes the ball to people standing in their preferred spots is extraordinarily antiquated.


Agreed.

This is why I disagree with those that say Coby can't play point. Will he every be a point guard that averages 12 ppg and 11 apg, setting up the team like Nash? Of course not, but not many players do that anymore.

White can play both positions, and that's a good thing. He's shown defensively the potential to guard both guard spots. As long as his handles are strong and he isn't getting stripped a couple times a game, no reason he can't bring the ball up.
KC: Do you still think you're a championship-caliber team?
Gar: I never said that and correct me if I'm wrong
User avatar
Leslie Forman
General Manager
Posts: 8,654
And1: 4,101
Joined: Apr 21, 2006
Location: 1700 Center Dr, Ames, IA 50011

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#27 » by Leslie Forman » Tue Sep 1, 2020 10:40 pm

MrSparkle wrote:
coldfish wrote:This is somewhat related.

The traditional PG is dead. Every person on the court should be able to handle the ball, shoot and be a willing passer. Maybe you can have a defensive only big but even that would be a concern. If you have a PG who can't score or shoot, he is a liability.

The idea of a PG who comes down the court and distributes the ball to people standing in their preferred spots is extraordinarily antiquated.


Well, I think guys like Price, Stockton, Mark Jackson, Mookie Blaylock, Kenny the Jet would've been great in today's league. Lowry reminds me of that type of all-around, excellent classic PG. I think they'll always have a role. Plus these guys could all shoot that 3P, albeit they did it on much lower volume. But I think of them as traditional PGs.

Price and Kenny would be good. Maybe even better than they were back then. The other two, not so much. Mookie was frankly an awful scorer who would not be allowed to shoot anywhere near as much today. Mark Jackson's go-to move was backing people down in the post so much they made a rule against it. That might have been fine in the pre-analytics, anti-offense '90s and '00s but it ain't flying now.

I'm not so sure it really even did back then - dudes like Kidd/Rondo really didn't do squat for offenses even then and would be even worse today with how much more teams have figured out how to really push today's defensive rules.

Absolutely none of this is new. The old Kerr/Jordan/Pippen/Kukoc/Rodman lineup could be considered the original smallball "Death" lineup. That was really the closest thing to a modern lineup with at least four guys who could legitimately dribble, pass, and shoot. It's basically a similar makeup to the Clippers or Celtics. If MJ/Pip/Kukoc were just a little better at 3pt shooting, Kerr was actually athletic enough to create anything off the dribble, and Rodman could shoot at all, that'd win titles right now.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 47,353
And1: 7,429
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#28 » by dougthonus » Tue Sep 1, 2020 11:12 pm

coldfish wrote:This is somewhat related.

The traditional PG is dead. Every person on the court should be able to handle the ball, shoot and be a willing passer. Maybe you can have a defensive only big but even that would be a concern. If you have a PG who can't score or shoot, he is a liability.

The idea of a PG who comes down the court and distributes the ball to people standing in their preferred spots is extraordinarily antiquated.


Yeah, no one is looking for the next Mark Jackson or Andre Miller. If you find someone amazing like Magic, Kidd, Paul, or Nash then sure. If you run into a guy like Rondo then that's fine, but you don't go looking for a Rondo, you just take him if he lands in your lap.
AirLaVine8
General Manager
Posts: 8,432
And1: 129
Joined: Apr 09, 2002
 

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#29 » by AirLaVine8 » Tue Sep 1, 2020 11:27 pm

Chicago-Bull-E wrote:
coldfish wrote:This is somewhat related.

The traditional PG is dead. Every person on the court should be able to handle the ball, shoot and be a willing passer. Maybe you can have a defensive only big but even that would be a concern. If you have a PG who can't score or shoot, he is a liability.

The idea of a PG who comes down the court and distributes the ball to people standing in their preferred spots is extraordinarily antiquated.


Agreed.

This is why I disagree with those that say Coby can't play point. Will he every be a point guard that averages 12 ppg and 11 apg, setting up the team like Nash? Of course not, but not many players do that anymore.

White can play both positions, and that's a good thing. He's shown defensively the potential to guard both guard spots. As long as his handles are strong and he isn't getting stripped a couple times a game, no reason he can't bring the ball up.


This is why I disagree with the notion we need a playmaker PG. So unless LaMelo can play SF and fix his pathetic shooting, I want no part of him
RIP Kobe :cry: :cry:
Mamba Forever
User avatar
TheSuzerain
RealGM
Posts: 13,133
And1: 8,302
Joined: Mar 29, 2012

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#30 » by TheSuzerain » Tue Sep 1, 2020 11:30 pm

dougthonus wrote:
Leslie Forman wrote:Murray really isn't this good. His numbers are obviously unsustainable and the bubble is having a huge effect on not just him but shooters as a whole.

The bubble playoffs are basically gonna March Madness some guys' stock, and then everyone will be just shocked that they're actually right back to being the same guys they always were when they're playing a normal schedule in full stadiums again.


We already have Jamal Murray, and his name is Zach LaVine. Scores in higher volume with better efficiency and is a similar caliber passer, better shooter, and more athletic. I don't think LaVine is a superstar, but that's sort of the point.

I think Lavine has that level of talent.

But he's pretty lacking in terms of decision-making and reading a game. And he's unlikely to ever develop that.

Lavine has the tools but no toolbox.
ChettheJet
Veteran
Posts: 2,539
And1: 586
Joined: Jul 02, 2014
       

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#31 » by ChettheJet » Tue Sep 1, 2020 11:38 pm

Seeing what Murray has done of late should be the lesson to the shortsighted, quick to judge and internet experts to stop making snap decisions on players. You can't judge what a young player will become from his rookie year, a lot of rookies of the year don't do much after that.

As to Coby White, maybe wait to see what he can do with a healthy NBA lineup on the floor with him and not a couple of banged up guys and some G League fill ins. Some people just don't have the sense to do that. Somebody like Otto Porter jr isn't a big highlight reel but he's in the position the plays call for him to be, that matters when a guard like White or Lavine drives to the basket and gets met by a shot blocker. Porter is where he should be to get the pass and take the open shot. Thad Young can do that, when healthy Markkanen knows how to do that,Chandler Hutchison, Wendell Carter, Daniel Gafford still have to learn that.

I think White can score 20 a game just by playing within the flow of the game, if he doesn't have to force shots because he's got no help.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 47,353
And1: 7,429
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#32 » by dougthonus » Wed Sep 2, 2020 12:24 am

TheSuzerain wrote:I think Lavine has that level of talent.

But he's pretty lacking in terms of decision-making and reading a game. And he's unlikely to ever develop that.

Lavine has the tools but no toolbox.


Maybe, or maybe Murray has a ton more talent around him. Zach's more efficient and higher volume and faces more defensive pressure. I'm not really so high on Zach as much as I think Murray is just a solid player that's having a spectacular series.

Though Murray is still a couple years younger, so maybe he's just on the cusp of what he will become, you never know.
Chi town
RealGM
Posts: 17,772
And1: 3,846
Joined: Aug 10, 2004

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#33 » by Chi town » Wed Sep 2, 2020 1:37 am

Leslie Forman wrote:Murray really isn't this good. His numbers are obviously unsustainable and the bubble is having a huge effect on not just him but shooters as a whole.

The bubble playoffs are basically gonna March Madness some guys' stock, and then everyone will be just shocked that they're actually right back to being the same guys they always were when they're playing a normal schedule in full stadiums again.


Really? I’d like to see the analytics on that.

You think the same for MPJ? He’s not nearly this good?
User avatar
Leslie Forman
General Manager
Posts: 8,654
And1: 4,101
Joined: Apr 21, 2006
Location: 1700 Center Dr, Ames, IA 50011

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#34 » by Leslie Forman » Wed Sep 2, 2020 1:57 am

Chi town wrote:
Leslie Forman wrote:Murray really isn't this good. His numbers are obviously unsustainable and the bubble is having a huge effect on not just him but shooters as a whole.

The bubble playoffs are basically gonna March Madness some guys' stock, and then everyone will be just shocked that they're actually right back to being the same guys they always were when they're playing a normal schedule in full stadiums again.


Really? I’d like to see the analytics on that.

You think the same for MPJ? He’s not nearly this good?

I mean, if you really think Jamal Murray playing better than 2016 regular season Steph Curry is sustainable, be my guest.
Chi town
RealGM
Posts: 17,772
And1: 3,846
Joined: Aug 10, 2004

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#35 » by Chi town » Wed Sep 2, 2020 2:19 am

Leslie Forman wrote:
Chi town wrote:
Leslie Forman wrote:Murray really isn't this good. His numbers are obviously unsustainable and the bubble is having a huge effect on not just him but shooters as a whole.

The bubble playoffs are basically gonna March Madness some guys' stock, and then everyone will be just shocked that they're actually right back to being the same guys they always were when they're playing a normal schedule in full stadiums again.


Really? I’d like to see the analytics on that.

You think the same for MPJ? He’s not nearly this good?

I mean, if you really think Jamal Murray playing better than 2016 regular season Steph Curry is sustainable, be my guest.


Of course it’s not sustainable.

It’s your big statement that the “bubble is having a huge effect on shooters as a whole.”

Not saying it’s not trueish. Would love to see the data and the reasons why?
- No fans, less pressure
- Boxed in gym w screens that helps w depth perception
- Noise
- More focus in bubble

All interesting.
User avatar
drosereturn
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,281
And1: 1,368
Joined: Oct 12, 2018

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#36 » by drosereturn » Wed Sep 2, 2020 2:29 am

dougthonus wrote:
TheSuzerain wrote:I think Lavine has that level of talent.

But he's pretty lacking in terms of decision-making and reading a game. And he's unlikely to ever develop that.

Lavine has the tools but no toolbox.


Maybe, or maybe Murray has a ton more talent around him. Zach's more efficient and higher volume and faces more defensive pressure. I'm not really so high on Zach as much as I think Murray is just a solid player that's having a spectacular series.

Though Murray is still a couple years younger, so maybe he's just on the cusp of what he will become, you never know.


Having more talent has nothing do with decision making. Lavine would just make little more shots if he was in Denver but not certainly not playmake better. Trae Young has far worse roster and he avges double double every day.
You cannot just claim they are similar caliber players when Murray is playoff proven and much younger.
Lamelo will be a future superstar Bull. Book it. Lavar for president!
User avatar
Leslie Forman
General Manager
Posts: 8,654
And1: 4,101
Joined: Apr 21, 2006
Location: 1700 Center Dr, Ames, IA 50011

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#37 » by Leslie Forman » Wed Sep 2, 2020 2:40 am

Chi town wrote:Not saying it’s not trueish. Would love to see the data and the reasons why?
- No fans, less pressure
- Boxed in gym w screens that helps w depth perception
- Noise
- More focus in bubble

All interesting.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-have-nba-offenses-been-so-good-in-the-bubble/

This Denver Utah game happening right now might lower all the numbers though, lol
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 47,353
And1: 7,429
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#38 » by dougthonus » Wed Sep 2, 2020 10:42 am

Showtime23 wrote:Having more talent has nothing do with decision making. Lavine would just make little more shots if he was in Denver but not certainly not playmake better. Trae Young has far worse roster and he avges double double every day.
You cannot just claim they are similar caliber players when Murray is playoff proven and much younger.


I didn't compare Zach to Trae Young. Trae Young is obviously a better play maker.

Not sure Murray is. Murray doesn't really make plays for anyone or creative passes. He's mostly just a scorer. Murray is two years younger, but due to Zach's ACL injury, their total minutes is actually fairly close which is a better barometer for how much improvement either guy has left.

I think if Zach were on the Nuggets he would score less and not more, because the Nuggets have more talent and Zach wouldn't take on as a ridiculous a load. This would also amount to fewer turnovers and more assists. I think his numbers would be awfully similar to Murray except he'd probably be more efficient given that he's already more efficient with a heavier load and more difficult shots.

Murray's gone on some crazy runs against Utah in this series, but it's not hard to see Zach doing the same type of crazy runs against guys, especially watching all the games and seeing how Murray is scoring. I don't think Zach is a star, I just don't think Murray's a star either. Maybe he'll continue to break out, but on the season he was a pedestrian assist level, pedestrian efficiency, decent volume scorer.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 47,353
And1: 7,429
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#39 » by dougthonus » Wed Sep 2, 2020 12:38 pm

Leslie Forman wrote:Price and Kenny would be good. Maybe even better than they were back then. The other two, not so much. Mookie was frankly an awful scorer who would not be allowed to shoot anywhere near as much today. Mark Jackson's go-to move was backing people down in the post so much they made a rule against it. That might have been fine in the pre-analytics, anti-offense '90s and '00s but it ain't flying now.

I'm not so sure it really even did back then - dudes like Kidd/Rondo really didn't do squat for offenses even then and would be even worse today with how much more teams have figured out how to really push today's defensive rules.


Jackson is what I think of when I think of the "traditional" PG from the past. He wasn't really much of a scorer (a typical season for him was ~10 points a game), and he mostly just moved the ball and facilitated the offense. I think he'd be okay on your team today, and would probably develop a bit differently (like he'd probably have worked on his three and been a 30-35% 3 point shooter on low volume, but not a real threat), still be a good defender, decent passer, fine if he's your 4th/5th starter.

Think Rondo is probably pretty similar. I think you underrate Kidd some, he put a lot of pressure on opposing defenses even if it wasn't with his scoring.
ATRAIN53
Head Coach
Posts: 6,188
And1: 1,708
Joined: Dec 14, 2007
Location: Chicago

Re: Jamal Murray 

Post#40 » by ATRAIN53 » Wed Sep 2, 2020 1:23 pm

I was looking forward to Murry v Mitchell Game 7 last night!

Both those guys shrank like a turtle in such a big game. I was expecting nothing but Mitchell drives to the hoop for the final 10 minutes or so. I was expecting him to force the issue.

I know he went to bed thinking the same thing last night - he should have taken over in the 4th.

I still take Mitchell over Murray, but they both were a major let down last night.

It was great to watch some post play between Jokic and Gobert down the stretch-
That is how tight NBA games used to be decided. Jokic got him with a couple of key moves.

I don't think Murray is gonna have a lot of success against the Clippers....

Return to Chicago Bulls