RealGM

Here's a view of our NEXT star, Jamal Murray. People are all ga-ga over Donovan Mitchell, another star in UTH but here's a look at why we didn't have to draft Mitchell, I think Murray is going to be as good, but more probably better. Nice write-up by Ryan Blackburn, an up-n-comer in his own right.

https://www.denverstiffs.com/2018/7/18/17575216/five-things-jamal-murray-must-do-to-become-denvers-second-star

Great write-up but you already knew I had a man-crush on this kid. I try to suppress that because my favorite comparison is some short guy at Golden State and everything thinks that's too much - truthfully, it might seem that way, but he just might get in the same ballpark IMO.

Of course what do I know, I've been crying for him to get more PT for two years.

Murray 2018-19 improvement is a key factor for Denver success next season. I think we already know what to expect from Jokic, Harris, Millsap, and Barton, but Murray is the only starter mystery. With eventual 20-4-4 40%3pt season we have West TOP4 seed case!

Another unknown factor with big importance for next season result is Isaiah Thomas, Lyles, and Juancho from the bench.

NuggetsWY wrote:Great write-up but you already knew I had a man-crush on this kid. I try to suppress that because my favorite comparison is some short guy at Golden State and everything thinks that's too much - truthfully, it might seem that way, but he just might get in the same ballpark IMO.

Of course what do I know, I've been crying for him to get more PT for two years.

You seem to have a lot of man-crushes on these "kids", starting to wonder about you WY

I really found the comparison with Donovan Mitchell, the UTAH "star" that so many Jazz fans gloat over. When comparing the two, I prefer Murray much more than DM. Mitchell has the flashy athleticism that is just beyond Murray, but everything else is Murray > Mitchell.

skywalker33 wrote:

NuggetsWY wrote:Great write-up but you already knew I had a man-crush on this kid. I try to suppress that because my favorite comparison is some short guy at Golden State and everything thinks that's too much - truthfully, it might seem that way, but he just might get in the same ballpark IMO.

Of course what do I know, I've been crying for him to get more PT for two years.

You seem to have a lot of man-crushes on these "kids", starting to wonder about you WY

I really found the comparison with Donovan Mitchell, the UTAH "star" that so many Jazz fans gloat over. When comparing the two, I prefer Murray much more than DM. Mitchell has the flashy athleticism that is just beyond Murray, but everything else is Murray > Mitchell.

People are right, Mitchell NBA debut was spectacular. He has a better season as a rookie than Murray as a sophomore. Actually, Mitchell as a rookie has better and more impactful season than any sophomore last season apart from Embiid! But what people here often forget is the fact that Murray is about half a year younger than Mitchell. This case is still not closed.

THE J0KER wrote:

skywalker33 wrote:

NuggetsWY wrote:Great write-up but you already knew I had a man-crush on this kid. I try to suppress that because my favorite comparison is some short guy at Golden State and everything thinks that's too much - truthfully, it might seem that way, but he just might get in the same ballpark IMO.

Of course what do I know, I've been crying for him to get more PT for two years.

You seem to have a lot of man-crushes on these "kids", starting to wonder about you WY

I really found the comparison with Donovan Mitchell, the UTAH "star" that so many Jazz fans gloat over. When comparing the two, I prefer Murray much more than DM. Mitchell has the flashy athleticism that is just beyond Murray, but everything else is Murray > Mitchell.

People are right, Mitchell NBA debut was spectacular. He has a better season as a rookie than Murray as a sophomore. Actually, Mitchell as a rookie has better and more impactful season than any sophomore last season apart from Embiid! But what people here often forget is the fact that Murray is about half a year younger than Mitchell. This case is still not closed.

I'm sorry but I don't think Mitchell was better than Murray last year. For all the hype Mitchell gets he was not a great player last year. He was inefficient, had a ton of turnovers, and was the worst defender in their starting lineup which tells you he is overrated as a defender as Gobert is a huge help for him.

That is not even getting into the eye test. I watched a Jazz Nuggets game from about 8 rows off the floor. Murray and Harris both were clearly better that night than Rubio and Mitchell both, Mitchell had some highlight plays but was nowhere near as good as I thought he would be hearing so much about him. Now it was one game, but I was shocked at how hyped Mitchell was while being so ineffective. Ingles and Favors were the best players on the floor that night, than maybe Rubio, but with Mitchell had the ball more and got more shots. The Jazz are a defensive team that spreads it around the floor, Mitchell is just about the only iso scorer on the team and was used similar to how Barton was last year by the Nuggets.

I see almost every Jazz game each year - I would take Murray over Mitchell without a doubt. I think Mitchell is very good and would make the perfect combo-guard to go with Harris & Murray. (Of course I'd love Mitchell as a 3rd guard but let's be real, that's of no consequence since there is no way Denver would have taken Mitchell if they had kept that pick. No one predicted Mitchell to be as good as he was - not even in Utah. If anyone expected him to be that good, he would have gone much higher in the draft.

21-4-4 is clearly better season than 17-4-3, especially if we know that 21ppg is for the 104ppg team (about 20% of team points), and 17ppg from 110ppg team (about 15%). Murray is a more efficient shooter, but you must give some extra credit to players which is clearly #1 offensive options in the team and opponent defense is focused on them which make indirectly their teammates more efficient. Iverson is a perfect example from the past with low FG% and tons of turnovers, or out of active players look at the guys like Westbrook or Wall. Also, Mitchell as SG has more assists than PG Murray last season, but on a positive note, Jamal very improved in that department since the all-star break. So I can't agree that Murray is an already better player last season than Mitchell, but no surprise for me at all if he overtakes him next season.

THE J0KER wrote:21-4-4 is clearly better season than 17-4-3, especially if we know that 21ppg is for the 104ppg team (about 20% of team points), and 17ppg from 110ppg team (about 15%). Murray is a more efficient shooter, but you must give some extra credit to players which is clearly #1 offensive options in the team and opponent defense is focused on them which make indirectly their teammates more efficient. Iverson is a perfect example from the past with low FG% and tons of turnovers, or out of active players look at the guys like Westbrook or Wall. Also, Mitchell as SG has more assists than PG Murray last season, but on a positive note, Jamal very improved in that department since the all-star break. So I can't agree that Murray is an already better player last season than Mitchell, but no surprise for me at all if he overtakes him next season.

You are looking at stats and not how guys were used, Mitchell had the ball in his hands considerably more than Murray and took more shots than Murray, that does not mean he is the better scorer than Murray nor a better player. The question to ask is if Murray had 25% more plays in every game would he put up the same numbers as Mitchell, and I do not see how there is any argument that he wouldn't.

You bring up Iverson, and the one year Iverson made it past the 2nd round they had 4 great defenders including the DPOY and a guy who should be a superstar in his own right in Mutombo. Other than that Iverson never made it past the 2nd round in a considerably weaker Eastern Conference.

Advanced stats show that Mitchell is only slightly better than Barton yet he is the worst player in the rotation for the Jazz. The eye test confirmed that for me when watching the guy live.

THE J0KER wrote:21-4-4 is clearly better season than 17-4-3, especially if we know that 21ppg is for the 104ppg team (about 20% of team points), and 17ppg from 110ppg team (about 15%). Murray is a more efficient shooter, but you must give some extra credit to players which is clearly #1 offensive options in the team and opponent defense is focused on them which make indirectly their teammates more efficient. Iverson is a perfect example from the past with low FG% and tons of turnovers, or out of active players look at the guys like Westbrook or Wall. Also, Mitchell as SG has more assists than PG Murray last season, but on a positive note, Jamal very improved in that department since the all-star break. So I can't agree that Murray is an already better player last season than Mitchell, but no surprise for me at all if he overtakes him next season.

Keeping it simplistic as well, Mitchell played 33mpg to Murrays 31mpg, hard to think Murray couldn't have scored 2 baskets or more in those extra couple of mins.

Murray is pretty good, but Mitchell has been significantly better last season. He also did great in the playoffs.
Looking at Mitchell overall stats is misleading because it took him a couple of months to get acquainted to nba and the team.
I think Murray's ceiling is something like Lillard with better defense, but Mitchell is the next Kobe in my opinion.

lars_rosenberg wrote:Murray is pretty good, but Mitchell has been significantly better last season. He also did great in the playoffs.
Looking at Mitchell overall stats is misleading because it took him a couple of months to get acquainted to nba and the team.
I think Murray's ceiling is something like Lillard with better defense, but Mitchell is the next Kobe in my opinion.

Well, your entitled to your (trolling) opinion, but Did you even bother to read the article and the ensuing statistical analysis ???

Comparing Mitchell to Kobe Maybe you're referring to their chucker mentality.

Mitchell has a better season than Murray, which he finished on the spectacular way with one of the all-time best playoff performances for a rookie (25-6-4).

Even as Denver fans we shouldn't be too much biased. Problem with Murray 2017-18 season is consistency (unlike with Mitchell which almost every night put similar numbers). But saying that, I will proclaim Jamal Murray #7 pick of 2016 draft after his 2nd season #2 best player of his draft class! He starts last season on the awful way, we even have "who is better, Murray or Mudiay" thread here before his December breakthrough, but here is numbers of TOP10 players of 2016 rookie class with new redraft based on 2017-18 stats without October and November:

I marked with yellow all extraordinary stats of Murray.

If Murray averaged as many shots as Mitchell did he'd probably be up in the 23-26ppg range but he has other offensively gift players around him, more so than Mitchell does

skywalker33 wrote:If Murray averaged as many shots as Mitchell did he'd probably be up in the 23-26ppg range but he has other offensively gift players around him, more so than Mitchell does

In a perfect world, yes, but we still have no proofs that he will hold the same level of efficiency if he becomes Nuggets ultimate #1 offensive option because in that case, opponents defense would be way more focused on him. Also, you must have a special "always hungry" mindset of trying to score so often every game. Out of younger generation players, I can see it so far only in D.Mitchell and D.Booker cases.

Look on that 2016 draft class table case of Bucks M.Brogdon. His efficiency is elite, but maybe he also taking advantage with a smart shot selection from not being TOP3 offensive option in his team. No proofs that he would be same efficient if he takes the much bigger role, so opponents also will go to take a bigger attention on him.

I'm a Murray fan but I don't see a 23 ppg scorer in him yet. I wouldn't take Mitchell over him on our team though. It's like a watered down comparison of Westbrook vs. Lillard, they have different strengths.

THE J0KER wrote:

skywalker33 wrote:If Murray averaged as many shots as Mitchell did he'd probably be up in the 23-26ppg range but he has other offensively gift players around him, more so than Mitchell does

In a perfect world, yes, but we still have no proofs that he will hold the same level of efficiency if he becomes Nuggets ultimate #1 offensive option because in that case, opponents defense would be way more focused on him. Also, you must have a special "always hungry" mindset of trying to score so often every game. Out of younger generation players, I can see it so far only in D.Mitchell and D.Booker cases.

Look on that 2016 draft class table case of Bucks M.Brogdon. His efficiency is elite, but maybe he also taking advantage with a smart shot selection from not being TOP3 offensive option in his team. No proofs that he would be same efficient if he takes the much bigger role, so opponents also will go to take a bigger attention on him.

OH PLEASE., it's hardly a proportional stretch to say, perfect world or no. Right now Murray is shooting 1/2 as much as Mitchell, 9 shots to 18 shots. At 17ppg, even if Murray score 1/2 as well as he does with his 1st 9 shots he adds
8.5ppg more putting him at 25.5, SIMPLE MATH and I was being cautious on that speculation. Brogdon isn't nearly as good of a scorer as Murray or Mitchell, even so you're speculating there much as I am.

But hey, if you love Mitchell's game so much, I'm sure they'll love to discuss that over in the Jazz thread, knock yourself out !!

U hova wrote:I'm a Murray fan but I don't see a 23 ppg scorer in him yet. I wouldn't take Mitchell over him on our team though. It's like a watered down comparison of Westbrook vs. Lillard, they have different strengths.

I agree he's not there yet but I can see he has that type of potential. I know going from 17ppg to 23ppg isn't that easy but realistically it's just 2-3 basket per game and I feel confident to say he could do it, just does he become that much of a ball-hogg on an offense that could easily have 3-4 20 ppg scorers. With our anticipated starting 5 already averaging 83 ppg that's a lot of players who can light it up, especially when you factor it Barton wasn't starting last year and Millsap, Harris and Jokic all missed some time with injuries.