Keegan Murray

[Upperclass]

^ He had alot of good games vs alot of crappy teams. Doesnt have a handle, footspeed, leaping ability, quick release on his J, rare length, size, doesnt pass at ALL, nor polished offensive moves.. He just hit alot of shots, which cant be discounted but you see that in mature forwards quite often in the NCAA. ie Adam Morrison.. Sam dekker, Justin Jackson.. Derrick Williams..

[Adg1987]

^ He had alot of good games vs alot of crappy teams. Doesnt have a handle, footspeed, leaping ability, quick release on his J, rare length, size, doesnt pass at ALL, nor polished offensive moves.. He just hit alot of shots, which cant be discounted but you see that in mature forwards quite often in the NCAA. ie Adam Morrison.. Sam dekker, Justin Jackson.. Derrick Williams..

You always run the risk of with a dominant players from a smaller school being a bust. I think he has a lot more than that those guys but we shall see. I have been wrong before on prospects lol

[Hawkeyejam]

^ He had alot of good games vs alot of crappy teams. Doesnt have a handle, footspeed, leaping ability, quick release on his J, rare length, size, doesnt pass at ALL, nor polished offensive moves.. He just hit alot of shots, which cant be discounted but you see that in mature forwards quite often in the NCAA. ie Adam Morrison.. Sam dekker, Justin Jackson.. Derrick Williams..

I'm Biased as a Hawkeye fan but Keegan is an absolute Unit.

His numbers actually got better as he got into the Big Ten Season.


Murray 3 point shooting % was 32.6% going into the new year.

He also wasn't asked to distribute. So that's an incomplete if anything.


His efficiency/offensive analytics with his usage rate are unheard of and he did it in the Big Ten on a team with no other players that will sniff the NBA. Every team in the BIG knew he was who they had to stop and he would regularly go on 8,10,12 point runs on his own.

The facts are that people can't quantify why he was so good. The fact is he has amazing court vision and awareness. He does all the little things well and outhustles. People are concerned about the aspect of his game that is bullyball but he crashes boards and puts himself in good position. He also has great reaction time. He's gonna get opportunity for easy twos with his effort. Decent footwork and elite hands. He also has a lot of good shot making ability. He developed a Dirk fadeaway midrange shot that could be great. He also has a bit of an old school hook that teams didn't have an answer for. If he is going to play back to the defender in the half court, he needs to develop another finishing move.

This idea he lacks athletic ability is absurd as well. You don't finish 2nd in NCAA in transition scoring in a P5 conference and not possess decent speed, control, and leaping ability. His shot release for a 6'8.5 225 frame is actually quite quick as well. Him and KD are the only two players to score at that clip have 60 threes and 60 blocks in a season. He's the only guy to ever put 60 3's and 60 dunks at his scoring clip. You can't find another Power 5 guy to do his scoring numbers with 45 dunks/3s in the last decade.

I'm generally shocked how many people don't like his game. He has prototypical size, long, and is that switch defender that franchises love. Hard worker, loves the game, comes from a level headed family. I'm from his hometown. I don't know his dad Kenyon but I know people that know him pretty well. Really good family.

He needs to develop a handle in the halfcourt but had plenty of moments where he showed promise.it wasn't asked from him at iowa He plays right handed but is actually left handed. His off hand numbers to the basket are actually some of the best in this draft. I would say he also can over commit on defense but his ability to adjust getting out of position to make a play is elite. He really has good ability to recover.

He doesnt get in foul trouble. He doesn't turn the ball over. The biggest criticism he got at Iowa was that he wasn't selfish enough given his efficiency. No ego, good teammate. I'm shocked King's/small market fans aren't gushing over him tbh. Always worried about getting the big star but not thinking, will they stay there after that rookie deal? Keegan will put in roots with a team that treats him well.

He's boring but has a Duncan like demeanor. Dont overthink the age. I remember watching local sports news. The Murray twins were way undersized, late bloomers. He's likely done growing but there is room to grow into his current frame. I think he has a lot of room to get stronger and faster. He's 21 going on 22 but likely a few years younger from physical development. He was legitimately 6'0 180 after his Soph season of HS. This idea his ceiling is lower is kind of false. I think he has much room to grow their game as anybody. Iowa is notoriously bad at teaching Defense. Fran McCaffery doesn't give a crap about it. I think he has a lot of room to grow as a on the ball defender and he likely will be a better shooter. He keeps getting better at it.

I really feel for the team that overpads to trade up to get Jaden Ivey. He has one elite attribute. He flys! But he isnt a great defender. His off hand numbers aren't good. He regularly puts himself in bad positions and lacks control at.top speed. He didn't have the best rep as a teammate from Purdue fans I've talked with. His TO numbers are rough and honestly his assist numbers arent great. Purdues coach Matt Painter is a great developer. Ivey had two great big men this past year. The fact Trevion Williams came off the bench at times is wild. Do I think Jaden Ivey has a lot of upside? YES! Do I think he's anywhere near the player Ja Morant is coming into the league? No. If you trade up to get him thinking your gonna get a Ja, eeshhh...

Keegan is a unit. Don't overthink it. I think he's a guy who will go to multiple all star games . Do I think he's gonna be a multi all pro? Probably not, but I think hes gonna be really good. I've been watching Big Ten basketball for 30+ years pretty religiously and last year he was phenomenal

[clyde21]

^ He had alot of good games vs alot of crappy teams. Doesnt have a handle, footspeed, leaping ability, quick release on his J, rare length, size, doesnt pass at ALL, nor polished offensive moves.. He just hit alot of shots, which cant be discounted but you see that in mature forwards quite often in the NCAA. ie Adam Morrison.. Sam dekker, Justin Jackson.. Derrick Williams..

His numbers actually got better as he got into the Big Ten Season.

not true, his 2PT FG% went from 62% to 57% in conference, FT shooting went all the way down to 66%, box scores also went down across the board.

his numbers were obv still very good despite being down a bit in conference but there is little evidence he get BETTER.

[jman3134]

I feel like he is an 'intangibles' type of prospect (not intangibles on the court) who might develop during his time in the NBA.

With the way he got his shot off at the college level, I just don't see anything remarkable besides the shot making (which is obviously important). If that continues, he could be a very good supporting player. But, that is his upside case imo (a supporting wing or even energy bench guy). Not top 5/10 talent.

However, I don't know how he is off the court and what he is putting into his game every offseason. There are guys who are super smart and work hard enough at their craft, elevating themselves to another tier. I don't see it on tape, but there are factors I don't know with him.

[Hawkeyejam]

^ He had alot of good games vs alot of crappy teams. Doesnt have a handle, footspeed, leaping ability, quick release on his J, rare length, size, doesnt pass at ALL, nor polished offensive moves.. He just hit alot of shots, which cant be discounted but you see that in mature forwards quite often in the NCAA. ie Adam Morrison.. Sam dekker, Justin Jackson.. Derrick Williams..

His numbers actually got better as he got into the Big Ten Season.

not true, his 2PT FG% went from 62% to 57% in conference, FT shooting went all the way down to 66%, box scores also went down across the board.

his numbers were obv still very good despite being down a bit in conference but there is little evidence he get BETTER.

His 3 pt shooting % was 43.1% from January 1st on. When you take into account the upswing in difficulty I guess you can make that assumption but I figured that.would be built in. He could have gone for 50 in about in 8 of his first 10 of games. He played so little in the 2nd half.

[clyde21]

His numbers actually got better as he got into the Big Ten Season.

not true, his 2PT FG% went from 62% to 57% in conference, FT shooting went all the way down to 66%, box scores also went down across the board.

his numbers were obv still very good despite being down a bit in conference but there is little evidence he get BETTER.

His 3 pt shooting % was 43.1% from January 1st on. When you take into account the upswing in difficulty I guess you can make that assumption but I figured that.would be built in. He could have gone for 50 in about in 8 of his first 10 of games. He played so little in the 2nd half.

his 3pt shooting was the only thing went up in conference, which makes me think that was the aberration. everything else went down in conference, PER, TS%, FG%, FT%, rbd rates, assist rates, net rating, etc.

again his numbers were all still obviously very good, but the idea that he was better in conference just isnt true.

[GSWFan1994]

Call me crazy, but I think this guy has been somewhat undervalued.

I just love his makeup as a player, and the way he behaves on the court. Just seems like a pro's pro. Goes about his business, does the work, never complains and that's all.

Seems to me like a turbocharged TJ Warren, who honestly was on his way to a good career before the injuries, a borderline All-Star if I may say.

Throughout NBA's history we've seen these late bloomer types, guys who come out of nowhere relative to their high school hype, have a great, very impressive season(s) in college, with an unexpected improvement rate, fit a certain prototype and go on to having a very good NBA career.

Murray seems like he fits in this mold to a T. I'm not betting against him, and I think he will surprise lots of folks.

[baldur]

just curious as it is brought up so often. If he were 19 years old, not like almost 22 now, where would he get selected from? top 3 for sure? what do you think?

[DroseReturnChi]

just curious as it is brought up so often. If he were 19 years old, not like almost 22 now, where would he get selected from? top 3 for sure? what do you think?

hes already top 4 so hes very overrated. not like hes a generational talent and had a mediocre 1st yr. i feel bad he is going to get compared to ivey and regarded as a bust if he is even 1% worse.

[Dame Lizard]

Call me crazy, but I think this guy has been somewhat undervalued.

I just love his makeup as a player, and the way he behaves on the court. Just seems like a pro's pro. Goes about his business, does the work, never complains and that's all.

Seems to me like a turbocharged TJ Warren, who honestly was on his way to a good career before the injuries, a borderline All-Star if I may say.

Throughout NBA's history we've seen these late bloomer types, guys who come out of nowhere relative to their high school hype, have a great, very impressive season(s) in college, with an unexpected improvement rate, fit a certain prototype and go on to having a very good NBA career.

Murray seems like he fits in this mold to a T. I'm not betting against him, and I think he will surprise lots of folks.

I remember a massive chunk of RealGM trying to argue that Lillard wasn't going to get noticeably better after his RoTY season. It was evident how there were simple parts of his game that he could improve to become a much better player.

Some people focus a bit too much on age imo. It's a big factor for sure, but you expect a forward like Murray to peak in 7 years time. That's a lot of time for improvement.

[SelfishPlayer]

I wouldn't have drafted an older smallish power forward prospect like Murray as high as the Kings did. It's the Kings, they traded Haliburton for a big man in today's NBA. This feels like Wesley Johnson all over again, who also was an older 4th overall pick that played a similar position.

[Yuri Vaultin]

Kinda reminds me of the drafting of Jarrett Culver. I may be wrong, but I feel like all the things said about him leading up to the draft have been said about Murray.

[tyguy]

Kinda reminds me of the drafting of Jarrett Culver. I may be wrong, but I feel like all the things said about him leading up to the draft have been said about Murray.

Culver couldn’t shoot and is at least three inches shorter.

[tyguy]

I wouldn't have drafted an older smallish power forward prospect like Murray as high as the Kings did. It's the Kings, they traded Haliburton for a big man in today's NBA. This feels like Wesley Johnson all over again, who also was an older 4th overall pick that played a similar position.

Wesley was a year older and didn’t put up anything close to the stats Murray put up last year.

[SelfishPlayer]

I wouldn't have drafted an older smallish power forward prospect like Murray as high as the Kings did. It's the Kings, they traded Haliburton for a big man in today's NBA. This feels like Wesley Johnson all over again, who also was an older 4th overall pick that played a similar position.

Wesley was a year older and didn’t put up anything close to the stats Murray put up last year.

What stats are you talking about specifically? Luka Garza looked pretty good at Iowa as well. Keegan Murray was a 20 year old backup for Iowa as a freshman while Luka Garza was putting up huge numbers.

[916fan]

Kinda reminds me of the drafting of Jarrett Culver. I may be wrong, but I feel like all the things said about him leading up to the draft have been said about Murray.

As someone who knew Culver would bust, and didn't have Murray as my top choice for the Kings, I would have to disagree here. While I see the similarities of them both being older players, high IQ, jack of all trades, etc, I think the biggest difference was that Culver came into the league not having a single true consistent skill. With Murray, he's at least got his shooting ability.

Culver's shooting numbers showed inconsistencies and the lack of reliability of his shot. In his freshman year, he shot 38.2% from 3pt, but 64.8% from FT. In his 2nd year, he improved to 70.7% from FT, but shot 30.4% from 3pt.

As a freshman, Murray was a 29.6% 3pt shooter, but a 75.5% FT shooter. In his 2nd year, he improved to 39.8% from 3pt, and stayed around the same FT% at 74.7%. His shooting improvement is a lot more believable because he showed consistent FT shooting %. I don't think he's going to be a near 40% shooter in the league, but he's going to shoot at least league average, if not better.

Imo, another big difference is that Keegan can find ways to contribute without the ball. Culver can't. Murray has a very high ceiling. There is no way he busts like Culver did. Murray will probably be able to consistently shoot, rebound, and defend at the NBA level. Culver was in his 3rd year... and still couldn't do any of that.

[bucknut]

I wouldn't have drafted an older smallish power forward prospect like Murray as high as the Kings did. It's the Kings, they traded Haliburton for a big man in today's NBA. This feels like Wesley Johnson all over again, who also was an older 4th overall pick that played a similar position.

It's a scary pick - Johnson turned into a 3 and d guy in the league. Self creation is not murrays strong point, so is that gonna happen to him ? just spot up in the corner

On one hand I feel like Murray is an efficient swiss army knife guy who is a championship 3rd option on a great team by doing those little things - getting points off cuts, rebounds, posts, hitting open 3s, switchability on D, and all while not needing the ball a ton to do it or slowing the offense down. Dude would go perfect on golden state

On the other hand if he is Wesley Johnson he isn't even going to be a great role player

I think all star is out of question the question is can successfully be a a high level role player which would make the pick ok. How is he getting his points if it's not off wide open 3s, not off cuts, and not off post ups/rebounds against smaller college defenders ?

[GSWFan1994]

Yeah, I think the Culver and Wesley Johnson comparisons don't fit.

Murray had a much better season than those guys had:

- way better amount of steals + blocks
- way more efficient shooting wise, on higher volume too

Plus, Johnson was a product of the Syracuse system, which everybody knows hasn't produced a good NBA player for a long time now, and has gone on having lots of overdrafted players.

[SelfishPlayer]

Yeah, I think the Culver and Wesley Johnson comparisons don't fit.

Murray had a much better season than those guys had:

- way better amount of steals + blocks
- way more efficient shooting wise, on higher volume too

Plus, Johnson was a product of the Syracuse system, which everybody knows hasn't produced a good NBA player for a long time now, and has gone on having lots of overdrafted players.

Iowa doesn't have a system? Luka Garza put up some huge numbers for Iowa while Keegan watched from the bench.