Collin Murray-Boyles - South Carolina

[The-Power]

You either have to be super dynamic with the ball like a Ja Morant or Giannis type of player if you can't shoot or you have to play center. Shooting is indeed important in todays NBA and most teams want to play at most 1 guy that can't shoot.

If you're referring to literal non-shooters, I would agree for the most part. But in that case it wouldn't make sense to include Morant in this list. So if we're just talking about bad shooters or shooters teams tend to cheat off, it becomes a lot less straightforward. Because there are plenty of good teams that feature role players that can't shoot well.

[moss_is_1]

He is the same size as PJ Washington, Kobe Brown and James Johnson. All those guys are required to make three point shots to provide value in the NBA, something I don't CMB can do.

Or he's Draymond green with a much better offensive game. Hes kind of got Draymond and thad Young's stocks

I think he was most efficient post player in cbb. The pick and roll with this guy could be a hub play and one of the most efficient plays in basketball.

Think how high guys like giddy and egor demon are valued for being creators and bring not much else.

I think he's good even if he can't shoot the three. His other traits are elite.

Also measure really similar to Aaron Gordon. Aaron Gordon with above average athleticism vs elite athleticism?

[bucknut]

CMB being physically strong and wide is not very relevant, he can't protect the paint, he can't play center. There are some fun lineups he could play in next to a true center where he's defending the opponent center while his team's center is roaming against a non-threat... But he still needs to learn how to shoot because he's a PF at his core.

He needs to shoot like 36%+ from three on good volume.

He has same block percentage as Draymond at Michigan state. The warriors put Draymond at the five with no shot blocking 4 and were like 13 and 0 with that lineup at one point

Why does it matter that he's a power forward while point guards get a pass for not being able to shoot. ....the dermins the giddys always go high. Nba has proved you can play any position without being able to shoot if your strengths are strong enough. Boyles strengths are elite enough to overcome it.

I think I'd rather have a guy who won't shoot then a guy who sucks at shooting but still shoots

[bucknut]

He is the same size as PJ Washington, Kobe Brown and James Johnson. All those guys are required to make three point shots to provide value in the NBA, something I don't CMB can do.

Or he's Draymond green with a much better offensive game. Hes kind of got Draymond and thad Young's stocks

I think he was most efficient post player in cbb. The pick and roll with this guy could be a hub play and one of the most efficient plays in basketball.

Think how high guys like giddy and egor demon are valued for being creators and bring not much else.

I think he's good even if he can't shoot the three. His other traits are elite.

Also measure really similar to Aaron Gordon. Aaron Gordon with above average athleticism vs elite athleticism?

Aaron Gordon is another example of a similar guy...it's one of the old adages. Its not what they can't do as much as what they can do.

They both have translatable skills that outweigh anything else

[bbms]

murray boyles core power comes from lower body and low center of gravity that's what makes him different from aaron gordon (which is a stud).

gordon proved himself to be an ace in zone schemes by providing middle support.

murray boyles has that kind of power that i expect him to be able to shore up the middle at man defense sets.

this man/zone differentiation is the key to why murray-boyles is such an interesting prospect in the right situation.

he's not like draymond green (specially on offense) overall, but his core strenght is a lot like draymond's and his projection to be able impact the middle both in man and zone looks is the key point

hence my projection of him as a cason wallace in draymond's body and 1-5 versatility.

i think the remarks about his 3pt are legit. the point is murray-boyles with a 3 point shot is a top 3 pick IMO.

if he's at #11 i expect both spurs and okc to be bidding for a move up from their respective #14 and #15 slots really.

too fantastic of a fit next to chet/wemby.

[Apoe]

I see a lot of Julius Randle without the umper in his game combined with vando's defensive capabilities. I like his vision and he seems tough. But he can't schoot. I think at max he can carve out a role in the league from the bench as a the 7th/8th guy is his main focus can be playing defense. Question is: can he play the role that is asked from him? If he falls to the right team with te right system he has some potential.

[Yallbecrazy]

Had him #1 last year by a lot, but the draft was super weak. He was hovering around #8 for a while this year, but a lot of guys faded down the stretch and he finished the season really strong. Have him #3 this year.

[Yallbecrazy]

He's a 6-7 off-the-dribble shot creator and elite finisher with no jumpshot. He made one off the dribble jumper from 15 ft last game. How does that work at the next level? He's a good athlete but not an elite one.

I think it's pretty well proven, you can have one non-shooter in an NBA lineup but a second non-shooter in the lineup tanks spacing and makes it really makes life tough for shot creators. Seems to me, this guy will require the perfect fit roster wise to maximize his potential.

Ya. Not sure what separates him from a Rondae Hollis-Jefferson honestly. Slightly better passing and like 8lbs of muscle?

How about 7 % Usage and 10% 2pt shooting. 2.5 BPM, almost double the assist% all while playing against much better competition with FAR worse teammates. Also, a better defender and rebounder.

I see comparisons like this a lot, and same with MKG, but the numbers are just so much superior while playing against better players and far worse teammates/spacing.

[Yallbecrazy]

He's better than Thad was as a prospect. It's unique in that he's legit good at basketball and translates but he doesn't really fit the modern that a bad team needs and the good teams need him but they won't know they need him till they bring him in and he adjust to their squad. The issue is, some good squads might be a bad fit for him but some might be a perfect fit.

Thad was really highly regarded as a prospect. Don't think CMB is better at this stage.

Ya, Thad was for sure a better prospect. More athletic than CMB and coming out he was seen as having a 3PT shot - it just didnt develop out to the NBA 3PT line (Thad shot 39 of 93 for 42% from 3 in his single college year).

From a shot chart perspective the closest guy I can find to CMB is Hollis-Jefferson - albeit CMB has more handle / passing.

So Thad had 2.2 stocks per 40 vs 3.7 for CMB. Shot 13% worse from 2, had fewer assists per 40 despite playing on a stacked team that had 3 other NBA players, while CMB played on a team that was literally the level of a poor shooting mid major without him. Also only ~ 60% of the rebounds and 4 fewer points per game.

Maybe look at some numbers before you make completely ridiculous statements.

[babyjax13]

Thad was really highly regarded as a prospect. Don't think CMB is better at this stage.

Ya, Thad was for sure a better prospect. More athletic than CMB and coming out he was seen as having a 3PT shot - it just didnt develop out to the NBA 3PT line (Thad shot 39 of 93 for 42% from 3 in his single college year).

From a shot chart perspective the closest guy I can find to CMB is Hollis-Jefferson - albeit CMB has more handle / passing.

So Thad had 2.2 stocks per 40 vs 3.7 for CMB. Shot 13% worse from 2, had fewer assists per 40 despite playing on a stacked team that had 3 other NBA players, while CMB played on a team that was literally the level of a poor shooting mid major without him. Also only ~ 60% of the rebounds and 4 fewer points per game.

Maybe look at some numbers before you make completely ridiculous statements.

Yet Thad shot well from 3 in college and people were debating if it was projectable. A player that is worse than CMB in every way except shooting, as long as those differences aren't totally disqualifying, is probably a better prospect.

[Yallbecrazy]

Ya, Thad was for sure a better prospect. More athletic than CMB and coming out he was seen as having a 3PT shot - it just didnt develop out to the NBA 3PT line (Thad shot 39 of 93 for 42% from 3 in his single college year).

From a shot chart perspective the closest guy I can find to CMB is Hollis-Jefferson - albeit CMB has more handle / passing.

So Thad had 2.2 stocks per 40 vs 3.7 for CMB. Shot 13% worse from 2, had fewer assists per 40 despite playing on a stacked team that had 3 other NBA players, while CMB played on a team that was literally the level of a poor shooting mid major without him. Also only ~ 60% of the rebounds and 4 fewer points per game.

Maybe look at some numbers before you make completely ridiculous statements.

Yet Thad shot well from 3 in college and people were debating if it was projectable. A player that is worse than CMB in every way except shooting, as long as those differences aren't totally disqualifying, is probably a better prospect.

10% better from 2 on higher usage while playing against better players and with far worse spacing/ facing constant double teams and shifted defenses/ opposing teams best players well outweighs any 3pt%, unless the guy is shooting 50% on high volume.

#1 thing the draft undervalues is bbiq and CMB is second only to Flagg for the best age adjusted bbiq in the draft.

CMB has elite quickness, movement, and agility for someone as big as he is (check his shuttle and sprint times for quantitative proof if you don't want to watch the film). It allows him to blow by guys on offense with simple dribble moves and defend the perimeter against guards. He is an outlier good finisher around the rim. He has multiple outlier strengths and if he ever develops on off the dribble jumper (unlikely) he probably has perennial mvp candidate potential.

[babyjax13]

So Thad had 2.2 stocks per 40 vs 3.7 for CMB. Shot 13% worse from 2, had fewer assists per 40 despite playing on a stacked team that had 3 other NBA players, while CMB played on a team that was literally the level of a poor shooting mid major without him. Also only ~ 60% of the rebounds and 4 fewer points per game.

Maybe look at some numbers before you make completely ridiculous statements.

Yet Thad shot well from 3 in college and people were debating if it was projectable. A player that is worse than CMB in every way except shooting, as long as those differences aren't totally disqualifying, is probably a better prospect.

10% better from 2 on higher usage while playing against better players and with far worse spacing/ facing constant double teams and shifted defenses/ opposing teams best players well outweighs any 3pt%, unless the guy is shooting 50% on high volume .

I am not saying we should have thought that, but at the time he was very highly regarded (moreso than CMB is now). I was skeptical about the shot but he was a very switchable defender in a way I am not sure CMB will be.

[JMAC3]

He is very high on Twitter big boards, which I feel are run mostly on analytics at this point. He ranks a good bit lower on the major media boards that are more heavily influenced by NBA projectability and Front Office sources.

I think his productivity is noteworthy, but we have to be careful not to assume what works in college automatically translates to the NBA game- which is why I am lower on him than consensus. He played with the ball in his hands a lot for USC, 27% usage. I just don't think that is realistic based on where he is going to get drafted, he will have to function off the ball a lot more and what value does he bring off the ball if teams are sagging off him?

If NBA teams are going to put their center on him, how does he punish that coverage?

[bucknut]

He is very high on Twitter big boards, which I feel are run mostly on analytics at this point. He ranks a good bit lower on the major media boards that are more heavily influenced by NBA projectability and Front Office sources.

I think his productivity is noteworthy, but we have to be careful not to assume what works in college automatically translates to the NBA game- which is why I am lower on him than consensus. He played with the ball in his hands a lot for USC, 27% usage. I just don't think that is realistic based on where he is going to get drafted, he will have to function off the ball a lot more and what value does he bring off the ball if teams are sagging off him?

If NBA teams are going to put their center on him, how does he punish that coverage?

I think he would drive by most centers in the league even some in drop. All he has to do is get even hip to hip with his elite finishing ability. Lamar odom siakam driver as he develops more of that handle. We see bigs all the time transition into those other guard skills besides shooting. Playing with the ball in his hands needs to continue and extend out even more. He's got to dribble to be effective.

Its likely he develops a nice middle j. His free throw looks decent

The biggest question is his lack of recovery speed on defense if someone gets a step. But his all around defense is pretty good

[JMAC3]

He is very high on Twitter big boards, which I feel are run mostly on analytics at this point. He ranks a good bit lower on the major media boards that are more heavily influenced by NBA projectability and Front Office sources.

I think his productivity is noteworthy, but we have to be careful not to assume what works in college automatically translates to the NBA game- which is why I am lower on him than consensus. He played with the ball in his hands a lot for USC, 27% usage. I just don't think that is realistic based on where he is going to get drafted, he will have to function off the ball a lot more and what value does he bring off the ball if teams are sagging off him?

If NBA teams are going to put their center on him, how does he punish that coverage?

I think he would drive by most centers in the league even some in drop. All he has to do is get even hip to hip with his elite finishing ability. Lamar odom siakam driver as he develops more of that handle. We see bigs all the time transition into those other guard skills besides shooting. Playing with the ball in his hands needs to continue and extend out even more. He's got to dribble to be effective.

Its likely he develops a nice middle j. His free throw looks decent

The biggest question is his lack of recovery speed on defense if someone gets a step. But his all around defense is pretty good

He is so much smaller, don't know if him driving on centers is realistic to be honest.
His free throw % in college is 69.5%, don't think that says he is close to developing any type of jumper anytime soon.

[EvanZ]

Okoro vibes

[Upperclass]

Brandon Bass/Jason Maxiell type energy big

[dawhizz]

Brandon Bass/Jason Maxiell type energy big

I was thinking maybe Kenneth Faried as well.

[Yallbecrazy]

He is very high on Twitter big boards, which I feel are run mostly on analytics at this point. He ranks a good bit lower on the major media boards that are more heavily influenced by NBA projectability and Front Office sources.

I think his productivity is noteworthy, but we have to be careful not to assume what works in college automatically translates to the NBA game- which is why I am lower on him than consensus. He played with the ball in his hands a lot for USC, 27% usage. I just don't think that is realistic based on where he is going to get drafted, he will have to function off the ball a lot more and what value does he bring off the ball if teams are sagging off him?

If NBA teams are going to put their center on him, how does he punish that coverage?

Analytics have vastly outperformed consensus picks and the NBA offices are using analytics more and more and those that don't are drafting worse than your twitter analytics people.

Look at the people below saying Maxiell, Okoro, and Maxiell when CMB put up vastly superior stats to all those guys. He is clearly a superior prospect to all of them

He was way too quick for centres in college, teams were best suited to putting more athletic wings and helping/doubling with their centre. Even though he is a really good passer his teammates were so bad defenses took their chances with his teammates messing up closeouts and open shots.

He's unique because guys who are as strong as he is aren't nearly quick enough and he's got at least 15 lbs on anyone that is as quick as he is.


edit: and Faried FFS

[Dat2U]

He's a 6-7 off-the-dribble shot creator and elite finisher with no jumpshot. He made one off the dribble jumper from 15 ft last game. How does that work at the next level? He's a good athlete but not an elite one.

I think it's pretty well proven, you can have one non-shooter in an NBA lineup but a second non-shooter in the lineup tanks spacing and makes it really makes life tough for shot creators. Seems to me, this guy will require the perfect fit roster wise to maximize his potential.

Ya. Not sure what separates him from a Rondae Hollis-Jefferson honestly. Slightly better passing and like 8lbs of muscle?

How about 7 % Usage and 10% 2pt shooting. 2.5 BPM, almost double the assist% all while playing against much better competition with FAR worse teammates. Also, a better defender and rebounder.

I see comparisons like this a lot, and same with MKG, but the numbers are just so much superior while playing against better players and far worse teammates/spacing.

Referring to college stats is cool but it tells me nothing about CMB's translation to the pro game. We all know he was a really good college player but alot things that work in college do not work in the NBA. Those post entry passes from the top of key where CMB seals off his man is a non-stater in the league. College teams that play a high 2-3 zone and give no help to the low man - looks that CMB destroyed - arent seen in the NBA. Those ISO face ups where CMB blew by slower bigs, will now see guys play off and dare him to shoot and if CMB still attacks, he'll be met quickly with guys just as athletic & long as him rotating over.

He desperately needs a jumper to have any real offensive utility and to not muck up spacing for his teammates and his shooting indicators don't give me alot of optimism.

If his jumper does not develop, I see him as a matchup based, small ball C. I get Montrezl Harrell vibes with better defensive instincts but still overmatched against bigger guys. Some nights, he'll look good, other nights he'll be unplayable against certain lineups. I have him in the early to mid 20s range on my board.