RealGM

Similar size, similar strengths/weaknesses.

Reminds me a lot of Saddiq during last years evaluations.

Bey was a Wooden finalist and Erving Award winner as a sophomore...Murphy didn't even make the honorable mentions list for All-ACC 3rd team as a junior. I can see why people like him, but his actual on-court production was really underwhelming for a more experienced prospect.

Murphy could end up being better - he's 2 inches taller and a better defender - but not built as strong as bey..

A big reason Bey and Haliburton outperformed draft position is because they went to teams where they got lots of minutes and lots of shot attempts. Murphy is likely going to go to a team towards end of 1st round who is a really good playoff type team like the Sixers or Knicks so likely won't get those same opportunities out of the gate..

Charm wrote:Bey was a Wooden finalist and Erving Award winner as a sophomore...Murphy didn't even make the honorable mentions list for All-ACC 3rd team as a junior. I can see why people like him, but his actual on-court production was really underwhelming for a more experienced prospect.

That's kind of a weak argument. By that logic, Luke Garza should be a top 5 pick. I mean, he won the Wooden Award. And Tyker Hansborough should have been an NBA all-star.

Teams don't draft based on who got better accolades in college. They draft based on physical tools, skill set, upside/potential, translatable skills to the next level, motor, hustle, character.

Hal14 wrote:

Charm wrote:Bey was a Wooden finalist and Erving Award winner as a sophomore...Murphy didn't even make the honorable mentions list for All-ACC 3rd team as a junior. I can see why people like him, but his actual on-court production was really underwhelming for a more experienced prospect.

That's kind of a weak argument. By that logic, Luke Garza should be a top 5 pick. I mean, he won the Wooden Award. And Tyker Hansborough should have been an NBA all-star.

Teams don't draft based on who got better accolades in college. They draft based on physical tools, skill set, upside/potential, translatable skills to the next level, motor, hustle, character.

Well, ideally you want a combination of youth and elite production. But you have to get *at least* one or the other, especially if you're drafting in the first round. Young players who aren't producing much are sometimes interesting. Old players who are dominating the NCAA are sometimes interesting. Old players who're just solid starters on decent teams are pretty much never interesting.

Charm wrote:

Hal14 wrote:

Charm wrote:Bey was a Wooden finalist and Erving Award winner as a sophomore...Murphy didn't even make the honorable mentions list for All-ACC 3rd team as a junior. I can see why people like him, but his actual on-court production was really underwhelming for a more experienced prospect.

That's kind of a weak argument. By that logic, Luke Garza should be a top 5 pick. I mean, he won the Wooden Award. And Tyker Hansborough should have been an NBA all-star.

Teams don't draft based on who got better accolades in college. They draft based on physical tools, skill set, upside/potential, translatable skills to the next level, motor, hustle, character.

Well, ideally you want a combination of youth and elite production. But you have to get *at least* one or the other, especially if you're drafting in the first round. Young players who aren't producing much are sometimes interesting. Old players who are dominating the NCAA are sometimes interesting. Old players who're just solid starters on decent teams are pretty much never interesting.

Gotcha, thanks for clarifying - fair point..

Is like a bigger Danny Green

kobyz wrote:Is like a bigger Danny Green

A 6’9 Danny Green?

That’s an incredibly valuable player lol

I am surprised people are so high on his defense. Looks more like a 'set feet 3pt specialist' who isnt a turnstyle but isnt really good either on defense.

His shooting from kick outs is great, but he isnt going to be a screen curling sniper either.

Charm wrote:

Hal14 wrote:

Charm wrote:Bey was a Wooden finalist and Erving Award winner as a sophomore...Murphy didn't even make the honorable mentions list for All-ACC 3rd team as a junior. I can see why people like him, but his actual on-court production was really underwhelming for a more experienced prospect.

That's kind of a weak argument. By that logic, Luke Garza should be a top 5 pick. I mean, he won the Wooden Award. And Tyker Hansborough should have been an NBA all-star.

Teams don't draft based on who got better accolades in college. They draft based on physical tools, skill set, upside/potential, translatable skills to the next level, motor, hustle, character.

Well, ideally you want a combination of youth and elite production. But you have to get *at least* one or the other, especially if you're drafting in the first round. Young players who aren't producing much are sometimes interesting. Old players who are dominating the NCAA are sometimes interesting. Old players who're just solid starters on decent teams are pretty much never interesting.

Murphy and Bey have eerily similar production per 100 possessions - which if you want an apples to apples comparison due to that ultra slow Virginia offense, you have use that stat.

Trey Murphy's TS% was 67%, while Bey was at 61%. Murphy PER 20.9, Bey 21.6. Murphy 26 ppg, 7.6 rebs per 100, Bey 28 ppg, 8.3 rebs per 100. About the same height and both are shooters who played at the highest levels in college basketball.

the Bey comparison is as good as any out there.

BlazersBroncos wrote:I am surprised people are so high on his defense. Looks more like a 'set feet 3pt specialist' who isnt a turnstyle but isnt really good either on defense.

His shooting from kick outs is great, but he isnt going to be a screen curling sniper either.

i think most are high on his defensive potential due to being a solid athlete with good size who should be able to switch if he commits and is coached on defense.

SeattleJazzFan wrote:

BlazersBroncos wrote:I am surprised people are so high on his defense. Looks more like a 'set feet 3pt specialist' who isnt a turnstyle but isnt really good either on defense.

His shooting from kick outs is great, but he isnt going to be a screen curling sniper either.

i think most are high on his defensive potential due to being a solid athlete with good size who should be able to switch if he commits and is coached on defense.

His D looks pretty good here:

Hal14 wrote:

SeattleJazzFan wrote:

BlazersBroncos wrote:I am surprised people are so high on his defense. Looks more like a 'set feet 3pt specialist' who isnt a turnstyle but isnt really good either on defense.

His shooting from kick outs is great, but he isnt going to be a screen curling sniper either.

i think most are high on his defensive potential due to being a solid athlete with good size who should be able to switch if he commits and is coached on defense.

His D looks pretty good here:

Watch on YouTube

agreed. just addressing blazersbroncos concerns. even if he doesn't think he's that good defensively, at the very least the potential is there. i happen to think he's already pretty good.

SeattleJazzFan wrote:

Charm wrote:

Hal14 wrote:That's kind of a weak argument. By that logic, Luke Garza should be a top 5 pick. I mean, he won the Wooden Award. And Tyker Hansborough should have been an NBA all-star.

Teams don't draft based on who got better accolades in college. They draft based on physical tools, skill set, upside/potential, translatable skills to the next level, motor, hustle, character.

Well, ideally you want a combination of youth and elite production. But you have to get *at least* one or the other, especially if you're drafting in the first round. Young players who aren't producing much are sometimes interesting. Old players who are dominating the NCAA are sometimes interesting. Old players who're just solid starters on decent teams are pretty much never interesting.

Murphy and Bey have eerily similar production per 100 possessions - which if you want an apples to apples comparison due to that ultra slow Virginia offense, you have use that stat.

Trey Murphy's TS% was 67%, while Bey was at 61%. Murphy PER 20.9, Bey 21.6. Murphy 26 ppg, 7.6 rebs per 100, Bey 28 ppg, 8.3 rebs per 100. About the same height and both are shooters who played at the highest levels in college basketball.

the Bey comparison is as good as any out there.

I'm a numbers guy, but this is why it actually pays to watch the games. Bey wasn't just a shooter in college...he was very clearly "the guy" on an excellent Villanova team. That's why he got all kinds of awards and recognition at the college level. Murphy, in contrast, was at best a third banana behind Hauser and Huff...he just had a very simple 3&D role. He can probably have some success doing the same thing at the NBA level, but given that he wasn't really an outlier in terms of his 3-point volume or his defense, I don't see what all the fuss is about. Seems like a mid-2nd-round roleplayer type.

I like Murphy, has has potential, but he has even further to go than Bey despite the extra college experience. So no, he’s not the next Bey (first team all-rookie, close to ready to contribute right out of the box), but he could get there in a couple of years.

Charm wrote:

SeattleJazzFan wrote:

Charm wrote:
Well, ideally you want a combination of youth and elite production. But you have to get *at least* one or the other, especially if you're drafting in the first round. Young players who aren't producing much are sometimes interesting. Old players who are dominating the NCAA are sometimes interesting. Old players who're just solid starters on decent teams are pretty much never interesting.

Murphy and Bey have eerily similar production per 100 possessions - which if you want an apples to apples comparison due to that ultra slow Virginia offense, you have use that stat.

Trey Murphy's TS% was 67%, while Bey was at 61%. Murphy PER 20.9, Bey 21.6. Murphy 26 ppg, 7.6 rebs per 100, Bey 28 ppg, 8.3 rebs per 100. About the same height and both are shooters who played at the highest levels in college basketball.

the Bey comparison is as good as any out there.

I'm a numbers guy, but this is why it actually pays to watch the games. Bey wasn't just a shooter in college...he was very clearly "the guy" on an excellent Villanova team. That's why he got all kinds of awards and recognition at the college level. Murphy, in contrast, was at best a third banana behind Hauser and Huff...he just had a very simple 3&D role. He can probably have some success doing the same thing at the NBA level, but given that he wasn't really an outlier in terms of his 3-point volume or his defense, I don't see what all the fuss is about. Seems like a mid-2nd-round roleplayer type.

The fuss is because he actually is a really freaking good defender (see video I just posted higher up on the page).

And 43.3% from 3 on 4.8 attempts a game is also really freaking good. Like you said, he was a role player (3 and D guy) and he can play that same role in the NBA. Isn't that better than some guy who was a star player dropping 20 points a game in college but will have to learn how to play a whole different way in the NBA when he's the 9th option on a team and no longer the 1st? Murphy can play basically the same exact role in the NBA.

Wings are the most valuable position in today's NBA. 3 and D wings are super valuable. Guys who are really good (like comfortably above average at both the 3 and the D) are VERY valuable. Add in the fact that his shot is likely to translate well to the NBA because he has a really quick release and really nice form, plus the fact that he's 6'9" with a 7'0" wingspan and the fact that he has good athleticism and the fact that he's 21 yrs old so still has room to keep getting better and developing his frame (literally just turned 21 last month) and you have a guy who is absolutely a 1st round talent, probably even worthy of taking in the top 20.

Charm wrote:

SeattleJazzFan wrote:

Charm wrote:
Well, ideally you want a combination of youth and elite production. But you have to get *at least* one or the other, especially if you're drafting in the first round. Young players who aren't producing much are sometimes interesting. Old players who are dominating the NCAA are sometimes interesting. Old players who're just solid starters on decent teams are pretty much never interesting.

Murphy and Bey have eerily similar production per 100 possessions - which if you want an apples to apples comparison due to that ultra slow Virginia offense, you have use that stat.

Trey Murphy's TS% was 67%, while Bey was at 61%. Murphy PER 20.9, Bey 21.6. Murphy 26 ppg, 7.6 rebs per 100, Bey 28 ppg, 8.3 rebs per 100. About the same height and both are shooters who played at the highest levels in college basketball.

the Bey comparison is as good as any out there.

I'm a numbers guy, but this is why it actually pays to watch the games. Bey wasn't just a shooter in college...he was very clearly "the guy" on an excellent Villanova team. That's why he got all kinds of awards and recognition at the college level. Murphy, in contrast, was at best a third banana behind Hauser and Huff...he just had a very simple 3&D role. He can probably have some success doing the same thing at the NBA level, but given that he wasn't really an outlier in terms of his 3-point volume or his defense, I don't see what all the fuss is about. Seems like a mid-2nd-round roleplayer type.

Yeah, 2nd round seems crazy to me. His stroke is as pure as you find for someone his size and I believe the defense is certainly transferable.

Sam Vecenie just put him in his top-20 and most big boards I'm seeing now are doing the same.

I wasnt saying his defense is bad, just not great. And yes, his frame and awareness give him the chance to be a nice 3/D guy.

But he isnt some sniper. He is a set foot 3PT guy. This isnt a dude you want shooting off a screen or in duress IMO. But if he has room and is set, he can be excellent.

Seems like an ideal pick for a good-ish team looking for a day 1 contributor. Wont be a star, will be a rotation guy if not 4-5th option starter.

Hal14 wrote:

Charm wrote:

SeattleJazzFan wrote:
Murphy and Bey have eerily similar production per 100 possessions - which if you want an apples to apples comparison due to that ultra slow Virginia offense, you have use that stat.

Trey Murphy's TS% was 67%, while Bey was at 61%. Murphy PER 20.9, Bey 21.6. Murphy 26 ppg, 7.6 rebs per 100, Bey 28 ppg, 8.3 rebs per 100. About the same height and both are shooters who played at the highest levels in college basketball.

the Bey comparison is as good as any out there.

I'm a numbers guy, but this is why it actually pays to watch the games. Bey wasn't just a shooter in college...he was very clearly "the guy" on an excellent Villanova team. That's why he got all kinds of awards and recognition at the college level. Murphy, in contrast, was at best a third banana behind Hauser and Huff...he just had a very simple 3&D role. He can probably have some success doing the same thing at the NBA level, but given that he wasn't really an outlier in terms of his 3-point volume or his defense, I don't see what all the fuss is about. Seems like a mid-2nd-round roleplayer type.

The fuss is because he actually is a really freaking good defender (see video I just posted higher up on the page).

And 43.3% from 3 on 4.8 attempts a game is also really freaking good. Like you said, he was a role player (3 and D guy) and he can play that same role in the NBA. Isn't that better than some guy who was a star player dropping 20 points a game in college but will have to learn how to play a whole different way in the NBA when he's the 9th option on a team and no longer the 1st? Murphy can play basically the same exact role in the NBA.

Wings are the most valuable position in today's NBA. 3 and D wings are super valuable. Guys who are really good (like comfortably above average at both the 3 and the D) are VERY valuable. Add in the fact that his shot is likely to translate well to the NBA because he has a really quick release and really nice form, plus the fact that he's 6'9" with a 7'0" wingspan and the fact that he has good athleticism and the fact that he's 21 yrs old so still has room to keep getting better and developing his frame (literally just turned 21 last month) and you have a guy who is absolutely a 1st round talent, probably even worthy of taking in the top 20.

I'm basically with BlazersBroncos on this. Yeah, there's merit to drafting roleplayers, but I'd only draft them in the first round if they bring some kind of outlier skill. 43.3% from 3 on 4.8 attempts a game is not that extraordinary...it's not even as good as his teammate Sam Hauser, and it's not like Murphy's generally shooting high degree of difficulty shots either. He wasn't setting NCAA defenses on fire with his 3-point shot, and he probably won't set NBA defenses on fire either. Similarly with his defense, he has adequate box score stats, adequate physical tools, and adequate fundamentals/IQ to hold his own defensively in the NBA. But there's no sign that he's an outlier defensive talent. I typically have just 5 or 6 upperclassmen in the top-30 of my big board, and there's a lot of guys to choose from who bring more exciting skills than Murphy.

BlazersBroncos wrote:I wasnt saying his defense is bad, just not great. And yes, his frame and awareness give him the chance to be a nice 3/D guy.

But he isnt some sniper. He is a set foot 3PT guy. This isnt a dude you want shooting off a screen or in duress IMO. But if he has room and is set, he can be excellent.

Seems like an ideal pick for a good-ish team looking for a day 1 contributor. Wont be a star, will be a rotation guy if not 4-5th option starter.

Sounds like Saddiq? (minus the bolded part in relation to Detroit lol)