Troy Murphy

Indy2thaWindy · Post #1 » by **Indy2thaWindy** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:28 pm

Has anyone noticed how bad Troy Murphy has been this year for the Nets. James Posey is putting up better numbers. Does this stat seem familiar to anybody? The Nets are 4-1 without Troy Murphy and they are 0-5 with Troy Murphy.

Murphy is averaging 4.4pts/5.2rebs/1asst/0.4stls/0.2blks in 20.4 minutes while shooting 30% from the field, 27% from 3, and 33% from the free throw line.

The worst part about it is he's effecting Brook Lopez.
Lopez is averaging 15.6pts/5.4rebs/2.4tos while shooting 34% from the field in the games Murphy has played in.

Lopez is averaging *20.4pts/5.8rebs/1.4tos while shooting 51% from the field* in the games Murphy sat out. *this included the Nov. 10th game, where Lopez only scored 4 points on 1-5 shooting.

It is clear he is hurting Brook Lopez's production. Would he have done the same to Hibbert if he was here? Did he hold Hibbert's production the past two seasons? So far this season James Posey has been the better player. A trade of James Posey for Troy Murphy right now looks like a fair trade, but to get Darren Collison for him? That is why I love my main man Larry Burrd.

Was I right in calling him a cancer?

Post #2 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:06 pm

No. He's not a cancer. He's simply playing hurt, and it is hurting the team as well. He'll heal, and he'll play well there.

Post #3 » by **Miller4ever** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:29 pm

A cancer is different from a black hole. A cancer is a chemistry problem in the locker room. A black hole just sucks.

FreeRon · Post #4 » by **FreeRon** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:34 pm

I'm probably not being totally fair because I've never been a fan of Murphy in the NBA, but I think he is a cancer. He's not NEARLY as bad as he's played this year. I totally agree with Scoot that his stats so far can be attributed to his being hurt. When he plays, though, I've always felt like he takes away from the big men he plays with. He gets a lot of points and a lot of rebounds, but he seems to get a lot of those rebounds crashing the boards, not boxing out. He's leaving his big man to box out two guys while he runs in and gets the rebounds. If the other team has two good rebounders on the court, your team is going to lose. Like I said, I'm not the best person to get an opinion from, but that's the way I've always seen him.

FreeRon · Post #5 » by **FreeRon** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:35 pm

Miller4Ever beat my post. After reading his, I'm going to agree with his assessment.

Indy2thaWindy · Post #6 » by **Indy2thaWindy** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:53 pm

Miller4ever wrote:A cancer is different from a black hole. A cancer is a chemistry problem in the locker room. A black hole just sucks.

But he has taken it from place to place. Isn't this the part where a black hole becomes a cancer?

colts2004 · Post #7 » by **colts2004** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:28 am

You just hate Murph. No one when they are hurt plays up to par. Nets suck anyways!

Boneman2 · Post #8 » by **Boneman2** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 4:09 am

Murphy is a good shooter, above-average scorer, great rebounder & he can stretch defenses because of his size. His downside is that he is to slow to be effective as a starter.

When his contract expires I think you'll see him sign with a contender for less than his market value.

jowglenn · Post #9 » by **jowglenn** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 11:11 am

Dammit, no, 2thawindy, you do not understanding the generally accepted meaning of the term cancer as it regards NBA players.

A guy who is a **** player is not a cancer.

A guy who makes his teammates worse is not necessarily a cancer.

Being a black hole on offense and a sieve on defense does not make you a cancer.

To be a cancer, a guy must negatively affect the entire emotional attitude of the team, both in the locker room and on the court. "Cancer" must involve something besides his on-court production. We call people like Stephon Marbury cancers, not just because he sucks on court, but his attitude and carelessness spilled out into the locker room and infected the others with an ambivalence.

Nowhere have I ever heard that Murphy is a bad teammate, or an extremely selfish or egotistical teammate.

Please do not hyperbolize everything and redefine words. Murphy sucks. He makes other players worse. But he is not, by any remotely accepted definition of the word, a cancer.

colts2004 · Post #10 » by **colts2004** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 2:10 pm

Cancer players are like Alan Iverson and Latrell Sprewell and Jamaal Tinsley! Got talent but God forgot to give them brains!

Post #11 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Fri Nov 19, 2010 12:30 am

jowglenn wrote:Please do not hyperbolize everything and redefine words. Murphy sucks. He makes other players worse. But he is not, by any remotely accepted definition of the word, a cancer.

This is kind of what I feel, too. Although, I don't feel that he makes other players worse, it's just that he doesn't make other players better, and his production doesn't really add to a roster, but rather substitutes for production from lesser players.

He's a great teammate, and will be a great role player for the next 4 years or so when he's on a much cheaper contract. His greatest sin is merely that Chris Mullin offered him much too large of a contract, and I can't exactly blame Murphy for accepting it.

colts2004 · Post #12 » by **colts2004** » Fri Nov 19, 2010 1:58 am

In this league if you are 6'10" and even remotely good your going to get a huge contract no matter what

Post #13 » by **Gremz** » Fri Nov 19, 2010 10:24 am

I miss Murph. Now I have one less reason to yell at the TV screen during games.

It's bad for my health.

Starkiller · Post #14 » by **Starkiller** » Fri Nov 19, 2010 1:57 pm

Anyone think those contender's last year looking for a player at the trade deadline (like Cleveland) saw this and that's why we didn't get Murphy shipped out then?

aquatic92 · Post #15 » by **aquatic92** » Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:29 pm

No, everyone knew/knows Murphy sucks.

Thread Closed.

Post #16 » by **mizzoupacers** » Fri Nov 19, 2010 4:06 pm

I see that realGM thinks Murphy will probably be traded later in the season...

Maybe the Pacers could offer New Jersey a package deal of Posey and the two Joneses...nah, won't happen.

:wink:

Post #17 » by **PR07** » Sat Nov 20, 2010 4:17 am

Murphy's a good guy and a good player. Problem is...on the team's he's been with, he's being paid and featured in the offensive system like he's a star.

8305 · Post #18 » by **8305** » Sat Nov 20, 2010 3:45 pm

mizzoupacers wrote:I see that realGM thinks Murphy will probably be traded later in the season...

Maybe the Pacers could offer New Jersey a package deal of Posey and the two Joneses...nah, won't happen.

Maybe not that but, say Solo and either Ford or Dunleavy for Murphy? Price could step in for Ford and we've got lots of wings. Would Murphy be remarkably more effective than Posey has been?

Post #19 » by **Miller4ever** » Sat Nov 20, 2010 6:08 pm

If Posey could be thrown in, I would do it, because that saves us 7 million in the next season, which is huge.

8305 · Post #20 » by **8305** » Sat Nov 20, 2010 8:53 pm

Sure, if you could save 7 mil and trade out Murphy for Posey. That would be a no brainer. But, there's no way New Jersey does that. The real question is would you give some combination of our expiring contracts for Murphy? If you can count on Foster being there the rest of the year I'm not sure I would.