Keegan Murray - 2022 NBA Draft Prospect

[exstatic]

Pretty sure basically no one is arguing over what the Spurs WILL do. They'll do what they'll do, and we won't affect that. We are talking about what they SHOULD do. Unless you believe that everything the Spurs end up doing was the best choice, then those are two very different things. A lot of us fear that they will draft some 18- or 19-year-old 6-5 wing whom they stick in the d-league for a year for some reason and then have him come into the league his second year as a ball-dominant midrange-shooting combo-guard who struggles to fit into a team concept and posts a negative net-rating. I mean, yeah, the Spurs fan in me wakes up in cold sweats about that. That's because if they keep following that trend, it would be a bad decision in my eyes. I'll be desperately hoping they win free agency to cover up for a bad draft. I'll still root for all of the players in the summer league and all that, but I'll be even more disillusioned about the direction of the team.

This is actually a pretty good draft for the Spurs to follow their template AND come away with a player 6’8” or taller.

I find that trying to impose my template on what the Spurs do to be a waste of time, but you do you. PATFO has access to reams of data on the players that we don’t. I don’t think they’re perfect, and I’ve stated that. They miss, and I’ve stated that, too. What I’m convinced of is that they’re trying for the home run, and I’m good with that. We’ve got enough surrounding complementary players.

[Chinook]

I find that trying to impose my template on what the Spurs do to be a waste of time, but you do you.

Wait, what do you think you're spending your time doing? Do you think typing post after posting saying the Spurs will do the right thing is somehow a better use of time than saying what you hope they do? It's all the same, us using heartbeats to pump blood and electricity into our finger muscles so that we can post our thoughts for free on a message board. Unless timvp has some kind of "guess the pick and win $50" game next month, there's no value added either way.

We’ve got enough surrounding complementary players.

I don't think the Spurs have complimentary players outside of Poeltl and Richardson. What they have are middling prospects who project to be complimentary players. That distinction matters, because they NEED actual complimentary players instead of net-negatives. Those are the guys that can get you good trade value like Hill, White and Young, and you need those guys to make a free-agent push actually work. You can draft some guys to be patient with too, but you can't repeatedly draft players with the goal of them becoming net-contributors sometime during their second contracts. That's not sustainable, and it isn't how they're going to dig themselves out of their hole.

[exstatic]

There are multiple players who could or do fit that template, especially with multiple picks. That’s worthwhile discussing, to me.

In the TaT mock lottery, there are 9 out of 14 who could be said to fit the template. I don’t find discoing those other 5 to be nteresting. There’s also the thing where people get PISSED when the Spurs don’t draft who they want, and I don’t find that a productive use of time. I’m not smarter than PATFO,nor do I pretend to be, but there are more than a few here who DO think they are smarter than PATFO. They really do.

[Dejounte]

It doesn't take a degree in accounting to figure out that a player who can come out at a young age and stick around for a few years is going to make a potful of money more than one who stays in school , earns a degree while polishing his skills, and incidentally lets his body mature. Since most players with NBA dreams don't give a rat's ass about completing a degree that will be totally useless to them in their future, there is no incentive to stay in school any longer than absolutely necessary to get that DD (Draft Degree) instead of a B.A. That's why the average age of players entering the draft and the NBA is dropping--and why our draft picks are shifting to younger players. We've been talking about this shift for ages. Nothing new here.

On the other hand, there is no reason to treat a draft prospect like a leper if he is over 20. (OMG, he's so OLD!) He might even be more ready for the NBA than some 18 year old who "has the potential to gain some muscle to handle the bigger faster players in the league."

Let's just take a step back and look at most draft picks realistically for what they bring to the table NOW. I'm sick of players with potential who still need two or three years of G league experience before they are useful. By the time we train them to NBA level players and they begin to realize their potential as great players, many of them will leave us in free agency. There are simply too many lures out there such as better team, super All-star teammates, big cities with bright lights and flashy women for young players on the cusp of greatness.

Suppose we use all of our draft picks so well that we get three or four absolutely great players who show All-star play in two or three years. What are the chances we keep them all? Zero in my opinion. So if we find a player(s) who can step in to the starting lineup sooner rather than later, let's take those two or three years of production on an initial contract and then see what happens in extending their contract. We may never see a Big Three again.

I’m not anti-“draft a 18 or 19 year old”

I’m anti-“draft a 18 or 19 year old at all costs”

I’m anti-“do XYZ at all costs” for that matter

Such thinking are for simpletons who lack nuance

the moron who accused me of not making any counterpoints and only bringing distraction basically conveniently ignored points I brought in much earlier in this thread and went off to spout his usual irrelevant bull .

I acknowledged the difference between draft age and start-of-rookie season age. It’s out-of-this-world for this idiot when someone takes accountability for things they say. A very foreign concept to him.

I see no acknowledgement of the following points I made in earlier posts:

1) How COVID has impacted when prospects come out of college the last couple of years, thus not being the “of age” from his BS requirements
2) If a prospect turned 20 just before Draft Day, does that disqualify their “supreme home run” status as a prospect? If they turn 20 right after Draft Day, does that mean they “made it” in the wonderful Book of Heaven and they are still part of the “Chosen Ones”?

I don’t expect to have rebuttals to these points nor do I care to see one now, especially from a dude who expresses fake humility about him not knowing any better yet goes on and on about “it’s gotta be this one way or else they’ll up”

[The Truth #6]

I'm ok with a variety of directions the Spurs could go in, but I just hope they don't draft players who can't even contribute anything yet. I understand some seasoning in G League for part of the year, but not to an extreme. And I think they learned their lesson somewhat after Luka Sammich. No more outright crazy difficult players. Yeah, we'll see what they go for. Some draft night trades, if they bring clarity to the roster and our direction, would be nice as well. But we'll see.

[R. DeMurre]

I'm ok with a variety of directions the Spurs could go in, but I just hope they don't draft players who can't even contribute anything yet. I understand some seasoning in G League for part of the year, but not to an extreme. And I think they learned their lesson somewhat after Luka Sammich. No more outright crazy difficult players. Yeah, we'll see what they go for. Some draft night trades, if they bring clarity to the roster and our direction, would be nice as well. But we'll see.

I think people tend to overstate the tendencies of most teams-- you see it now in lots of mock drafts where people have the Spurs picking foreign players because "that's a thing the Spurs do." But looking objectively at their picks in the last half decade, it's really not-- not anymore than any other team at this point. They were ahead of the curve on that in the past, but the rest of the league has generally caught up with regards to Euro scouting. If the often repeated cliches about the Spurs were true, they would've picked Nikola Jokic in 2014 instead of Kyle Anderson, and we'd be looking at a vastly different situation right now! It's funny, but I've read multiple comments in just the last few days from people saying the Spurs won't pick Sochan, because they're not the type of organization to put up with a "Rodman-like" guy (as if Dennis was the first human to ever dye his hair, or that every college dude who dyes his hair is automatically similar to him!), which I seriously doubt is the case. If anything, Pop would probably admire Sochan's stances on social causes & the like. The guy I see Pop having more trouble with is Tari Eason, who is super talented but also super wild, & probably too turnover & foul prone for Pop's tastes.

[jjspur]

I'm ok with a variety of directions the Spurs could go in, but I just hope they don't draft players who can't even contribute anything yet. I understand some seasoning in G League for part of the year, but not to an extreme. And I think they learned their lesson somewhat after Luka Sammich. No more outright crazy difficult players. Yeah, we'll see what they go for. Some draft night trades, if they bring clarity to the roster and our direction, would be nice as well. But we'll see.

That's a good amount of common sense thank you. Hopefully the spurs will use some on draft night. They'll have their choice of a number of players just no more non contributing, two years away from being two years away bad dribbling, not tall enough, non rebounding 18-19 year olds or euro slackers for this team please.

[The Truth #6]

I think people tend to overstate the tendencies of most teams-- you see it now in lots of mock drafts where people have the Spurs picking foreign players because "that's a thing the Spurs do." But looking objectively at their picks in the last half decade, it's really not-- not anymore than any other team at this point. They were ahead of the curve on that in the past, but the rest of the league has generally caught up with regards to Euro scouting. If the often repeated cliches about the Spurs were true, they would've picked Nikola Jokic in 2014 instead of Kyle Anderson, and we'd be looking at a vastly different situation right now! It's funny, but I've read multiple comments in just the last few days from people saying the Spurs won't pick Sochan, because they're not the type of organization to put up with a "Rodman-like" guy (as if Dennis was the first human to ever dye his hair, or that every college dude who dyes his hair is automatically similar to him!), which I seriously doubt is the case. If anything, Pop would probably admire Sochan's stances on social causes & the like. The guy I see Pop having more trouble with is Tari Eason, who is super talented but also super wild, & probably too turnover & foul prone for Pop's tastes.

It's a good point. If they go with Tari Eason (ideally at 20 if he slides), then I suppose it becomes a balance of how much he is able to contribute. It definitely could be a battle of the wills if his personality is indeed wired that way, but I hope that somehow he is good enough for Pop to roll with it. With Eason, and anyone in general, really, if we land a player who is somehow talented enough where Pop has to just roll with it, then we'll be closer to having another star on our hand I would imagine. If the problem is from trying too hard instead of not enough, then the Old Man might also find a way to exercise some patience. Trigger warning: I mean, it worked with Manu Ginobili.

Joking. Relax.

[R. DeMurre]

Trigger warning: I mean, it worked with Manu Ginobili.

Joking. Relax.

I was actually going to mention Manu, but then decided, nah, he's more idiosyncratic than wild anyway.

[Chinook]

I don't get it, is Eason a bad teammate? If he's a good teammate but just weird, Pop isn't going to have any more of a problem with him than any other coach. Will Pop try to get Eason to be more disciplined? Yes. Will he compromise if Eason is effective? Yes. People forget that Pop and Manu didn't get along well on the court for years because of Ginobili's freelancing. Eventually they settled on a compromise that got the best out of him. That would be true for Eason, Marcus Smart or Tony Allen if that guy were available. Now, if Eason just refuses to improve, that's a different story, and it won't matter who his coach is. Or if he's a locker-room cancer like Jack was, then that's not going to fly. But I think it's lazy to believe the Spurs need everyone to have the same personality. The Spurs could totally due with an defensive edge right now, because they don't have the perimeter talent to be an elite finesse defense like they were in 2012-2016.

[The Truth #6]

^ Chinook, I don't see your post saying anything in disagreement with what I said. Or are you referring to someone else?

Gun to my head, I think he's my preferred pick at 9. There aren't a lot of interviews out there I could find with him, except this goofy ass video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mmvV9pgdRY

To me that shows a solid person, actually quite articulate, humble, and loves the game of basketball. Honestly, I don't see how he isn't rated higher.

Yeah, he might be weird in that he's more intelligent than his peers, and so Pop could love that.

[Chinook]

^ Chinook, I don't see your post saying anything in disagreement with what I said. Or are you referring to someone else?

I didn't reply to you, so I don't know why you assumed I was talking about your specific stance. I even liked your post, since as you said, it did agree with a lot of what I was saying. The idea that Eason has some personality issues that would make the Spurs pass on him has been brought up before. I don't know enough about him personally to know if he's a real problem of it people are just under the impression the Spurs can't handle different personalities. Eason obviously has a great work ethic and a ton of passion. Unless he's an asshole, Johnathon Isaac 2.0 or has prominent uncles, I can't even imagine why it keeps getting brought up.

[The Truth #6]

Yeah, makes sense. It's the nature of the internet, trying to clarify what others are writing.

Anyway. And I know I'm hijacking the Murray thread to talk about Eason (until someone dedicates a thread to him), but he seems like a player that could contribute immediately on the defensive side while also learning to craft his game in the way Kawhi did, in theory at least. He seems like he was created in a lab for what we need: 6'8" player, crazy wingspan, crazy athletic physical skills, articulate, loves to play defense, burgeoning offensive skills. Sign me up. Added bonus, he 's from Seattle so DJM can someone to mentor from his hometown, because it seems that's something he would like to do, but that's a footnote to his appeal to the current Spurs team.

[Mr. Body]

There are suggestions that Eason's interviews/workouts aren't going well, whatever that means. He may be a weird dude, as others have mentioned. That aside, he seems to be an undisciplined player who struggles to play within college sets both on offense and defense. He may be incredibly talented on an individual level, if this is true, but has little team IQ.

[The Truth #6]

I suppose the Spurs would be the best team to teach discipline, if he’s open to learn.

[Ocotillo]

Yeah, makes sense. It's the nature of the internet, trying to clarify what others are writing.

Anyway. And I know I'm hijacking the Murray thread to talk about Eason (until someone dedicates a thread to him), but he seems like a player that could contribute immediately on the defensive side while also learning to craft his game in the way Kawhi did, in theory at least. He seems like he was created in a lab for what we need: 6'8" player, crazy wingspan, crazy athletic physical skills, articulate, loves to play defense, burgeoning offensive skills. Sign me up. Added bonus, he 's from Seattle so DJM can someone to mentor from his hometown, because it seems that's something he would like to do, but that's a footnote to his appeal to the current Spurs team.

He is the prototype of what we could use on this team on paper. For all his eccentricities, Nephew was a gym rat that worked hard on what he needed to work on. Does Eason? Who knows, hope so.

[Ocotillo]

Yeah, makes sense. It's the nature of the internet, trying to clarify what others are writing.

Anyway. And I know I'm hijacking the Murray thread to talk about Eason (until someone dedicates a thread to him), but he seems like a player that could contribute immediately on the defensive side while also learning to craft his game in the way Kawhi did, in theory at least. He seems like he was created in a lab for what we need: 6'8" player, crazy wingspan, crazy athletic physical skills, articulate, loves to play defense, burgeoning offensive skills. Sign me up. Added bonus, he 's from Seattle so DJM can someone to mentor from his hometown, because it seems that's something he would like to do, but that's a footnote to his appeal to the current Spurs team.

He is the prototype of what we could use on this team on paper. For all his eccentricities, Nephew was a gym rat that worked hard on what he needed to work on. Does Eason? Who knows, hope so.

[PhantomDashCam]

[R. DeMurre]

It's funny, but I've read multiple comments in just the last few days from people saying the Spurs won't pick Sochan, because they're not the type of organization to put up with a "Rodman-like" guy (as if Dennis was the first human to ever dye his hair, or that every college dude who dyes his hair is automatically similar to him!), which I seriously doubt is the case.

But I think it's lazy to believe the Spurs need everyone to have the same personality. The Spurs could totally due with an defensive edge right now, because they don't have the perimeter talent to be an elite finesse defense like they were in 2012-2016.

I haven't seen anyone say the Spurs need everyone to have the same personality... where is that coming from? In fact, my post specifically mentioned Sochan as a talent the Spurs wouldn't automatically dismiss simply because he has a unique personality, and--like you said-- one whose defensive edge they'd like.

[Mr. Body]

Nothing about Sochan reads as Rodman off the court. He comes off as a kind of a funny kid who likes his family and likes his unusual background. No red flags at all and well within what is considered Spurs-like. Even more so since he's worldly.

The issue with Eason isn't any prickliness or weirdness but the fact that he may simply not understand basketball at a high enough level. He fouled out of a lot of games, even coming off the bench, and LSU fans report that he'd often not pick up on basic rotations and would freelance a lot. I've said before, he's like that guy at the YMCA that crushes in pick-up games, but once he plays organized ball his problems emerge. I'd still draft him at a certain point.

[The Truth #6]

Seattle is close to Canada. Maybe Brian Wright will like Eason more if he thinks of it that way.

Joking…

[SAGirl]

I agree with Chinook on a lot of points. It makes sense for a team that likes to throw darts at very young players that have a lot to improve on still to have more picks to take those swings.

I am replying mostly to share that thinking about this has put the alleged/rumored Spurs promise to Caleb Houstan in perspective. He is 19, had an underwhelming to bad first season, to the point he was projected as a late second rounder without a good combine showing — which he needed.

It’s not out of the realm of possibilities to think that if he had played at the combine, he would have shined. He already played great in Under 19 tournaments and a lot of the combine prospects’ are not NBA material ultimately. He could have looked like Kyle Anderson in summer league for all we know. Then that showing, combined with the fact that he could at least shoot well, his height, length and age (just a factor here, but important for scouts taken together with everything else) would have catapulted him to a late first round pick at least.

I have thought the Spurs actually gave him a promise for the 38 pick with a guaranteed deal like they did to Tre, because they believe in him like a first round pick and believe he deserves the couple of guaranteed years to develop, specially because he’s also very young and could have benefitted from going back to college, which they know. Why does it make sense for the player to forgo the combine instead of taking his chances?

Because he didnt want to fumble the bag basically. Its better to take the guaranteed deal that you like, rather than refuse that and go take chances that don't let you know where you will end up, whether you will like the situation, or the team will even be that invested in you. Also, I have thought about the unlikely scenario that he could be a surprising talent taken on the second round, like a best case scenario for him is a Chandler Parsons career trajectory. He would hit FA sooner and get paid on his second contract sooner.

The Spurs are known for giving their players time to develop and invest on their growth and development. They are also a young team trending even younger with playing time to spare for your young projects who show potential. Its a good place to get drafted at currently. I am actually quite ok with them giving that promise to Houstan for 38 and perhaps even 25 if they start fearing a different team also likes him and will jump on them to grab him sooner than 38.

The season they gambled on a project like Luka Samanic, they at least ended with Keldon. Them having extra picks is the best scenario for allowing margins for errors on home run swings. Is Houstan a home run swing? He doesn’t look like it, but he has paths to be an useful player at least, which is not bad for 38. More questionable at 25, but still justifiable when we know that’s not their only chance for a swing. Id think they will go for surer hits with their higher picks, but we will see.

As for Keegan, he's a no brainer. Let the Spurs take their swings on youngin projects like Houstan later people.

[rjv]

There are multiple players who could or do fit that template, especially with multiple picks. That’s worthwhile discussing, to me.

In the TaT mock lottery, there are 9 out of 14 who could be said to fit the template. I don’t find discoing those other 5 to be nteresting. There’s also the thing where people get PISSED when the Spurs don’t draft who they want, and I don’t find that a productive use of time. I’m not smarter than PATFO,nor do I pretend to be, but there are more than a few here who DO think they are smarter than PATFO. They really do.

bingo. also, there are too many posters here who play armchair GM in a vacuum, without any knowledge of how the entire process is being played out, what goes on internally, and so on. so, in their smug eyes, it's a very black and white world, one in which their take is more than just an opinion, it's gold. i'm just here for the entertainment, coming across the occasional good take and links to articles.

[DAF86]

From the scouting reports I've read on the web and seen in youtube, this guy seems like the best fit for the Spurs. But it looks like there's no chance of him falling to #9.

[Mr. Body]

From the scouting reports I've read on the web and seen in youtube, this guy seems like the best fit for the Spurs. But it looks like there's no chance of him falling to #9.

If reports are true, Sacramento seems enamored of him. If they don't take him, I think there's at least a small chance he falls to nine. I could see Duren and even Sochan go before him.