Keegan Murray - 2022 NBA Draft Prospect

[timvp]

Why the Spurs might not draft Keegan Murray even if he's still on the board



Keegan Murray
Age: 21.8
School: Iowa
Height w/ Shoes: 6-foot-8*
Weight: 225*
Position: PF
*unofficial (no combine measurements)

Strengths
+Efficiency
+Shooting
+Character

Weaknesses
-Age
-Possible NBA translation issues

[mo7888]

Why the Spurs might not draft Keegan Murray even if he's still on the board



Keegan Murray
Age: 21.8
School: Iowa
Height w/ Shoes: 6-foot-8*
Weight: 225*
Position: PF
*unofficial (no combine measurements)

Strengths
+Efficiency
+Shooting
+Character

Weaknesses
-Age
-Possible NBA translation issues

Good stuff. On the age issue being a reason to pass on him....that same line of thinking would seem to suggest trading DJ and Poeltl for younger players more in line with a younger timeline. I'm one who thinks we should move DJ if it gets us a top 4 pick but, it's not because of his age it's because of increasing our chances of getting a high level star player. I apply the same logic here...I wouldn't pass on Keegan because of his age but I would if I thought I had a shot at a star (even though his floor might be lower)... Ousmane or Daniels might be in that category but, I don't see alot of star potential in the 10-20 range this year.

[Russ]

Keegan Murray is a safe pick. He'll be good. But . . .

[CGD]

Good stuff. On the age issue being a reason to pass on him....that same line of thinking would seem to suggest trading DJ and Poeltl for younger players more in line with a younger timeline. I'm one who thinks we should move DJ if it gets us a top 4 pick but, it's not because of his age it's because of increasing our chances of getting a high level star player. I apply the same logic here...I wouldn't pass on Keegan because of his age but I would if I thought I had a shot at a star (even though his floor might be lower)... Ousmane or Daniels might be in that category but, I don't see alot of star potential in the 10-20 range this year.

For me I feel it’s less the age and more the transferability of post up game to the pros.

[Mr. Body]

His is age is a reason I think Sochan could be drafted before Murray.

Good points about Iowa's system. Iowa was carried by Murray the same way Garza carried them. I think Murray was hidden on defense less due to deficiencies than offensive load, and he's a better athlete, but the projectability of his skills are a question.

This leads to the question of what you want from a PF in the modern game. It's a position in flux. The center and small forward seem better defined.

[mookie2001]

Would be annoying to see him constantly referred to as "Murray" on this board.

Already frustrating

[exstatic]

Keegan Murray is a safe pick. He'll be good. But . . .

The safer the pick, and that usually means a good floor outside of the top few picks, the less upside. Think Duarte, Brandon Clarke.

[PhantomDashCam]

I’m a big Keegan guy.
If he’s there at 9, I would assume other higher upside guards would be off the board which means the Spurs shouldn’t hesitate.
There will be an opportunity to take the upside swing at 20 if so inclined too.

[Ariel]

I agree that you can't expect him to replicate what he did in college as many aspects won't translate, which is why I'm not onboard with those who want to trade up to no. 6 to get him, by means of overpaying.
However, he's well rounded enough that a good portion of his game will translate, and he's an excellent fit to our needs, so if he's there @ 9 he's hard to pass on.
I'm also very high on Sochan, Daniels and Mathurin (who are 3/2 years younger) though, so I won't be upset if we pìck any of them even if he's on the board.

[TD 21]

I see no credible argument against not selecting him or inquiring about the cost to trade up for him (to what extent they should go is a different story).

If the most likely outcome here is something like Brogdon, only at the scarcest position in the league (one this organization hasn't been able to truly nail down since '06, when last Duncan could still mostly get away with masquerading as one), they'd be stupid to not pursue that for the latest project who's most likely outcome ranges from JAG to fringe player.

[Chinook]

There are a number of guys Murray's size who post up. I'd argue that the changes in the league have helped his game. Guys like Morris, Randle, Harris, Lebron and Butler all do damage there. The key is whether the Spurs could get Murray into quick post-up opportunities and whether Murray can get out of them quickly. Again the motion-weak "Beautiful Game" offense literally has a PF post-up as its first option. If you have a guy who's a tremendous post scorer, and you have an offense that generates good post looks, there's not a problem. What they shouldn't do is do like they did with LMA and cater to post-up iso plays that drag down the shot clock. Hopefully with a young Murray and guys like DJM and Johnson on the team who are going to eat before him, that impulse would be kept in check. That Murray can also play off the ball and hold his own on defense means he doesn't have to be the star of the team to justify his selection.

I would be disappointed if the Spurs had as 2D of an outlook on potential. Yes, Primo might get a higher net boost to his 2K rating than Murray would, but he also has more ground to make up. If Murray's a solid pick for a high-end starter, then you need more than just the vague suggestion that a player could theoretically be a star to pull the trigger. With DJM's age and contract, they can't afford to whiff on a pick or even to hit after years of development. Hitching your wagon to DeJounte means accepting that avoiding the play-in is a near-ideal scenario. The margins are going to be thin. I'm hoping the guy the team picks is a star as much as anyone, but if they prioritize that change over everything else, they're going to be in the lottery for years to come.

I would be intensely disappointed if they pass on Murray, outside some extreme scenarios. There are players I'd perfectly okay with them drafting at 9 who'd probably still be available as well, but I'd much rather the team take Murray at 9 and then aggressively try to move up for that other player. Dude just checks too many boxes, and it's bad juju to ignore the universe after it drops such a perfect fit drop in your lap

[rascal]

It's looking more and more like the Spurs are going to fumble this draft.

[Uriel]

I read the article, but... I'm still not convinced Murray wouldn't be the pick at #9 if he were available. He was the best player in college basketball last season, his analytics are very favorable, he plays the position of need for the team, and even his age makes his developmental timeline a good fit for our current roster.

If I were Brian Wright, and Murray were to be available when we pick, I would submit his name to Adam Silver so fast, ESPN wouldn't even have time to cut to commercials before our pick like they always do.

[Uriel]

When you look at Murray through silver and black tinted glasses, he doesn’t look like any other recent Spurs draft pick. When was the last time San Antonio drafted such a nearly finished product who dominated at college as an older prospect?

What about ACC Player of the Year Tre Jones?

[intlspurshk]

Pick him at 9 is no brainer. Just trade him afterwards if he reaches potential like DE

[duncan2150]

Nice article, i have a hard time explaining why i think he could be available at 9 and why i'm not totally sold on him.

The translation of his back to the basket game, His defense wich is not bad but not really good. That's why i may prefer a Sochan tough his offense comes from far away.

Overall i will be ok to take him at 9 if he's there.

[exstatic]

What about ACC Player of the Year Tre Jones?

Was he a lottery pick? I’d be happy to take Keegan with #38…

[The Truth #6]

I suppose passing on Keegan Murray would really peel back the curtain and reveal their priorities and approach, though it may seem mostly baffling. If they pick a really young player again who is three years away, I don’t know, that would seem risky to me.

They have a plan each draft and off season it seems but it isn’t necessarily obvious what it is. If I had to guess, with Vassel and Tre Jones they wanted to bring back defense. With Primo, Lil Weezy, McBuckets, and Forbes (I think he was that year, it feels like he’s always here) it seemed like shooting. Of course this analysis is a guess, they don’t spell it out.

This season: who knows, playmaking? Interior depth? Players for positionless basketball?

[Chomag]

He looks like a pretty decent player but I'm not seeing anything special in him. A safe pick that doesn't have potential to move the needle anywhere.

At this point I would rather see the Spurs swinging for the home run rather then going for the bunt. More risky yes but Spurs should be only bunting if they have any already established players which is somethingthis team is very lacking.

[BatManu20]

He’ll be long gone by 9 sadly.

[Dejounte]

Well, Keegan does move the needle in a sense that he will help the defense because everyone will be at their natural positions… and you’re adding a potential 20 ppg scorer on top of the two you already have (DJ and likely Keldon)

that added team synergy alone adds 10 wins.

[KingKev]

Murray and Keldon going to be the new version of the twin towers.

[CGD]

Murray and Keldon going to be the new version of the twin towers.

I kind feel Keldon is not long for the Spurs if Keegan is the guy. That, or Keldon accept the role he’s best suited for in my view, which is supersub. but then do you pay 12-14M a year for that?

[CGD]

He’ll be long gone by 9 sadly.

I agree. I think the first 6 picks are firming up, though, the order may change.

To me this is a question of whether the Spurs trade up to 7 to get him if someone nudges Keegan out of the Top 6 and he’s all the sudden there.

[Degoat]

If Keegan Murray is attainable you get him, enough said.