Minnesota Sports Forum

Cam, if you want to talk up a player based on their college season, Denzel Valentine had an amazing year. I would love to grab Valentine if he drops beyond the lottery. He has been called the highest IQ guy in college basketball and he was the most complete player. He gets knocked for his athleticism, but the guy can just flat out play.

Camden0916 wrote:

Volans19 wrote:Is Jamal Murray a less athletic, better spot up shooting version of Zach Lavine?

Would Murray and Zach mesh on the court or would we see a lot of ISO from both?

Just trying to get a read on some of these guys any feedback is greatly appreciated

Less athletic, but stronger. Think he might have a better overall feel for the game, but LaVine just has unmatched physical ability. Murray's the better shooter as a 19-year old, but LaVine's already shown that he's an above average volume three-point shooter at the NBA level.

I think they could coexist, but they'd probably cross-match defensively. Both are capable on-ball scorers while being useful off-ball. Could see them being able to play off of each other. Sure would be fun.

I would describe the difference between Lavine and Murray this way. Lavine is basically some guy you create in a video game he has all the athletic ability you can put into him and the absolute skill is high there. For some reason you forgot to bump up the intangibles and BBIQ to match. Basically Zach just didn't really know how to play in general. We have seen him grow over the last 2 seasons in that area a great deal and that's why he has so many people excited about him.

Murray fits more into the category that he knows how to play. He doesn't have the crazy athletic ability like Lavine but he is very skilled and like Cam has said Murray likely has more ability passing the ball than he showed last year playing SG at UK. A 19 year old freshman at a big time college program putting up numbers like he did especially with how he shot the ball is something.

I do think they could play together in the backcourt at least in theory. Murray seems more of a passer but either guy would likely enjoy having the other to drive and kick to. Think about sole of the dynamic backcourts in the league like Lilliard and CJ, Curry and Klay. Those guys are a nightmare to guard and a lot of it has to do with both guys being able to shoot the hell out of the ball. No Ibam not suggesting that these two guys will make it to that level (especially Curry and Klay and Lilliard is just ridiculous) but the potential is there for Lavine and Murray to be very difficult to guard and at this point we are talking about Murray coming off the bench.

One key thing drafting Murray would do is bring shooting to a team that needs it. I'm not saying he should be the guy if he is available but he has legit potential to be a terrific player.

Camden wrote:

Volans19 wrote:Is Jamal Murray a less athletic, better spot up shooting version of Zach Lavine?

Would Murray and Zach mesh on the court or would we see a lot of ISO from both?

Just trying to get a read on some of these guys any feedback is greatly appreciated

Less athletic, but stronger. Think he might have a better overall feel for the game, but LaVine just has unmatched physical ability. Murray's the better shooter as a 19-year old, but LaVine's already shown that he's an above average volume three-point shooter at the NBA level.

I think they could coexist, but they'd probably cross-match defensively. Both are capable on-ball scorers while being useful off-ball. Could see them being able to play off of each other. Sure would be fun.

Murray would clash with Lavine and Bazz on this roster. He's a liability on defense, shot hungry and not much of a passer. Plus, Thibs says he wants two way players and so I don't see him considering Murray if he meant what he said.

Murray is the devil. He does nothing well. He's not even American. I heard he lost a spelling bee once. He hits puppies. I bet he puts salt on his watermelon too.

- TeamRicky

Camden0916 wrote:Murray is the devil. He does nothing well. He's not even American. I heard he lost a spelling bee once. He hits puppies. I bet he puts salt on his watermelon too.

- TeamRicky

Wait...is putting salt on watermelon un-American? I just ask because I know a lot of people that do. I don't. Is that ok? Actually I'm not a big watermelon eater in general.

Camden wrote:Murray is the devil. He does nothing well. He's not even American. I heard he lost a spelling bee once. He hits puppies. I bet he puts salt on his watermelon too.

- TeamRicky

When you can't win the debate, go for the personal attacks. Nice one Cam!

Cam, why do you hate Euros so much? Last year you called Porzingis a bust and someone you'd never draft high. This year you knock Bender. Not every Euro is Darko or Tshkvilla. There are a lot of good Euros: Jokic, Zinger, Pau Gasol, Marc Gasol, Dirk, Gobert, Batum, Greek Freak, Vucevic etc. There is a lot of tape on Bender if you dig for it and you can see he has the skills to be good at the next level. He could really help our perimeter defense and stretch the floor.

It's like he picks a guy and gets so fixated on whoever it is, that this guy is the only free agent or the only draft pick. Funny. It's clear he's a weak defensive player but tries to argue otherwise.

Duke13 wrote:It's like he picks a guy and gets so fixated on whoever it is, that this guy is the only free agent or the only draft pick. Funny. It's clear he's a weak defensive player but tries to argue otherwise.

Yeah, I think 90% of his posts on this thread are talking up Murray or criticizing another poster's like of somebody else.

TeamRicky wrote:

Camden wrote:Murray is the devil. He does nothing well. He's not even American. I heard he lost a spelling bee once. He hits puppies. I bet he puts salt on his watermelon too.

- TeamRicky

When you can't win the debate, go for the personal attacks. Nice one Cam!

Neither one of us can "win the debate" right now... We'll see in about two to four years. I do think that I've presented my case better than you have, but that's certainly subjective. I also already told you that I would stay away from Murray arguments with you specifically because I already know what you'll say, including things that don't add up.

As for the post you quoted and called a personal attack... Come on. It was pretty obvious that it was a joke. Monster got it. Oh well.