Bryant West joins the Kings Pulse podcast to talk about Iowa’s Keegan Murray. Murray might have been the best player in college basketball last season averaging 23.5 points, 8.7 rebounds, 1.5 assists, 1.9 blocks, 1.3 steals, and just 1.1 turnovers per game while shooting an average of 55.4 percent from the field, 39.8 percent from three on 4.7 attempts per game and 74.7 percent from the free throw line.
We spent a large portion of the episode explaining what it is that made the 6’8″ forward so successful at Iowa and what we think are the skills that will or won’t translate to the NBA.
It’s no secret that the Sacramento Kings are in desperate need of both three-point shooting and versatile defenders. Coincidentally, Keegan Murray checks both of those boxes easily. His nearly 40 percent from deep is something that we expect to be a weapon for him at the next level and we explained what caliber of shooter we expect Murray to in the league in this episode. Can he knock down shots off movement? Will he be a Harrison Barnes caliber shooter?
🚨 NEW EPISODE 🚨
🔘Special Guest: @BSWest5
🔘What made Keegan Murray the best player in college basketball
🔘Murray is an ideal fit with the Sacramento Kings
🔘Where do we have Murray on our boards?
🔘The tiring & never-ending debate: fit vs. talenthttps://t.co/YMTt7i1CIQ pic.twitter.com/1nSdCxeiUz— Kings Pulse (@Kings_Pulse) June 4, 2022
Episode 313 included a whole lot of comparing Keegan Murray to Harrison Barnes for reasons that are explained in-depth. And everyone knows how much the Sacramento Kings could use another player like Harrison Barnes.
We also dove into Murray’s defense and why we think his stock numbers at Iowa can be a bit misleading. Is he someone who could be a difference-maker on the defensive side of the ball? Is he the weakside rim protector that Sacramento so desperately needs?
But, the ultimate question is should Keegan Murray be seriously considered by the Sacramento Kings at the number four overall pick in the 2022 NBA Draft? Is he someone that the Kings should consider trading down and picking while acquiring even more assets?
The Kings Pulse podcast is available on all major listening platforms.
I’m not sure if Murray will be the BPA at #4, but I have him in the same tier as Sharpe & Ivey, so I think it’ll be fine if the Kings pick him (unless 1 of the bigs drop to #4).
Would this suggest you think Banchero is going to be there at 4?
Idk if any of the bigs will drop to #4, but I’d consider Jabari, Paolo or Chet the BPA if they’re available at #4.
Agreed, barring new info, there’s no way to pass on any of them at four. I’m also starting to lean toward the opinion that if Ivey is still there, it would be a mistake to pass him over.
While I am no expert, LOL, I have a top 4 that does include Ivey and then Murray as the only player in the second tier.
He is skilled. He has a high floor and a moderately high ceiling.
He has great fit with this current team.
I do believe that there is a great chance that some team falls head over heels for Ivey and trades up to #2 to get him. This is dependent on OKC and how much they love Chet vs. how much they love even more assets.
If this happens, someone- probably Chet actually falls to #4. Kings should not hesitate. No trade.
On the other hand, if the top 3 go as commonly expected, Ivey is there at #4. I would take him, fit be damned. If the Kings feel that he will not become a super star player, they could trade down to someone who does believe that. In this case I would not trade down past Detroit (who loves Ivey) so that Murray is available. Trading past Detroit gets into the third tier. If a team gets a first-tier pick, DO NOT traded own to third tier.
What would be my price? – #5 + an unprotected first round pick in 2023.
Would #5 + Grant do it? no
would an protected pick do it? probably not.
All is dependent on Kings evaluation of Ivey. Murray will do well, he fits and he is solid. Do you take that vs. the high ceiling of Ivey?
I say go with Ivey.
I think SS’s footwork is an issue. He can shoot for sure but has trouble getting into the shot. That + “mystery” drops him to 4th tier.
I was a Shaedon Sharpe fan, but the more I read about him, the more I’m reluctant to pick him @ 4. We need shooters and defensive minded players. #4 pick is a vital pick, and we have options. I say trade the pick to Indiana for #6 and Duarte, and we get Murray. (if they’re willing to trade). That shores up two spots in need for the starting lineup. Trade HB/Holmes for more shooters or a PF.( PJ Washington)
this is not a terrible plan except that Pacers trade up to 4, take Ivey, then Murray goes at 5 to Detroit. This occurs because Murray is 5th BPA.
If one of the top 3 bigs does not drop and Kings don’t want Ivey then cannot trade more than one slot down if still want to get Murray.
Let’s try drafting nobody at four. And see what happens. Could be the best non-decision that the Kings have ever made. NBA says, “What’s your pick?” Kings say, “Kangz.” NBA is like, “Huh?” Kings: “Kangz though.” NBA says, “Um, you have to pick somebody.” Kings: “Do we?”
And Kings win six of the next 16 championships, and you’re all welcome for that brain fart.
Same value as recent lottery picks like McLemore, Jimmer, T Robinson, Staukas and Willie C-Stein ! The best draft pick of the last 20 years was I Thomas ( two time All Star and 3rd in MVP vote with Celtics ). He was no. 60
Stauskus is playing for a ring.
He isn’t playing .
He is on a team playing for a ring. He sucks ass but has managed to achieve more than any Kangz player in history.
How dare you, Justin Jackson made it there first.
Bjelli not only made it to the finals, he actually scored 3 points!
Bjelica Not Kangz but lost his starting spot to a first ballot Hall of Kangzer
Pega, Richmond, and Joe Klein all got rings while being bench guys . Study BBall history .
Nah, history is stupid and boring.
PEJA and Richmond aren’t Kangz so they are excluded. Klein was pre Kangz but he might get in on merit.
Kleine wasn’t part of Kangz 2.0, but he was a member of Kangz 1.0.
I would argue we have been in Kangz 3.0 for some time now.
What period would you call Kangz 2.0?
Maloofs own Kangz 2.0 and 2.5
Maloofs also own most all of Kings playoff history!
Maloofs were great owners until they ran out of money. They let people who understood basketball run a basketball team.
They represent the true duality of life. Best of times and until recently worst of times.
Other than wanting to sell the team I would gladly welcome them to take over for the current owner.
Who is Pega?
Presumably it’s Peja.
Never know….this team has drafted some random shit.
Mark Madsen has rings. Did he achieve more than (say) Barkley, Malone, Wilkins, etc.
The whole rings thing as a mark of achievement is subject to question, but for fringe players it’s downright silly.
I was not clear enough in my statement. I was referring to spectacular Kangz draft picks that have failed but ended up playing for a ring somewhere.
Honestly think Bagley might ride the bench somewhere and a get a ring before the Kangz make the playoffs.
Two words for the RINGZZZZ people:
Luke Walton.
There is nothing left to say about it.
Having an organization, a roster, and a coaching staff working towards a ring is a positive. Kangz do not have that. Kangz have non NBA talent at all levels soaking up NBA paychecks.
I’m not disputing what you say here, although I don’t understand it in the context of a reply to what I said.
Walton was soaking up an NBA paycheck. He was not pursuing anything but mediocrity. So yeah….choosing a coach based on RINGZZZZ is dumb.
Oh, I disagree. Mediocrity was clearly pursuing Walton, overtook him at an early age, then moved on after Sucks Balls asked to step in.
True….he never really knew if he was chasing or being chased.
Pretty sure someone had to explain the change in direction at the half a few times.
That depends on your opinion of his dancing:
Keegan Murray should be a good NBA player.
I would be happy if we picked him at #4.
Yeah i have him firmly as one of the top 5 guys in this draft so picking him at #4 isn’t some crazy reach for me. If he’s Monte’s guy, then take him. Otherwise, I think Indiana’s 6th pick or NO’s 8th pick look rather juicy.
#6 looks juicy, but I’d expect my favorite prospects to be gone at #8 (w/the possible exception of Sharpe).
agree-
Murray goes 5, then a blend of SS, Daniels, Griffin and Davis + Mathurin.
so there might be guys at 6 or 8 but none are top 2 tiers.
If NOP traded Ingrahm + 8 for 4 – maybe
NO would not trade Ingram for 1 . A former 2nd pick and young proven All Star caliber on an emerging team .
I don’t know. I can’t seem to get past the notion that having the 4 is an almost unheard of opportunity for the Kimgs to land a player better than Sabs and Fox. A star perhaps.
The Kings can’t lure a star to come otherwise. Take upside. But I also think McNair should already be extended.
This is all about a chance to build an actually contender. A real team/foundation.
Let’s look at the flipside a bit. Do you think there is a higher probability of Ivey being a bust than Murray? If so, what does that do to the equation? IMO, one of our biggest problems has been failing to get high end talent in the draft. What if Ivey craps out and we end up getting nothing (again) when we could’ve had a guy that will most likely be a solid starter for years to come?
I get the home run vs. double argument, but we’re talking about a guy in Ivey that has zero track record against any sort of high end competition. If he had any of that, it would certainly be less of a Maalox pick for me.
This is specific to Ivey being available at 4. If one of the projected top 3 falls, then just take that guy. At the end of the day, I trust Monte’s decision making, even if he takes Ivey at 4.
Wrong guy i was thinking of sharpe relative to the competition factor.
I was going to say, Big Ten hoops has high-level players, as we see among this tear’s prospects.
Someone is going to fall in love with Sharpe, I can feel it. McNair will do his due diligence, and if he has stars in his eyes for Sharpe, then I won’t be salty if we take him. That’s not what I expect to happen, though.
Ivey might crap out. Murray less likely to crap out.
But Ivey has a higher ceiling and at #4, got to take a chance, I believe.
Please simply choose someone that actually has NBA talent and abilities.
He is only 6”8.
same height as Barnes.
I wish our PF got at least 6”10.
Draymond Green is 6’6″ and so is Zion Williamson.
Murray does have a 7′ wingspan.
Why ? Length is far more important as no player rebounds with the top of their heads .
Bagley was often described as tall. A physically dominant beast……,,
I would love to see the name of the person who claimed that Bagley was physically-dominant. With Bagley, it was about his athleticism, which some people felt would compensate for his skinniness until he could add muscle and strength.
“Physically dominant beast……,,”?
Sarcasm.
Being tall or long does not really mean anything. It helps if a player is long or tall paired with the ability and desire to play basketball.
Wingspan & standing reach are more important than height.
And, of course, 6’8 is average height for a PF. It isn’t like Murray is undersized even by height.
Actual talent and desire are far more important.
Based on your assessment that wingspan and standing reach important….
How important is the second jump?
Skills & BBIQ>Motor>Length=Athleticism (though a 2nd jump isn’t an important measure of athleticism to me)>Height>2nd jump
I’m hoping Murray is the guy. Solid scorer, rebounder, and very good defender. Seems to be Coach Brown kind of guy. I’d love to trade back a couple spots and still get him, but I’m not sure that’s possible. Seems like Detroit might be in the market for him also. I trust Monty to get the job done. I wish Ranideve would give him an extension, and keep he and his Daughter’s hands out of the equation.
Ranadive and family are firmly in control of BBall operations and Monte just the latest front man !
So…they get credit for drafting Hali & spinning him into Sabonis?
If the Kings aren’t successful w/Sabonis & Hali develops into a major star, the person responsible for trading Hali (whether that was Monte or Vivek) is more likely to get blame than credit.
Always (insert front office personnel name here) never Vivek he hasn’t made a mistake ever.
He’s made too many mistakes to remember. He is the #1 person responsible for the current state of this organization, as he has signed off on every hire. The Divac hire set this franchise back a decade.
That said, he who gets the blame also gets the credit, with no cherry picking. It’s why I prefer to label it as “the organization” or “the front office” instead of “Vivek” or “Monte” or whomever. The organization passed on Luka Doncic. The organization selected Haliburton, and subsequently traded him for Haliburton. The organization will succeed or fail based on the decisions of the organization.
Woulda been longer if Divac had stuck around even just another year. McNair has managed assets far better than Divac did.
I really don’t think Vivek makes that many basketball decisions. He just has a chaotic setup that has yet to be proven successful. It’s not that he’s that involved, it’s that he’s trusted the wrong people for the most part.
I think he’s intent on proving his managing style works running a NBA team, too, more or less. Which is, of course, a real problem on top of the bad hires and misplaced trust.
Yep. Starting with Vivek himself. I don’t think there’s much outrage left. At this point people won’t care until you start winning again.
Explain how Monte hired Vivek’s daughter and had both join him at Chicago combine ? No other owner and daughter was present .
Yeah, I tend to prefer calling it the FO.
The NBA probably thought this was odd.
Hali for Hali is the fairest trade I’ve ever seen.
(Imagines the screams of Kings fans for trading away Haliburton, regardless)
“We’re not even getting back an all-star!”
It was totally sarcasm on my part, I agree. But he really does bring the mean of intelligence down regardless of who he has hired to be a GM or advise him about the GM or advise him to advise him on the advice he gets on the GM.
Vivek = Loss
Divac = Loss
McNair = Loss
Delasandro = Loss
Until someone changes the equation they are all shit.
Murray won’t last past #5. Players tend to go in value order and teams trade around that value. Murray’s value is at #5- so either Detroit or a trade with Detroit.
Murray is a fine player- will have immediate impact, plays O and D.
But Ivey could be Westbrook (the good one) If Monte goes Murray I will understand. What I will not understand is trading and losing both Ivey AND Murray
I like Murray. He seems to be a perfect fit. As for trading back, all I can think of is when the Kings traded back for Jimmer. Ugh!
TBF, Kawhi, Klay & Vucevic were available when Jimmer was drafted.
Fredette was selected to sell a bunch of jerseys to BYU fans. I’m sure the Failsons made a nice chunk from it.
Trade back and get the guy they want in the draft….predicting that the desired player will be available.
KaNGZ!!!!!!!
thanks for the breakdown of Keegan Murray. Wow, he sounds like a player. You both are extremely confident in projecting him to be a “good nba starter” at the 3/4 position. I have no reason to disagree with that.
However, the logic seems incomplete to rank Ivey over Murray without providing a similar breakdown of his game. Did you do a podcast on him yet? At the end of one podcast, you proposed doing Ivey and someone else, but I looked for it and couldn’t find it. Not the time to bust out a jump to conclusions mat with Ivey’s name on it just because he’s fast.
Some things to add about Murray which I’m sure will come out on the article this week. Blocks rate vs. foul rate. I’m not an analytics guru, but Murray seemed pretty good in this area, while playing a lot of center. Supply and demand. More available supply of athletic combo guards who are not primary initiators, not great shooters, and average to below average defense, compared to starting calibre two-way forwards who fit the modern nba.
Supply and demand.
Front court nicknames:
Shock and Hawes…. 🙁 🙁
Supply and Demand…. Sabonis can be “Supply” (cuz he makes nice passes!) Hmmm, if we had a guy for Sabonis to feed in the paint, that could be the “Demand” dude.
okay, not exactly what I was thinking, but A+ for creativity. kinda funny also.
I think he is the wrong pick at 4! Playing it safe is not the answer we need to swing for the fences. It Ivey or Sharpe for me unless one of the big 3 fall.
Murray was the best player in the NCAA last year, he is better than Ivey now and there is nothing that says he can’t continue to get better. He’s BPA now and because he’s a two-way player with even more upside, he has a higher ceiling than Ivey could ever dream of. Ivey will never be a two-way player, Murray already is.
This is a matter of opinion and your opinion is as good as mine.
Murray was best player in college last year.
He has serious skills on O and D and has improved. He will get better.
IMO- Ivey has serious skills as well and will continue to improve and by-pass Murray.
Unless a top 3 drops ( and I assume you would take any one of them over Murray despite none of them being better than Murray last year)–and if one did I would take the one who dropped over Murray- then at #4 it’s Ivey or Murray.
My rational brain says Murray. My fear of another Luka brain says Ivey.
If Monte decides on Murray, I would be fine with it- he is NOT a bad choice but perhaps not the best upside choice.
My opinion is probabIy an outlier. In regards to ceilings, Murray is a two-way player who could become a lockdown defender and a 3pt marksman with size. Even if Ivey were to improve on both sides of the ball as much as possible, I don’t think he’d ever be as good as Murray if both developed fully.
I have Murray in same tier as Ivey and Banchero (who I think is good but not what the Kings need and isn’t nearly as versatile – so even if Banchero slipped, I’d still take Murray after calling Det to see if they wanted to move into 4).
Murray can fit into most every NBA roster, while Banchero requires certain surrounding skills. Murray is the guy who provides those surrounding skills, its why he fits with Sabonis (and would fit nicely next to Banchero) and would fit alongside any other combination of players. His versatility to mix in with any roster lineup is very underrated.
I think Murray will be an excellent player, fits todays games as a 4, people say he has a lower potential ceiling, but I have yet to hear why except age. He is a year older than Ivey…so that is nothing, especially for a big who develop later. I honestly believe he will be a top 3 player from this draft!
I agree w/a lot of this, but I think Paolo’s talent puts him 2 tiers above Murray. I think Paolo’s in the same tier as Jabari & that Murray’s in the same tier as Ivey & Sharpe (I have Chet by himself in the 2nd tier). I’d note that Ivey probably has more time to develop than Murray b/c Ivey’s younger.
younger in age but not in experience- both played 2 years in college.
BTW- Murray has a twin brother Kris. So what you say? Twins seem to be more competitive and fiesty. .
I hope you are correct in the opinion that Murray will continue to improve and improve more than Ivey and that the Kings take him. I hope that is all true- then the Ivey fit is not an issue and Kings get Murray who does fit. (although SI says he does not fit with DS)
It seems like there are some odd things in SI’s mock draft.
yes, there are. This was just one of them.
Whoa! Quin Snyder out in Utah. Kings hired Brown, Lakers hired Ham – Charlotte hired … ?(Kenny Atkinson was the front runner a few days ago)
Knicks still have Thibodeau?
Will the shake out with coaching spur a change elsewhere?
And the Utah roster? Lots of talk about Gobert, Mitchell leaving. What about Bogdanovic? I wouldn’t mind the other Bogdanovic (Bojan) on the Kings, missed 3 pointer to end the season or not – I like him with Barnes.
I don’t see the Jazz getting rid of their best player (Spider Mitchell), doesn’t make sense to me. Hey, but who do they hire to coach? Atkinson? D’Antoni? Will Hardy? Charles Les? Terry Stotts?
…. Mark Jackson?
vet teams usually want vet coaches (except apparently the LAL) Hardy and Chrles Lee out in that scenario. Atkinson known for building teams.
Chaos in Utah.
If they break up the team, how about the other Bogi or Royce O’Neil?
I’d swap Barnes for Bojan. I believe both have a year remaining on their contracts.
If he’s the guy you want and he’s there at 4, don’t get cute. Take him. But if you’re fine with 2-3 guys, then drop down a spot or two and pick up an asset.
agree with don’t get cute.
The only cute scenario might be if Detroit was for sure picking Ivey, then pretend to be on the Ivey train, move down 1 spot and take Murray.
other than that NO CUTE.
If a trade happens, it’ll be the players, and not the picks, otherwise both parties are prohibited from trading the ’22-’23 pick. Detroit wouldn’t get our pick, they would get our draftee. No way to get cute about that.
yes, it would be the players and not the picks. This, obviously, is pre-arranged and so we know that Detroit wants Ivey and we pick for them and we want Murray and they pick for Kings.
(quietly) andwegetSaddiqBey
That’d be nice, but I wouldn’t expect Detroit to do that.
Oh, I don’t, that’s why I said it quietly.
My head says Murray because he meets the eye test and numbers test, but I’m having a hard time shaking the gut feeling saying “F*ck it” swing for the fences, whether it be a “physical freak” like Chet, or a “mystery phenom” like Sharpe.
Sorry, Holmes reminds me too much of Shawn Bradley. I’ll pass.
Another victim of auto-correct, methinks.
yep
Holmgren! Holmes doesn’t look anything like Bradley.
yep means I agree with auto correct that substituted Holmes for Holmgren
We don’t develop players and I don’t see that changing, so why choose another player that might have a higher ceiling.
murray all the way and I am crazy enough to take home over Chet if he fell!
If there is any inclination of one of the top 3 teams considering Ivey, I would use the #4 + next year (top 3 protected) to move up one or two spots. The bet is next year’s pick is either high lottery or playoff seeded if we pick up a top 3. I think a lot of teams bet against the Kings and that makes this trade look all the more attractive.
If a top 3 team drafts Ivey, I’ll celebrate. I don’t think he’ll be as good as the top 3 bigs.
not sure what you are proposing.
Top 3 protected is not much protection
and #4 + 2023 to move up where? Orlando is not trading. OKC might but why if Ivey goes top 4, take the one that falls.
are you saying move up for Ivey?? Too risky when the other 3 are so good.
It seems like cloudyeyes wants to move up to get Ivey if 1 of the top 3 teams is interested in Ivey. I wouldn’t move up & would celebrate 1 of the top 3 teams taking Ivey since I think Jabari, Paolo & Chet are definitely better prospects than Ivey.
Always remember: 3,500 words is not a problem if you’re telling me exactly what I want to hear.
Why do you think I write 3500 words? It ain’t cuz I’m hoping you will love me afterwards.
I’ve loved you long time, Pook.
Badge Legend