This topic contains 12 replies, has 12 voices, and was last updated by OhCanada- 1 year, 5 months ago.
Posted on: Wed, 12/26/2018 - 9:20am #69446
So in 2016 I was one of the people who were critical of Hield being rated ahead of Murray. Last year Murray (aged 20-21) had a better season on a better team than Hield (aged 25 then), and I considered myself to be hands down correct and saw no reason to revisit this debate. However, this season Hield has had a massive breakout year and is averaging 20,4 ppg on terrific efficiency from the field while also improving as a playmaker and rebounder. Meanwhile Murray has struggled with consistency as a scorer despite improving as a playmaker and defender.
So, who is better?
The case for Murray would be that he is five years younger, has improved some aspects of his game every year and is the more versatile player. At the same age Hield was a college sophmore and averaged fewer ppg than Murray is averaging in the NBA right now. Despite being 5 years younger, Murray is more versatile and a much better passer. One could argue Hield is close to peaking, while Murray is just scratching the surface of his potential.
The case for Hield is that he has a true role in the NBA: he is a very good scorer and a terrific shooter; most teams could use a player that can spread the floor and give them efficient scoring production every game. While he is 26 already, he has become better every single year since 2012, he is a very late bloomer, but who is to say he won’t keep improving for the next couple years. Murray, meanwhile, doesn’t seem to quite know who he is yet: he is a capable passer, but not a true PG; a good shooter, but very inconsistent; has an in-between game, but it’s not good enough to consistently rely on. One could fear Murray ends up as a better-passing harder-working Austin Rivers.
I, personally, still believe Murray will have the better career, but have to admit that the debate has suddenly gotten very interesting. In my opinion, Murray is too dedicated (constantly plays through injuries, loves the game) and too smart to never figure out his ideal playing style and to not become a better scorer. He has time to become a much better player than Hield. I do think Murray is the higher risk-higher reward pick, while Hield is the safer bet, but I will stick with Murray.
What do you guys think?
Posted on: Wed, 12/26/2018 - 9:52am #1127593
Jamaal Murray and the answer is easy to me.0
Posted on: Wed, 12/26/2018 - 12:46pm #1127595
I think the better question with Hield is was Vivek not as crazy as we thought a couple years back. 95% of people questioned the value they got back for Boogie in the deal and the headline was that Vivek was enamored with Hield and thought he had Curry potential as a shooter. Well now 2.5 years removed, they absolutely won the trade as it allowed them to reset their identity and build around young, quick and athletic guys that get up and down. They would’ve never been able to unlock this kind of offense with Boogie still in the fold. Since arriving in SAC, Buddy is shooting the 3 at a 43% clip and as his attempts increase so has his effeciency. He’s proving more than capable of handling a high volume scoring role without hurting the team in the process.
Side note (this is also why I agree with them not drafting Doncic. He wou’dn’t be able to keep up with this style of play and would’ve taken the ball away from Fox, Hield, and Bogdan who unlock this offense)0
Posted on: Thu, 12/27/2018 - 9:22am #1127614
I agree with everything you have said, except the part about Doncic. He’s so versatile and some of the numbers he is putting up as a 19 year old are comparable to only the BEST of the BEST (Jordan, Lebron, Bird, Magic, etc.). I think he would fit with every team in the NBA and the way the league works, you take talent over fit 10 out of 10 times when the talent is (so far, but his career has just started) a tier above the other options available.0
Posted on: Thu, 12/27/2018 - 12:58pm #1127625
I agree very much with the talent > fit assesment. But style of play matters for these kind of teams. Sacramento playing a more half-court brand of ball is probably somewhere between New Orleans and Phoenix record wise right now. Playing at this pace gives them a chance to stay in and consequently win more games. This team is performing the way it is because Fox is the engine and the pace setter. Taking him off the ball to accomadate Luka would’ve been counter productive0
Posted on: Fri, 12/28/2018 - 5:00pm #1127654
You might have a case if the Kings drafted Jaren Jackson. Instead they drafted Bagley who’s no more of a runner than Doncic.0
Posted on: Wed, 12/26/2018 - 1:03pm #1127597
I think that Murray still has more upside and with Hield being 4 years older you’d expect him to be a lot further along. The NOP had Holliday as their PG so taking Hield made sense. With Hield shooting the way he is at the moment, the thought of him on court with Holliday and AD would certainly have given the current NOP an interesting dynamic.0
Posted on: Wed, 12/26/2018 - 2:40pm #1127602
To me, Murray plays with other good players on denver like harris jokic millsap, and when barton comes back, he is a scorer and I think he doesn’t need to do that much because they are winning, and he has other reliable teammates, but when you put him on a roster like the kings I think he can flourish also, kings IMO lacks an identity although they are winning, however fox is doing good.0
Posted on: Thu, 12/27/2018 - 4:23am #1127609
Both good for there respective teams…I would take Murray becuase he’s younger.0
Posted on: Thu, 12/27/2018 - 9:54am #1127616
younger but I am so impressed w/ Buddy Hield
That Sacramento back court is Legit & I luv Bagley w/ that group – the athleticism & explosiveness of Fox & Bagley is off the charts & Hield is such a nice steady 2 guard
Vlade Divac deserves a Lot of credit for turning that organization around in the last couple years0
Posted on: Thu, 12/27/2018 - 1:44pm #1127626
Its really choosing between the explosiveness of Murray vs the steadiness of Hield, and I’d go with Buddy. I think Murray is actually closer to his peak than others do, he doesn’t have the frame or athleticism to suggest he has several more steps he can take to becoming super elite, and on a healthy Nuggets team his best fit longterm may be as a Lou Williams-type bench gunner. I’ve said it on here a lot, but just because a player is young doesn’t mean they’re brimming with superstar potential.0
Posted on: Fri, 12/28/2018 - 12:10am #1127631
Intially I like Murray over hield as he reminded me of Booker just a little shorter and Hield reminded me of Jimmer -A high volume chucker…Which I will gladly admit I got wrong.
But as time has gone on if I had to put either of the two on a contending team the one I think that would do better now would be Hield.. If you put Hield as a SG you can legit do that as he has the length and size to do that vs Murray who isn’t big enough to be a SG yet not quick enough to be a legit PG…
The issue as mentioned above is we sort of know what Hield is and could be if he reaches his ceiling vs Murray who we don’t fully know is he a PG is he SG what is he still..If we put Murray on a contender what would he be? A 6th man, A SG or A PG as he isn’t tall enough to be a legit SG and not quick enough to be a legit PG? So this makes it kind of hard to fully gauge if he is truly better than Hield..0
Posted on: Thu, 01/03/2019 - 4:43am #1127784
Bring this post back up when it happens. Ill take the negs for now. Murray is gonna develop into an elite player in this league and All NBA/borderline MVP talent. Right now he sits back and lets his teammates force the issue but once he decides to dominate the leagues gonna be in serious trouble with him and Jokic. They already are.0
|You must be logged in to reply to this topic.||Login|