Denver Nuggets: Cavaliers interested in Jamal Murray

Per ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski, the Cleveland Cavaliers are interested in Jamal Murray as a the center of a trade package for Kyrie Irving. Should Denver leverage the future for a true star?

When news first broke of Kyrie Irving‘s trade demands, ESPN‘s Zach Lowe was quick to break it all down and provide some viable trade partners. The Denver Nuggets came up, as a package built around Gary Harris and Jamal Murray was proposed. But it was reported that the Nuggets were unwilling to trade both young guards.

Weeks later, ESPN‘s Adrian Wojnarowski is now reporting that the Cavs have updated their wish list. Cleveland will relent on Harris, but still has its eyes on Jamal Murray.

According to Wojnarowski, Cleveland is no longer willing to bet on the return of LeBron James. They’ve limited their wish list to blue chip prospects to build around in exchange for Kyrie. Woj listed four names: Kristaps Porzingis, Josh Jackson, Jayson Tatum, and of course, Murray.

It’s clear that among that group, Porzingis is the real prize — but he’s also a long shot. Despite Phil Jackson‘s questionable decision to publicly shop the 7’3″ Latvian, the Knicks don’t appear to be willing to move Porzingis. At least not for Kyrie.

Jackson and Tatum are two of the top-four picks in a lauded 2017 NBA Draft class. They hold not just tremendous upside as players, but a ton of value as assets moving forward. They may not be Porzingis, but they’re a good place to start when looking at a potential rebuild.

The problem is, the Suns have also made it clear that they won’t include Jackson in any deal for Irving. Teams have reversed course on many occasions, but as of now, half of Cleveland’s wish list appears to be unavailable.

More from Denver Nuggets

• This overlooked skill proves that Nikola Jokic is underrated defensively
• Why the loss of impact players won’t damage Denver’s repeat title hopes
• Has Denver’s risky offseason hurt their repeat title hopes?
• The Nuggets’ sneaky great draft bolsters their championship roster
• Despite a short series, the Denver Nuggets and Miami Heat saved the NBA

Tatum’s upside as a scorer on the wing is outrageous, and Cleveland is right to add him to the list. But again, it’s just not realistic. If you’re Boston, Cleveland stands to get worse via virtually any conceivable Kyrie trade. There’s little incentive there to throw them a rope when you just loaded up for a run at the Finals. Boston doesn’t make sense either, which brings us to Jamal Murray.

At first glance, Murray’s name might seem like a confusing addition to those that haven’t watched a ton of Nuggets basketball. He was a lottery pick himself in 2016 at No. 7, and he put up some promising rookie numbers. But it’s difficult to put him on the same level as Porzingis. Plus, he never seemed to have the level of hype as Jackson and Tatum do as NBA prospects.

Ask some folks in Denver though and they’ll tell you that he’s the real deal. Murray’s per game averages are skewed by two things: first, Denver stuck him behind Jameer Nelson and Emmanuel Mudiay for most of the year, hindering his development and his production. Second, the dude played through not one, but two hernias.

That didn’t stop him from impressing though, and a glance at his per-36 averages shows he’s in elite company as a youngster at the guard position:

That description might look complicated, but it isn’t. This is a list of rookie guards under the age of 21 with per 36 numbers that look like similar to Murray’s. Kobe Bryant, Ray Allen and James Harden are all on that list. Like I said, good company.

Is Murray the next Mamba, Shuttlesworth, or bearer of the league’s fiercest beard? Probably not. But that’s one hell of a start to Murray’s career, and a full season featuring more playing time, no hernias, and Nikola Jokic as the starter could result in a big jump.

Depending on your team-building philosophy, you might be somewhat confused with any hesitancy on this deal. Sure, Murray carries a ton of value and potential, but is he anywhere near Irving’s level? Shouldn’t Denver be comfortable moving a package that excludes Harris for a true star like Irving?

Nugg Love

The original deal proposed in that Zach Lowe piece from late July was: Murray, Harris, Wilson Chandler and a first round pick. The Nuggets shot down the idea of shipping out both players, but Woj’s piece suggests that Denver might be able to pull this off without giving up a massive return.

If the asking price is reasonable, something along the lines of Murray, Chandler and/or Will Barton plus a first, then Denver will have to consider this deal. At the end of the day, the NBA is about star power and money. Denver has lacked for the former for quite some time. They also struggle to fill the Pepsi Center in a city that will always belong to the Broncos.

Nikola Jokic, Paul Millsap and Kyrie Irving have a ton of star power. Management must consider the fact that that trio would put butts in the seats. Irving would be as marketable as any player in franchise history save Carmelo.

But is that what the Nuggets want? Two guaranteed years of a marketable team and improved attendance, but no titles to show for it when Irving walks and the team is forced to consider moving on from an aging Millsap? It shouldn’t be.

The key factors here are player control and timelines for paths to contention. Denver did well to add Millsap and flipping Murray into Kyrie would undoubtedly make the Nuggets a better basketball team next year. But Golden State, Houston and potentially OKC will still be around in two years, plus it would be foolish to expect a massive drop-off in San Antonio anytime soon.

The West is a bloodbath and no version of an Irving-led Nuggets team should be expected to truly contend for a title. Murray probably won’t develop into Irving, but the Nuggets can afford to wait and find out just what kind potential this kid has.

Kyrie Irving only has two guaranteed years remaining on his contract, at which point he is expected to opt out and test free agency. There is no reason to believe Irving would re-sign in Denver.

On the flip side, Murray is under his team-friendly rookie contract for another four seasons. Denver can then offer him a qualifying offer in 2020-21. So the question is not actually: Would you rather have Murray and pieces or Irving, but rather, would you rather leverage the future for two years of Kyrie or bank on Murray’s development for at least four more years?

There is a correct answer here for Denver — it’s the latter.

Irving will sell tickets and help the team win more games. Of that there is little doubt. But two years of his presence followed by probable departure hinders what Denver is building. They’ve successfully grown a dangerous core internally. They drafted a star in Jokic, a perfect complementary piece in Harris, and surrounded them with mid-to-late lottery talent and capable role players.

Next: 5 teams that should make a trade offer for Kyrie Irving

Denver isn’t the “next” Golden State. No one will ever recreate what the Warriors have managed to build. But they do appear to be following the blueprint successfully thus far. They don’t need to jeopardize that for two years of limited improvement. Patience is a virtue, even when the potential acquisition of Kyrie Irving is on the table.