Jamal Murray
DEN · 2025-26Primary starterHigh evidenceWhat does Jamal Murray actually supply on the floor?
Jamal Murray's strongest evidenced functions are creation, shooting, passing; the weakest available areas are event creation, rim protection, rebounding. The profile is tied to DEN for 2025-26.
Function profile
2025-26 — eleven separate readings on a league scale. They are not additive.* limited evidence for that function. A dash means the evidence was insufficient — not a zero. Use the separate function strengths to evaluate role and roster fit; do not treat them as one player-value score. POA or switch conclusions require lineup, matchup, and assignment evidence beyond this profile.
Season by season
Every governed season profile on record.| Season | Team | Role | Evidence | Creation | Rim pressure | Shooting | Passing | Screening | Interior finish | Point of attack | Switch coverage | Rim protection | Event creation | Rebounding |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | DEN | Primary starter | High evidence | 83 | 59 | 82 | 82 | — | 70 | — | — | 39 | 33 | 40 |
| 2024-25 | DEN | — | High evidence | 80 | 57 | 68 | 82 | 50 | 59 | 55 | 56 | 50 | 56 | 31 |
| 2023-24 | DEN | — | High evidence | 79 | 59 | 72 | 80 | — | 65 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 53 | 52 |
| 2022-23 | DEN | — | High evidence | 75 | 55 | 67 | 77 | 46 | 53 | 37 | 38 | 34 | 49 | 56 |
| 2020-21 | DEN | — | High evidence | 70 | 60 | 71 | 69 | — | 52 | 49 | 54 | 38 | 62 | 54 |
| 2019-20 | DEN | — | High evidence | 66 | 61 | 52 | 66 | — | 63 | — | — | 30 | 59 | 50 |
| 2018-19 | DEN | — | High evidence | 73 | 52 | 67 | 72 | — | 46 | — | — | 35 | 45 | 53 |
| 2017-18 | DEN | — | High evidence | 56 | 59 | 67 | 52 | — | 50 | — | — | 35 | 52 | 38 |
| 2016-17 | DEN | — | High evidence | 55 | 51 | 50 | 54 | — | 30 | — | — | 41 | 47 | 52 |
What teams depended on him for
Seasons where a team's situation report named him a dependency case.DEN did not have a sufficiently supported observed replacement lineup for Jamal Murray. The database keeps the functional-loss evidence but does not invent a replacement plan.
Replacement evidence
No replacement lineup is supported by the available evidence.
on floor 5288 possessions · off floor 2497 possessions
DEN was highly dependent on Jamal Murray. Removing him cost about 26.9% of passing production, and lineups with him performed 8.0 points per 100 possessions better than lineups without him. The best supported replacement group was [Russell Westbrook, Aaron Gordon, Nikola Jokic, Michael Porter Jr., Christian Braun] over 276 possessions.
Replacement evidence
Russell Westbrook · Aaron Gordon · Nikola Jokic · Michael Porter Jr. · Christian Braun
shrunk net 5.6030 over 276 possessions
on floor 5530 possessions · off floor 3018 possessions
DEN had a supported lineup path without Jamal Murray: [Reggie Jackson, Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Aaron Gordon, Nikola Jokic, Michael Porter Jr.] at 2.8 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 876 possessions. This is an observed option, not proof it is universally better.
Replacement evidence
Reggie Jackson · Kentavious Caldwell-Pope · Aaron Gordon · Nikola Jokic · Michael Porter Jr.
shrunk net 2.8350 over 876 possessions
on floor 4187 possessions · off floor 3923 possessions
DEN lineups performed 9.0 points per 100 possessions better with Jamal Murray than without him. The best supported alternative was [Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Aaron Gordon, Nikola Jokic, Bruce Brown, Michael Porter Jr.] over 453 possessions.
Replacement evidence
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope · Aaron Gordon · Nikola Jokic · Bruce Brown · Michael Porter Jr.
shrunk net 4.6120 over 453 possessions
on floor 5327 possessions · off floor 3570 possessions
DEN did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Jamal Murray.
Replacement evidence
Will Barton · Aaron Gordon · Nikola Jokic · Michael Porter Jr. · Facundo Campazzo
shrunk net 0.7140 over 191 possessions
on floor 3054 possessions · off floor 4106 possessions
DEN lineups performed 4.9 points per 100 possessions better with Jamal Murray than without him. The best supported alternative was [Will Barton, Jerami Grant, Nikola Jokic, Monte Morris, Torrey Craig] over 253 possessions.
Replacement evidence
Will Barton · Jerami Grant · Nikola Jokic · Monte Morris · Torrey Craig
shrunk net -4.7980 over 253 possessions
on floor 4510 possessions · off floor 3136 possessions
DEN had a supported lineup path without Jamal Murray: [Mason Plumlee, Trey Lyles, Malik Beasley, Juancho Hernangomez, Monte Morris] at 5.1 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 215 possessions. This is an observed option, not proof it is universally better.
Replacement evidence
Mason Plumlee · Trey Lyles · Malik Beasley · Juancho Hernangomez · Monte Morris
shrunk net 5.1290 over 215 possessions
on floor 5324 possessions · off floor 3000 possessions
DEN did not have a sufficiently supported observed replacement lineup for Jamal Murray. The database keeps the functional-loss evidence but does not invent a replacement plan.
Replacement evidence
No replacement lineup is supported by the available evidence.
on floor 4598 possessions · off floor 2523 possessions
DEN had a supported lineup path without Jamal Murray: [Jameer Nelson, Danilo Gallinari, Kenneth Faried, Gary Harris, Nikola Jokic] at 2.7 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 167 possessions. This is an observed option, not proof it is universally better.
Replacement evidence
Jameer Nelson · Danilo Gallinari · Kenneth Faried · Gary Harris · Nikola Jokic
shrunk net 2.7300 over 167 possessions
on floor 3242 possessions · off floor 4071 possessions
Known contract calendar
Governed contract events naming this player — dates carry their honest quality.Jamal Murray has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2029 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. No extension-review trigger is applied yet.
Jamal Murray has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2025 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Jamal Murray has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2025 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Jamal Murray has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2025 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Jamal Murray has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2020 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Jamal Murray has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2020 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Jamal Murray has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2020 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Jamal Murray has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2020 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. No extension-review trigger is applied yet.
Function scores, roles, dependence records and contract events are separate evidence. No combined player value, trade value or ranking is computed from them, and none of them is a causal impact claim.