I think it's fair to question how much Lavine and Murray actually help you win. Looking at some data, their 3 year RAPM (20-23) isn't actual that bad:
RAPM rank / Luck Adjusted RAPM rank:
Lavine: 90 / 79
Murray: 96 / 70
These numbers are still noisy in a multi-year context, but I was actually surprised both were so high. They (Lavine in particular) have a reputation as losing players, but their teams' performance with and without them doesn't suggest that. They are not +/- gods like IQ or Caruso, but grade out higher than other players mentioned who would typically be seen as "winning" players. Overall I'd still say they are both a tad overrated by their box score output, I think they fall higher in consensus rankings because of that output. But their teams' performance does not suggest they are obvious, losing players. My first impression from diving into the rapm data is that while they are overrated from a casual fan's perspective, they probably get too much flak from the diehards.
Lavine is a really strong offensive player + neutral defender whose main contribution is bringing up the team's offensive efficiency. Defensively, he kills his team as a rebounder, but is better in other than you would expect elsewhere. IMO, this checks out. He's obviously a very efficient scorer, and defensively his effort isn't there which is reflected in the poor rebounding.
Murray is more of an all around player. His rebounding is good but does not make as much of an impact as you would expect. The one area where Murray stands out is reducing the amount of time his team turns over the ball, where he is elite. His impact on FTr is also very bad, which checks out and is the main thing keeping him from the next level.
