jcsunsfan wrote:OK. The fact is that they pulled within 11 with a minute and a half to go. There are some remarkable things about this game.
1. It must take an incredible amount of stamina just to put up that many points in an NBA game.
2. He was double and triple teamed at times and still scored. That is the making of a superstar.
3. This type of game is important for a young star like Booker because it changes the way the player thinks. The confidence goes through the roof and makes them even more effective.
4. This also changes the way other teams, and especially the referees see a player. Booker will get more calls.
5. It was a fairly efficient game as well.
It was a very efficient game. Outside of the Suns' final trip down the court, where Booker missed two field goals, his performance almost did not have a "70-point" feel in my view, because he was scoring very much within the flow of the game. I have received this feeling, too, watching, say, Michael Jordan and Kevin Johnson post big scoring games as opposed to, say, Kobe Bryant and Allen Iverson. With Bryant and Iverson, one often felt that they were throwing up anything and everything. With Jordan and K.J., I have sometimes been surprised to see 35 or 40 or 45 points on the board because everything was occurring within the flow of the game and without ostentatious moves or shots.
To me, the fact that Booker scored 70 is rather irrelevant. Of course, that fact is what the media and most people will focus on, but I am more interested in the nature of his performance. Sure, the fact that he reached 70 was something of a fluke—until the last two minutes, the atmosphere proved lackadaisical and Booker was playing on a D-League-caliber team with no offense outside of him or transition. Had Bledsoe been playing, Booker would not have scored 70.
But if Booker had checked out after scoring 45, I would have basically felt the same way about his performance. He was obviously very comfortable, and the whole game was clearly "slow" for him, meaning that he seemed to be seeing and processing everything in slow motion. Although he committed 5 turnovers, he delivered some outstanding passes and made some good defensive plays as well. Indeed, Booker actually produced a terrific all-around statistical line with 6 assists, 8 rebounds, 3 steals, and 1 blocked shot. In terms of his scoring, his fakes and quick stop-and-go and/or change-of-directions and/or in-and-out dribbles (either off the catch or a live dribble) were excellent. Booker said it best after the game when he stated that anyone who has ever played basketball can understand what happened—it was one of those games where he got into a great rhythm and everything clicked. And the experience is not exclusive to basketball, either.
Now for the bad news: over his last six games—including the 70-point performance in Boston—Booker is shooting .362 from the field in 23.0 attempts per game and .300 on threes in 6.7 attempts per game. Remove the 70-point performance, and Booker is shooting .296 from the field over that span (the other five games) and .276 on threes. So, obviously, the experience is not readily replicable or transferable—Booker possesses the skills and feel to have that experience, but when and if it happens is fairly random. Of course, in the four games before this most recent six-game stretch, Booker averaged 28.0 points on .506 field goal shooting and .438 three-point shooting. In the six games before that four-game stretch, he averaged 16.2 points on .413 field goal shooting, although he shot .414 on threes during that span.
So like a lot of shooting guards, Booker has run hot and cold. To me, he profiles as the kind of player who can push you over the top in a playoff game or two to swing a series yet who needs to be embedded in a solid overall team in order to enjoy that opportunity—much like Reggie Miller or Klay Thompson (Game Six at Oklahoma City in the Western Conference Finals last year), although Booker handles the ball better than Miller and Thompson.
