ImageImageImageImageImage

Trevor Booker

Moderators: nate33, montestewart, LyricalRico

dobrojim
RealGM
Posts: 15,573
And1: 3,298
Joined: Sep 16, 2004

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#621 » by dobrojim » Wed Oct 17, 2012 4:22 pm

encouraged that Book is reportedly going to play tonight
A lot of what we call 'thought' is just mental activity

When you are accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression

Those who are convinced of absurdities, can be convinced to commit atrocities
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#622 » by hands11 » Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:59 am

dobrojim wrote:encouraged that Book is reportedly going to play tonight


Welcome back Mr Booker 6-8 from the floor in in 17 minutes.
Brenice
Banned User
Posts: 4,071
And1: 464
Joined: Dec 27, 2004
Location: DC

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#623 » by Brenice » Thu Oct 18, 2012 5:12 pm

I'd rather have a short overachiever with a high motor than a tall athletic, underachiever. Booker sets a tone with his take-no-prisoners style. He, along with Seraphin, play physically tough, and that has been absent while we played with softies, Antawn, Brendan, Blatche, and JaVale.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 66,778
And1: 19,063
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#624 » by nate33 » Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:59 pm

So far this pre-season, Trevor Booker has played 39 minutes. During those 39 minutes, he has tabulated 34 points, 9 rebounds, 2 assists, 3 steals and just 1 turnover while shooting 64% from the field.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 21,927
And1: 7,853
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#625 » by payitforward » Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:05 pm

nate33 wrote:So far this pre-season, Trevor Booker has played 39 minutes. During those 39 minutes, he has tabulated 34 points, 9 rebounds, 2 assists, 3 steals and just 1 turnover while shooting 64% from the field.

I liked Booker when we drafted him -- thought it was a good trade up to get him -- although I might have picked Damion James to tell the truth.

Booker had an outstanding rookie season and a slightly better year 2. Injuries are the issue for him. If he can play 1500-2000 minutes this year, I expect it'll be his best. He's 24; should be ready to hit his stride.

Don't sleep on Damion James, btw -- I still think he'll be an effective starter in the league and expect a strong season from him this year, now that he's back from nagging injuries. I would have worked to get him this Summer.
Breaking News: In a shocking development, Wizards owner Ted Leonsis has sold the NBA franchise to a consortium of participants in a discussion board devoted to the team on realgm.com. Details to follow....
REDardWIZskin
Senior
Posts: 716
And1: 2
Joined: Jul 21, 2009
Location: DC

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#626 » by REDardWIZskin » Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:11 pm

I'm looking forward to seeing Booker in his match up against Bosh next week. Many speculate that the reason we may end up parting ways with Book is because of his height or lack there of, which possibly limits his upside. Bosh could be a good test. If he plays serviceable D it will be a good sign IMO.
Sit back and watch WALL WORK!! >:-)
User avatar
closg00
RealGM
Posts: 22,492
And1: 3,506
Joined: Nov 21, 2004

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#627 » by closg00 » Tue Oct 23, 2012 4:47 pm

REDardWIZskin wrote:I'm looking forward to seeing Booker in his match up against Bosh next week. Many speculate that the reason we may end up parting ways with Book is because of his height or lack there of, which possibly limits his upside. Bosh could be a good test. If he plays serviceable D it will be a good sign IMO.


That's a horrible match-up, Book doesn't have the length to guard taller/lanky players.
nuposse04
RealGM
Posts: 11,293
And1: 2,439
Joined: Jul 20, 2004
Location: on a rock
   

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#628 » by nuposse04 » Tue Oct 23, 2012 4:50 pm

I'd rather have booker on LeBron, he's the only guy on our squad who could match LBJ's physicality in the post without giving up too much on speed and athleticism. Offensively he'd probably be shut down by LBJ, but if we have one guy who has any hope of slowing LBJ at all, it is probably Booker.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 21,927
And1: 7,853
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#629 » by payitforward » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:39 pm

REDardWIZskin wrote:I'm looking forward to seeing Booker in his match up against Bosh next week. Many speculate that the reason we may end up parting ways with Book is because of his height or lack there of, which possibly limits his upside. Bosh could be a good test. If he plays serviceable D it will be a good sign IMO.

Of course it would be good if Booker -- with all his other qualities -- were an inch taller. Duh. Even better 2 inches taller. Hey, how about if he were 7'2".

Other than the above, there is nothing whatever to issue of his height. If you list the 4s in the league from tallest to shortest, your list will have no statistically meaningful correlation with another list of 4s, this time from best to worst.
Breaking News: In a shocking development, Wizards owner Ted Leonsis has sold the NBA franchise to a consortium of participants in a discussion board devoted to the team on realgm.com. Details to follow....
I_Like_Dirt
RealGM
Posts: 34,460
And1: 8,719
Joined: Jul 12, 2003
Location: Boardman gets paid!

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#630 » by I_Like_Dirt » Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:10 pm

closg00 wrote:That's a horrible match-up, Book doesn't have the length to guard taller/lanky players.


I'm not really sure who a good match up against Bosh is. You need a collection of solid defensive players working in unison to stop him or the Heat in general, or you just hope they fall asleep because they're tired of winning.
Bucket! Bucket!
fishercob
RealGM
Posts: 13,922
And1: 1,571
Joined: Apr 25, 2002
Location: Tenleytown, DC

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#631 » by fishercob » Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:15 pm

The one thing that keeps Booker at just "good" as opposed to "indispensable" is his defensive rebounding.

Look at him last year versus newly-minted $12M man Kris Humphries:

http://bkref.com/tiny/FH2nQ
http://bkref.com/tiny/At9k9

Not to say that Hump deserves all of that $12M, but the one area where he's markedly better is on the defensive boards.
"Some people have a way with words....some people....not have way."
— Steve Martin
User avatar
tontoz
RealGM
Posts: 18,363
And1: 3,824
Joined: Apr 11, 2005

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#632 » by tontoz » Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:38 pm

fishercob wrote:The one thing that keeps Booker at just "good" as opposed to "indispensable" is his defensive rebounding.

Look at him last year versus newly-minted $12M man Kris Humphries:

http://bkref.com/tiny/FH2nQ
http://bkref.com/tiny/At9k9

Not to say that Hump deserves all of that $12M, but the one area where he's markedly better is on the defensive boards.



Yeah there is no reason for Booker not to be a strong rebounder. He is never going to be a big scorer so if he wants a long, successful career he needs to really step it up on the boards.

Booker's standing reach is only .5" less than Humphries.
"bulky agile perimeter bone crunch pick setting draymond green" WizD
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 21,927
And1: 7,853
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#633 » by payitforward » Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:05 am

tontoz wrote:
fishercob wrote:The one thing that keeps Booker at just "good" as opposed to "indispensable" is his defensive rebounding.

Look at him last year versus newly-minted $12M man Kris Humphries:

http://bkref.com/tiny/FH2nQ
http://bkref.com/tiny/At9k9

Not to say that Hump deserves all of that $12M, but the one area where he's markedly better is on the defensive boards.

Yeah there is no reason for Booker not to be a strong rebounder. He is never going to be a big scorer so if he wants a long, successful career he needs to really step it up on the boards.

Booker's standing reach is only .5" less than Humphries.

It'd be great if Book was a better rebounder, but he can have a long successful career in the NBA doing just what he's doing right now. He's pretty clearly in the top 30% of 4s in the league. His only problem is staying on the court. Injuries.
Breaking News: In a shocking development, Wizards owner Ted Leonsis has sold the NBA franchise to a consortium of participants in a discussion board devoted to the team on realgm.com. Details to follow....
fishercob
RealGM
Posts: 13,922
And1: 1,571
Joined: Apr 25, 2002
Location: Tenleytown, DC

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#634 » by fishercob » Wed Oct 24, 2012 10:28 am

payitforward wrote:
tontoz wrote:
fishercob wrote:The one thing that keeps Booker at just "good" as opposed to "indispensable" is his defensive rebounding.

Look at him last year versus newly-minted $12M man Kris Humphries:

http://bkref.com/tiny/FH2nQ
http://bkref.com/tiny/At9k9

Not to say that Hump deserves all of that $12M, but the one area where he's markedly better is on the defensive boards.

Yeah there is no reason for Booker not to be a strong rebounder. He is never going to be a big scorer so if he wants a long, successful career he needs to really step it up on the boards.

Booker's standing reach is only .5" less than Humphries.

It'd be great if Book was a better rebounder, but he can have a long successful career in the NBA doing just what he's doing right now. He's pretty clearly in the top 30% of 4s in the league. His only problem is staying on the court. Injuries.


PIF, it seems as if much of your analysis of players is based on how they compare to others at their position. I am curious as to what informs this -- I.e. a particular book or study -- particularly in light of the Heat's attempt to move to "positionless" basketball.
"Some people have a way with words....some people....not have way."
— Steve Martin
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 21,927
And1: 7,853
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#635 » by payitforward » Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:17 pm

fishercob wrote:
payitforward wrote:It'd be great if Book was a better rebounder, but he can have a long successful career in the NBA doing just what he's doing right now. He's pretty clearly in the top 30% of 4s in the league. His only problem is staying on the court. Injuries.


PIF, it seems as if much of your analysis of players is based on how they compare to others at their position. I am curious as to what informs this -- I.e. a particular book or study -- particularly in light of the Heat's attempt to move to "positionless" basketball.

I don't know how else you would know a player was good except in relation to other players.

Nothing complicated at all in how I think about it -- look at their numbers for what I think are the key stats: TS%, rebounding rate, steals and turnovers. Then compare to others at their position. If I'm comparing at a single position, I can use an overall measure like WS40, but obviously you want to look at the component numbers as well.

"Positionless basketball" is a concept. Somebody's bringing the ball up, and they ain't counting on that guy to lead them in rebounds. LeBron is a superstar. mega superstar. Add Wade, etc. -- that's why they're good.
Breaking News: In a shocking development, Wizards owner Ted Leonsis has sold the NBA franchise to a consortium of participants in a discussion board devoted to the team on realgm.com. Details to follow....
REDardWIZskin
Senior
Posts: 716
And1: 2
Joined: Jul 21, 2009
Location: DC

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#636 » by REDardWIZskin » Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:59 pm

payitforward wrote:
REDardWIZskin wrote:I'm looking forward to seeing Booker in his match up against Bosh next week. Many speculate that the reason we may end up parting ways with Book is because of his height or lack there of, which possibly limits his upside. Bosh could be a good test. If he plays serviceable D it will be a good sign IMO.

Of course it would be good if Booker -- with all his other qualities -- were an inch taller. Duh. Even better 2 inches taller. Hey, how about if he were 7'2".

Other than the above, there is nothing whatever to issue of his height. If you list the 4s in the league from tallest to shortest, your list will have no statistically meaningful correlation with another list of 4s, this time from best to worst.


I'm confused as to what stance your taking, I still think Booker could be effective defensively in spite of his perceived lower ceiling because of his height.
I think you and Closg00 both misinterpreted the point of my post
Sit back and watch WALL WORK!! >:-)
User avatar
Shorty
Ballboy
Posts: 49
And1: 2
Joined: Oct 22, 2011

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#637 » by Shorty » Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:13 pm

payitforward wrote:
fishercob wrote:PIF, it seems as if much of your analysis of players is based on how they compare to others at their position. I am curious as to what informs this -- I.e. a particular book or study -- particularly in light of the Heat's attempt to move to "positionless" basketball.

I don't know how else you would know a player was good except in relation to other players.

Nothing complicated at all in how I think about it -- look at their numbers for what I think are the key stats: TS%, rebounding rate, steals and turnovers. Then compare to others at their position. If I'm comparing at a single position, I can use an overall measure like WS40, but obviously you want to look at the component numbers as well.

...


A nitpick: steals are not as reliable a measure of effective play as the other stats you mentioned. Obviously, all other things being equal, we'd like more steals out of our players, and they are a marker for quickness, but the Ghost of Wizards' past tells us that they can be achieved at the expense of actual good defense.

Similarly for blocks, right, Pierre?
Ruzious
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 47,909
And1: 11,579
Joined: Jul 17, 2001
       

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#638 » by Ruzious » Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:15 pm

payitforward wrote:
fishercob wrote:
payitforward wrote:It'd be great if Book was a better rebounder, but he can have a long successful career in the NBA doing just what he's doing right now. He's pretty clearly in the top 30% of 4s in the league. His only problem is staying on the court. Injuries.


PIF, it seems as if much of your analysis of players is based on how they compare to others at their position. I am curious as to what informs this -- I.e. a particular book or study -- particularly in light of the Heat's attempt to move to "positionless" basketball.

I don't know how else you would know a player was good except in relation to other players.

Nothing complicated at all in how I think about it -- look at their numbers for what I think are the key stats: TS%, rebounding rate, steals and turnovers. Then compare to others at their position. If I'm comparing at a single position, I can use an overall measure like WS40, but obviously you want to look at the component numbers as well.

"Positionless basketball" is a concept. Somebody's bringing the ball up, and they ain't counting on that guy to lead them in rebounds. LeBron is a superstar. mega superstar. Add Wade, etc. -- that's why they're good.

When you have Lebron and Wade (if healthy), you can try pretty much any concept and be successful. No other team has Lebron and Wade, so there's nothing to compare and contrast. So what if Miami uses it - it doesn't show anything except whether or not it hurts Miami.
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
Dat2U
RealGM
Posts: 23,492
And1: 7,062
Joined: Jun 23, 2001
Location: Columbus, OH
       

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#639 » by Dat2U » Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:20 pm

payitforward wrote:
tontoz wrote:
fishercob wrote:The one thing that keeps Booker at just "good" as opposed to "indispensable" is his defensive rebounding.

Look at him last year versus newly-minted $12M man Kris Humphries:

http://bkref.com/tiny/FH2nQ
http://bkref.com/tiny/At9k9

Not to say that Hump deserves all of that $12M, but the one area where he's markedly better is on the defensive boards.

Yeah there is no reason for Booker not to be a strong rebounder. He is never going to be a big scorer so if he wants a long, successful career he needs to really step it up on the boards.

Booker's standing reach is only .5" less than Humphries.

It'd be great if Book was a better rebounder, but he can have a long successful career in the NBA doing just what he's doing right now. He's pretty clearly in the top 30% of 4s in the league. His only problem is staying on the court. Injuries.


Top 30% of 4s? Hmm, so if Hollinger lists a total of 85 PFs that played enough minutes to qualify and Booker was around the top 30% percentile, that would put him somewhere around 28th or so. That sounds about right, give or take a few. He's a fringe to below average starter but a very good backup. I think asking him to do more or expecting him to start will limit his effectiveness. He's going to struggle with length and rebounding against quality starters and get exposed. But as 20/24 minute high energy reserve, he can be a useful and remain reliable asset.
fishercob
RealGM
Posts: 13,922
And1: 1,571
Joined: Apr 25, 2002
Location: Tenleytown, DC

Re: Trevor Booker 

Post#640 » by fishercob » Wed Oct 24, 2012 3:11 pm

payitforward wrote:
fishercob wrote:
payitforward wrote:It'd be great if Book was a better rebounder, but he can have a long successful career in the NBA doing just what he's doing right now. He's pretty clearly in the top 30% of 4s in the league. His only problem is staying on the court. Injuries.


PIF, it seems as if much of your analysis of players is based on how they compare to others at their position. I am curious as to what informs this -- I.e. a particular book or study -- particularly in light of the Heat's attempt to move to "positionless" basketball.

I don't know how else you would know a player was good except in relation to other players.

Nothing complicated at all in how I think about it -- look at their numbers for what I think are the key stats: TS%, rebounding rate, steals and turnovers. Then compare to others at their position. If I'm comparing at a single position, I can use an overall measure like WS40, but obviously you want to look at the component numbers as well.

"Positionless basketball" is a concept. Somebody's bringing the ball up, and they ain't counting on that guy to lead them in rebounds. LeBron is a superstar. mega superstar. Add Wade, etc. -- that's why they're good.


I'm not questioning the efficacy of comparative analysis. I'm asking why we compare by "position" as opposed to comparing all players, or by height, etc. Such comparisons might lead us to the same results; I dont know.

I just ask because, for instance, Landry Fields is a guy that you are higher on than most here -- including a few who use lots of statistics to evaluate players. It seems that a lot of what you like about Fields is what he does well for his position. Are there thinsg he does not do well for his position? Are the things he does well for his position also things he excels at versus other positions? What about the areas he's less proficient?

I am asking, not challenging. Your way may make more sense and be more illuminating that others'. It all feeds into the main question -- which type of analysis leads you to players who actually help you win?
"Some people have a way with words....some people....not have way."
— Steve Martin

Return to Washington Wizards