RealGM

pacers33granger wrote:Booker isn't good as far as making others better goes but guys like Bender and Jackson aren't on him at all. Some high picks just suck.

34% assist % with 6.8 assists per game. How many 2 guards are better passers and play makers?

dakomish23 wrote:

Stillwater wrote:

HartfordWhalers wrote:
I don’t agree with this at all. Bender being bad is independent of Booker

I would think if he were as great as some seem to think...he would have at least made his raw teammates look serviceable.

Ayton and Mikal looked pretty solid as rookies. Do they count? Or do you need a multi year example?

neither of those 2 were raw to begin with lol...
but now that we are on the subject how much better would they have been with Rubio last year?
the point is Booker for what he is was exposed for what he isnt. maybe he change that maybe he cant but this is his year to do it if he is going to.
the org stopped drafting projects starting w mikal by grabbing johnson and jerome both proven leaders and winners

BleedGreen1989 wrote:Two young, locked up star-level talents.

Who fetches more in a trade today?

Not sure if this is a serious question or not.
KAT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Booker

KAT is a legit MVP-caliber big man. Booker is a scorer who doesn't play defense.

Stillwater wrote:PHO fans take notice... Booker is overrated

Rich mans Zach LaVine.

Crives wrote:

pacers33granger wrote:Booker isn't good as far as making others better goes but guys like Bender and Jackson aren't on him at all. Some high picks just suck.

34% assist % with 6.8 assists per game. How many 2 guards are better passers and play makers?

There's more to making players better than racking up assists. Rondo puts up huge assist numbers but teams have routinely been awful with him on the floor for years.

pacers33granger wrote:

Crives wrote:

pacers33granger wrote:Booker isn't good as far as making others better goes but guys like Bender and Jackson aren't on him at all. Some high picks just suck.

34% assist % with 6.8 assists per game. How many 2 guards are better passers and play makers?

There's more to making players better than racking up assists. Rondo puts up huge assist numbers but teams have routinely been awful with him on the floor for years.

I don’t think that’s the fairest comparison.
-Rondo is a pg not a Sg
-Rondo isn’t known for shooting and doesn’t help space the floor.

Booker has some of the best passing numbers in the league at the SG position. To say he isn’t a good passer and doesn’t make his teammates better feels very silly.

Booker
USG % = 32.9%
Assist% = 34.1%
Assists = 6.8

Vs some of the better SG’s

Doncic
USG % = 30.5%
Assist% = 31.6%
Assists = 6.0

Beal
USG % = 28.4%
Assist% = 24.1%
Assists = 5.5

Donovan Mitchell
USG % = 31.6%
Assist% = 21.2%
Assists = 4.2

Klay Thompson
USG % = 25.6%
Assist% = 10.5%
Assists = 2.4

Jimmy Butler
USG % = 22.1%
Assist% = 18%
Assists = 4.0

Where do the numbers say Book is a poor passer? From what I see statistically he is arguably top 3 passer from the Sg position. And he passes the eye test on the court. If Book had better teammates I wouldn’t be surprised if he could have averaged 10 assists last year.

I can’t wait for Booker to get traded out of there. I have no problem with KAT over Book but some of these posts are nuts. Booker is negative value now?

Crives wrote:Where do the numbers say Book is a poor passer? From what I see statistically he is arguably top 3 passer from the Sg position. And he passes the eye test on the court. If Book had better teammates I wouldn’t be surprised if he could have averaged 10 assists last year.

I never said anything about being a good or bad passer so I have no clue where you're getting that from.

Either way I'm not going to belabor this. Clearly it's everyone else's fault the team sucks and he has no blame in losing 75% of games since he's been in the league.

Crives wrote:

pacers33granger wrote:

Crives wrote:
34% assist % with 6.8 assists per game. How many 2 guards are better passers and play makers?

There's more to making players better than racking up assists. Rondo puts up huge assist numbers but teams have routinely been awful with him on the floor for years.

I don’t think that’s the fairest comparison.
-Rondo is a pg not a Sg
-Rondo isn’t known for shooting and doesn’t help space the floor.

Booker has some of the best passing numbers in the league at the SG position. To say he isn’t a good passer and doesn’t make his teammates better feels very silly.

Booker
USG % = 32.9%
Assist% = 34.1%
Assists = 6.8

Vs some of the better SG’s

Doncic
USG % = 30.5%
Assist% = 31.6%
Assists = 6.0

Beal
USG % = 28.4%
Assist% = 24.1%
Assists = 5.5

Donovan Mitchell
USG % = 31.6%
Assist% = 21.2%
Assists = 4.2

Klay Thompson
USG % = 25.6%
Assist% = 10.5%
Assists = 2.4

Jimmy Butler
USG % = 22.1%
Assist% = 18%
Assists = 4.0

Where do the numbers say Book is a poor passer? From what I see statistically he is arguably top 3 passer from the Sg position. And he passes the eye test on the court. If Book had better teammates I wouldn’t be surprised if he could have averaged 10 assists last year.

No offense to your work but all this says is "Booker does not have a Point Guard while the other players do".

Mitchell had Rubio
Butler had Simmons
Thompson had Curry/Green
Beal had Wall/Satoransky

The closest comparison for Booker ends up being a 19 year old rookie who had nearly identical AST/TOV ratio as a 5-year veteran.

It feels like some people are looking at “not as valuable as KAT” to mean “Booker is bad.” That’s not true.

On the flip side, I am curious to see what argument could be made from the 8 people that voted that Booker has more trade value.

Crives wrote:

pacers33granger wrote:

Crives wrote:
34% assist % with 6.8 assists per game. How many 2 guards are better passers and play makers?

There's more to making players better than racking up assists. Rondo puts up huge assist numbers but teams have routinely been awful with him on the floor for years.

I don’t think that’s the fairest comparison.
-Rondo is a pg not a Sg
-Rondo isn’t known for shooting and doesn’t help space the floor.

Booker has some of the best passing numbers in the league at the SG position. To say he isn’t a good passer and doesn’t make his teammates better feels very silly.

Booker
USG % = 32.9%
Assist% = 34.1%
Assists = 6.8

Vs some of the better SG’s

Doncic
USG % = 30.5%
Assist% = 31.6%
Assists = 6.0

Beal
USG % = 28.4%
Assist% = 24.1%
Assists = 5.5

Donovan Mitchell
USG % = 31.6%
Assist% = 21.2%
Assists = 4.2

Klay Thompson
USG % = 25.6%
Assist% = 10.5%
Assists = 2.4

Jimmy Butler
USG % = 22.1%
Assist% = 18%
Assists = 4.0

Where do the numbers say Book is a poor passer? From what I see statistically he is arguably top 3 passer from the Sg position. And he passes the eye test on the court. If Book had better teammates I wouldn’t be surprised if he could have averaged 10 assists last year.

6.8 assists to 4.1 turnovers. That tells me he was forced to be a playmaker but isn't particularly good at it.

pacers33granger wrote:

Crives wrote:Where do the numbers say Book is a poor passer? From what I see statistically he is arguably top 3 passer from the Sg position. And he passes the eye test on the court. If Book had better teammates I wouldn’t be surprised if he could have averaged 10 assists last year.

I never said anything about being a good or bad passer so I have no clue where you're getting that from.

Either way I'm not going to belabor this. Clearly it's everyone else's fault the team sucks and he has no blame in losing 75% of games since he's been in the league.

I am referring to

pacers33granger wrote:Booker isn't good as far as making others better goes but guys like Bender and Jackson aren't on him at all. Some high picks just suck.

Apologize if I mistook this as referring to Books passing/playmaking.

MoneyTalks41890 wrote:

Crives wrote:

pacers33granger wrote:There's more to making players better than racking up assists. Rondo puts up huge assist numbers but teams have routinely been awful with him on the floor for years.

I don’t think that’s the fairest comparison.
-Rondo is a pg not a Sg
-Rondo isn’t known for shooting and doesn’t help space the floor.

Booker has some of the best passing numbers in the league at the SG position. To say he isn’t a good passer and doesn’t make his teammates better feels very silly.

Booker
USG % = 32.9%
Assist% = 34.1%
Assists = 6.8

Vs some of the better SG’s

Doncic
USG % = 30.5%
Assist% = 31.6%
Assists = 6.0

Beal
USG % = 28.4%
Assist% = 24.1%
Assists = 5.5

Donovan Mitchell
USG % = 31.6%
Assist% = 21.2%
Assists = 4.2

Klay Thompson
USG % = 25.6%
Assist% = 10.5%
Assists = 2.4

Jimmy Butler
USG % = 22.1%
Assist% = 18%
Assists = 4.0

Where do the numbers say Book is a poor passer? From what I see statistically he is arguably top 3 passer from the Sg position. And he passes the eye test on the court. If Book had better teammates I wouldn’t be surprised if he could have averaged 10 assists last year.

6.8 assists to 4.1 turnovers. That tells me he was forced to be a playmaker but isn't particularly good at it.

I think the biggest problem was Book was the only capable playmaker last year with terrible help in terms of perimeter shooting.so Book was constantly facing double/triple teams and getting forced into turnovers.. I’m very excited to add playmakers like Rubio and Saric to reduce the pressure on Book next year.

With that said.. Books 1.65 A/TO ratio still looks great compared to the top SGs

Book - 6.8/4.1 = 1.65 A/TO
Doncic- 6/3.4 = 1.74 A/TO
Mitchell- 4.2/2.8 = 1.5 A/TO
Beal - 5.5/2.7 = 2.0 A/TO
Klay - 2.4/1.5 = 1.6 A/TO
Harden - 7.5/5 = 1.5 A/TO
Butler - 4/1.5 = 2.6 A/TO

Booker is an awesome offensive talent and should be among the leading scorers in the league for a very long time. But as long as he's a complete traffic cone on defense he's not going to win a lot of games.

j-ragg wrote:I can’t wait for Booker to get traded out of there. I have no problem with KAT over Book but some of these posts are nuts. Booker is negative value now?

yeah this is wild. What did Booker ever do to trigger people to this extent? People responding here as if KAT is AD is ridiculous too.

Crives wrote:

KAT4PREZ wrote:Does booker have positive trade value?

No. He is obviously trash

Read on Twitter

?s=21

Since when does scoring 4 fewer points per game constitute a 'mirror image?' And that's just with cherry picked stats to make Booker look good. He was much worse on defense than Harden, turned the ball over more often, and was much more likely to be scoring meaningless garbage time points in a game that was already lost as opposed to leaving the game early in a blowout win.

nolang1 wrote:

Crives wrote:

KAT4PREZ wrote:Does booker have positive trade value?

No. He is obviously trash

Read on Twitter

?s=21

Since when does scoring 4 fewer points per game constitute a 'mirror image?' And that's just with cherry picked stats to make Booker look good. He was much worse on defense than Harden, turned the ball over more often, and was much more likely to be scoring meaningless garbage time points in a game that was already lost as opposed to leaving the game early in a blowout win.

Please read the thread.

It was pointed out multiple times that the comparison isn’t meant to say Book is better then the best SG in the league (Harden)

Not sure what you mean about Book turning the Ball over more.. a few posts up you can see Book has a better assist to turnover rate. Book also averages fewer raw turnovers per game.

Did the 10 accounts that voted for Booker do so because they think he is more valuable, or just to express pro Booker sentiments ?

Towns is more valuable, the dude has been on the cusp of being an all star since coming into the league and finally made one last season. Booker is no chopped liver tho and the people bashing him are a little off kilter.

No way am I a Towns fan - I am not sure why. His game doesn't have very many holes in terms of talent. I can't tell if there's an attitude problem. I just don't like him. Is he a better player? I don't know. I'm a terrible judge of comparisons of players that play different positions/styles of play.

Without a doubt however, he has more trade value than Booker.