Trevor Booker

[AnotherFinn]

Too bad there does not seem to have game logs of summer games, but I do remember that he did take about 2 long midrange shots/game in first 2 games making them all (was wide open each time).
I don't remember what kind of shots he did take in last 3 but he was 1-7, 2-6 and 5-10 so...

Too bad league broadband is not showing any Wizards preseason games so:
Anyone that watched preseason games and remembers what kind of jump shots Booker did take?

[closg00]

Thoughts on Booker now that we have a sample size?
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/475 ... JMAuSkvLYF

[nate33]

From hoopdata.com through the first 10 games (7 games actually played):

Booker is 8-10 at the rim (62.5% assisted)
He is 0-2 from <10 feet
He is 0-3 from 10-15 feet
He is 0-4 from 15-23 feet
He is 0-0 from 3P range

His TS% is .448.

Clearly, his offense needs work. That said, his on/off numbers are pretty solid. He helps our offense by 0.2 points when he is on the floor. He helps our D by 1.3 points. He sets good screens, plays good D, and doesn't disrupt team chemistry.

If he can ever improve that jumper, he'll be a quality NBA role player. For now, he's a fringe role player.

[closg00]

Last nights 2nd quarter line-up ( Arenas, Martin, Young, Booker, & McGee) dug us out of a hole and played-well, I'd like to see that line-up again. Booker shoots line-drives at the basket, someone needs to help him with that....not-sure how much that can improve.

[LyricalRico]

Booker was on the floor for our 4th quarter run tonight and made a crucial play by forcing a jump ball. He's definitely not looking like a SF, but as an undersized hustle PF type off the bench I think he's got a longterm role with this team.

[TGW]

If Booker could make a consistent jumpshot, he'd be very valuable. His hustle and defense is very good.

[go'stags]

People have been busting EG (and rightfully so) for a long time over his lack of picks with basketball IQ, toughness, and poise.

I have to say that Booker definitley fits the bill in regards to those traits. It doesn't hurt that he is pretty athletic, too. He needs to improve his rebounding, but his hustle, passing, and offensive and defensive IQ are much appreciated on this team. Once he adds a jumper and some more overall ball skills to go along with his quick first step and IQ he will be a very nice piece. He can play in this league.

[dobrojim]

he should get honorable mention for PotG last night

getting that jump ball was HUGE

[Wizards2Lottery]

He could be a really useful player if he develops a jump shot. I was a non believer of this pick because I don't like tweeners but Booker plays with a lot of energy and hustle. To be fair, he didn't really show much of this in summer league.

[closg00]

We shouldn't count on Booker developing a jump-shot, we had the same hopes for the last hustle- guy that we drafted (McGuire). Booker can earn his money as a Micheal Ruffin 2.0 for us.

[Donkey McDonkerton]

We shouldn't count on Booker developing a jump-shot, we had the same hopes for the last hustle- guy that we drafted (McGuire). Booker can earn his money as a Micheal Ruffin 2.0 for us.

Just my opinion, but Booker already looks way better than McGuire.

[JonathanJoseph]

We shouldn't count on Booker developing a jump-shot, we had the same hopes for the last hustle- guy that we drafted (McGuire). Booker can earn his money as a Micheal Ruffin 2.0 for us.

Yeah, if Booker developed a jump shot that would totally ruin your anti Grunfeld rants. You sound like you hope he doesn't develop a jump ****.

[closg00]

We shouldn't count on Booker developing a jump-shot, we had the same hopes for the last hustle- guy that we drafted (McGuire). Booker can earn his money as a Micheal Ruffin 2.0 for us.

Yeah, if Booker developed a jump shot that would totally ruin your anti Grunfeld rants. You sound like you hope he doesn't develop a jump ****.

You are wrong-again, I am interested in the improvement of the Wiz organization and I want them to field the best team possible. You are only interested in protecting Ernie Grunfeld in a motherly way. Those that don't worship him like you do are "haters"

[Mr. Grundle]

I went to Clemson so I watch as many games as I can and saw a fair amount of Booker. He's really not this bad offensively, and certainly not as bad as Dominic McGuire. He's actually got some touch around the basket he just hasn't shown it yet. He was more of an inside scorer in college but he can shoot a little bit. I'm confident he will develop a mid-range jump shot. Right now its obvious he has no confidence in his offensive game. He's not looking to score at all and the reason his % is so low is most of his shots have been forced when the shot clock is winding down. I'm guessing the coaches have asked him to be their energy guy, to rebound, block shots, play defense, and set screens. It's rare you see a guy that would rather set a screen than take a shot. His touch around the basket will come once he gets more comfortable out there, but right now, he's obviously not focused on his offensive game, and this is a good thing. It means he's coachable, doing what he's told, and will do whatever it takes to win. These are the types of players we wanted and needed. He's only going to get better.

[MF23]

He'll be fine. He's just started to see the court. He'll catch his rhythm and become more effective on offense. You can tell he gives something different at the 4 compared to anybody other big man on the team.

[Hoopalotta]

It's interesting, but Booker's actually the only guy on the team where we've actually outscored the opposition with him on the court. I mean, it's 135 minutes with lots of those against backups, but we've scored 110 while giving up 109 (P100P) with him on.

He's also 5th on the team in field goal attempts at the rim (in per game terms) despite only playing 10.8 minutes a game. It's 1.8 shots and he's hitting those at .66% so far too, which is nice.

I'd also point out that there's only been a handful of rookies league-wide who've displayed anything approximating on-court basketball functionality thus far. It's to the point where Landry Fields and Larry Sanders are darkhorse top 5 vote getters for the ROY and filling out the Rookie team for Allstar weekend is likely going to involve a game of pin the tail on the donkey.

If he can just hit the boards better and find his way into a semi decent jumper, he's a respectable 8th man as far as I'm concerned. And not a bad cultural guy, nor a burden on the developmental resources either (ie. he's not sucking loads of coaching minutes away from other projects or detracting from the overall professionalism).

[hands11]

I went to Clemson so I watch as many games as I can and saw a fair amount of Booker. He's really not this bad offensively, and certainly not as bad as Dominic McGuire. He's actually got some touch around the basket he just hasn't shown it yet. He was more of an inside scorer in college but he can shoot a little bit. I'm confident he will develop a mid-range jump shot. Right now its obvious he has no confidence in his offensive game. He's not looking to score at all and the reason his % is so low is most of his shots have been forced when the shot clock is winding down. I'm guessing the coaches have asked him to be their energy guy, to rebound, block shots, play defense, and set screens. It's rare you see a guy that would rather set a screen than take a shot. His touch around the basket will come once he gets more comfortable out there, but right now, he's obviously not focused on his offensive game, and this is a good thing. It means he's coachable, doing what he's told, and will do whatever it takes to win. These are the types of players we wanted and needed. He's only going to get better.

I could easily see how that may be the case. Work on one things at a time. Nice to see a couple of dunks at least last night.

[no D in Hibachi]

If he can just hit the boards better and find his way into a semi decent jumper, he's a respectable 8th man as far as I'm concerned.

Call me skeptical, but I think the odds are stacked against Booker in developing a semi decent jumper. First, how many times did we say DMac is a good jumper away from being a legit player in the league? Second, roughly 40% of Bookers shots are jumpers and guess what his eFG% is? That's right... .077%. For comparison purposes roughly 20% of Shaq's shots are jumpers and he hits them at a .571 eFG%. Granted Shaq's jumpers aren't 18 footers like Bookers, but the stats speak for themselves. Third, Booker doesn't really have great form on his jumper. I'm sure it can be corrected by coaching but changing shot mechanics is sort of like changing a pitchers mechanics, sometimes it works, but a lot of the time it doesn't so I'm not holding my breath.

Needless to say for Booker to become a useful player at all during his rookie season he needs to man up and become a terror on the glass. Lastly, I think Bookers absolute peak is James Singleton of last year, why uses a good pick on Booker when you can have Singleton for the minimum?

[closg00]

If he can just hit the boards better and find his way into a semi decent jumper, he's a respectable 8th man as far as I'm concerned.

Call me skeptical, but I think the odds are stacked against Booker in developing a semi decent jumper. First, how many times did we say DMac is a good jumper away from being a legit player in the league? Second, roughly 40% of Bookers shots are jumpers and guess what his eFG% is? That's right... .077%. For comparison purposes roughly 20% of Shaq's shots are jumpers and he hits them at a .571 eFG%. Granted Shaq's jumpers aren't 18 footers like Bookers, but the stats speak for themselves. Third, Booker doesn't really have great form on his jumper. I'm sure it can be corrected by coaching but changing shot mechanics is sort of like changing a pitchers mechanics, sometimes it works, but a lot of the time it doesn't so I'm not holding my breath.

Needless to say for Booker to become a useful player at all during his rookie season he needs to man up and become a terror on the glass. Lastly, I think Bookers absolute peak is James Singleton of last year, why uses a good pick on Booker when you can have Singleton for the minimum?

+1 Well-said.

[Hoopalotta]

To me, Booker is more explosive and bursty than Singleton, thus fitting better with the idea of uptempo ball. I'm not saying Trevor will outpace him, but they are different players. If we're talking out of position, Singleton's more a guy who could matchup with certain centers if you squint just so, while Booker's more a guy who plugs in against certain small forwards.

But I wouldn't see is as either or as Jimmy Shingles is the guy we should have retained this offseason if we were genuinely trying to win this year and with that happening instead of the Yi deal (and as noted by many, the argument that this team was purposely sabotaged with half a mind on guaranteeing minutes for McGee or even Seraphin seems solid - as Willbcocks said early this summer after the Armyi acquisitions, "the rosters starving and Ernie's serving up cucumber salad". The lapses were so egregious that it's hard to believe that it wasn't on purpose). I would suspect our interior on the defensive end as far as FG% and defensive rebounding would be significantly ahead of our near last place standing.

As to Bookers J, it's not a thing of beauty by any means, but his college shooting was more functional overall than McGuire's by percentage. We'll see - I'm not putting any wooden nickles on it. But at this point, even guys drafted as small forwards or guards aren't putting up much better percentages on their J's. I think James Anderson and Jordan Crawford are about the only rookies selected mid-late who have shot well from outside thus far (Fields and Vasquez have been OK too; I might be forgetting someone else). If his jumper doesn't develop, it's true that limits him a lot.

I will say that I like Booker oodles and scadoodles better than Yi at the 4 (Armstrong's really our backup pivot, as it were, so I'll leave him out of it).