Trevor Booker

[GhostsOfGil]

If I had to pick 5-6 guys to build around, Booker would be one of them, along with Wall, Singleton, Vesely (if we can get an outside shooter, I think this will do wonders for Jan), and Mack.

Truth be told, the only players I care to build around are Wall and Booker. I'm apathetic about everyone else.

[Nivek]

Booker isn't a "build around" player. I like him a lot. I thought he should have been in the starting lineup for this group a long time before he finally got there. But he's a role player, not a building block.

[Rafael122]

Booker isn't a "build around" player. I like him a lot. I thought he should have been in the starting lineup for this group a long time before he finally got there. But he's a role player, not a building block.

You can have role players who are building blocks though, I feel. But that's just me. I'm not suggesting he's an all star, but someone that you can pair along with a couple of superstars.

[Nivek]

A guy like Booker is nice to have on the roster. My point is that you don't make personnel moves based on already having him the way you do with someone like Wall. In other words: because Wall is on the roster, the Wizards don't need a PG. Even with Booker on the roster, the Wizards still need a PF.

[Rafael122]

A guy like Booker is nice to have on the roster. My point is that you don't make personnel moves based on already having him the way you do with someone like Wall. In other words: because Wall is on the roster, the Wizards don't need a PG. Even with Booker on the roster, the Wizards still need a PF.

Oh I agree with that, but just hypothetically speaking, say we get Davis in the draft. Booker at the 4 wouldn't sound appealing?

[Nivek]

Booker as a backup PF would be good. I don't see him as a long-term starter. Even with someone like Davis in the middle.

[Higga]

Right now Booker is the perfect backup PF, but I'm hopeful he can develop into a quality starter like a Udonis Haslem type.

[Severn Hoos]

I think he's the kind of guy you keep on your team and figure out the exact role later. Not the kind with elite talent to will push aside everyone else to make room for him, but not a throwaway either.

I also think his makeup is perfect for the type to be a 25 minute per game sub/spot starter in exactly the way that Blatche is not. That's why I'm not usually a fan of having "potential" (certainly not too much of it) on the bench. Those types of guys tend to think they deserve more PT before they've earned it, and then - even if they do break out - you have the challenge of paying to keep them happy.

A guy like Booker who understands and accepts his role - instead of trying to be someone he isn't - is actually more valuable in my book than the "untapped potential" which too often remains untapped. There's a definite role for the Bookers, Steve Blakes, Chuck Hayes, and all the other guys who may never be full-time starters but still give you great value night in and night out.

Oh, and it sure is fun to go back to the first few pages of this thread and see the handwringing - if not the pick itself, then definitely for the trade that brought us Booker. How have we managed without Solomon Alabi or Hassan Whiteside these past two years?

[GhostsOfGil]

Booker isn't a "build around" player. I like him a lot. I thought he should have been in the starting lineup for this group a long time before he finally got there. But he's a role player, not a building block.

I agree, I was merely stating that based off our current roster, Wall and Booker are the only 2 players I care about retaining moving forward.

[nate33]

Booker isn't a "build around" player. I like him a lot. I thought he should have been in the starting lineup for this group a long time before he finally got there. But he's a role player, not a building block.

I agree, I was merely stating that based off our current roster, Wall and Booker are the only 2 players I care about retaining moving forward.

Exactly. I wouldn't be at all disappointed if anyone on this team is traded with the exception of Wall and Booker. They're the only guys I like and I can envision playing a key role on a 50-win team.

[Nivek]

Booker isn't a "build around" player. I like him a lot. I thought he should have been in the starting lineup for this group a long time before he finally got there. But he's a role player, not a building block.

I agree, I was merely stating that based off our current roster, Wall and Booker are the only 2 players I care about retaining moving forward.

Yeah, we're in complete agreement then. nate too.

[tontoz]

There is only 1 ball and 5 players so when you have a guy who can have a big influence on the game without a high usage rate that is pretty valuable. Plus he is on the 2nd year of his rookie deal so his production is coming very cheaply and won't be a hindrance to bringing in a legit star player.

[DCZards]

Oh, and it sure is fun to go back to the first few pages of this thread and see the handwringing - if not the pick itself, then definitely for the trade that brought us Booker. How have we managed without Solomon Alabi or Hassan Whiteside these past two years?

Yeah, I've thought recently about all the naysayers when the Zards moved up to draft Booker. Not to boast, but this is what I wrote the day after the Zards drafted Trevor.

We already know about Booker's toughness and motor...combine that with his maturity (4 years in a tough conference) and athleticism and methinks EG knew exactly what he was doing when he moved up to draft Booker. In the final analysis, picking 30 and 35 were crapshoots anyway (as another poster pointed out) so why not move up to make sure you get the guy you REALLY want...someone you also brought in for a workout.

[closg00]

I have come-forward to receive my punishment Booker has far exceeded my expectations, his improved shooting is even more shocking to me.

This-time Ernie's fixation on a player has paid-off for us. OTOH, Ernie has swung on foreign project-players: Pech, Seraphin, & Vesely, all not worthy of where they were picked. Many of the other guys in Booker's draft class have been buried on the bench, so some of those other guys could pan-out as-well.

[CntOutSmrtCrazy]

Who ever compared Trevor Booker to Etan Thomas, or even a slightly better version of Etan, couldn't be further from the truth. I've been avid fan of this team since the season Gil came here, I saw Etan play quite extensively, and beg to ask how are they alike or even similar? Let me break it down.

Position-

Etan: Center. No ifs, ands, or buts about this one.

Booker: PF/SF. I see Booker as a tweener forward. He's not in the tweener mold of Jamison because he's capable of defending both position at an above average level. Now would I suggest putting Booker on elite wings, probably not, but I do think he could do okay if he was needed to and at the very least he would be in good position more often than not. He can also play some center when needed as he did last night and be effective on both ends, granted we would need a larger sample size, but at this point Javale is getting abused by any center that puts on a jersey.

Height/Length-

Etan: Undersized, but made up for some of it with strength. He also had a decent wing-spand if memory serves me correct, which made him a decent shot blocker; averaged a little over 2 bpg in that one good, contract season he had.

Booker: Undersized at the 4, good size at the 3, also makes up for his lack of size at the 4 with strength.
Booker's, because of his speed also, length makes him a threat for steals. He's had 11 games this season with 2+ steal (five with 3+) and is averaging 1.1 for the season. He's increasingly becoming a better shot blocker averaging almost a block per game this season.

Speed/Agility/Athleticism/Lateral movement/Strength-

Etan: Average speed for a center, agility was non-existence, his athleticism at best was average (and that's a big stretch IMO), and Etan's lateral movement was poor, he was often blown by opposing big men. His strength was his biggest assets, its probably the main factor for him even being in the league.

Booker: Great speed for a 3, even better at the four (likewise for agility). He has great hops and athleticism and from what I've seen, this season in particular, he has a good ability to stay in front of his man. Booker is also strong, maybe not as strong as Etan (although I could debate that as well), but he doesn't get pushed around and he does a good job at keeping guys away from their spots.

Rebounding/Defense-

Etan: He was a decent rebounder, nothing special in the least; to his credit he probably was an above average offensive rebounder. Despite being a decent shot blocker during his peak year's, Etan was a poor defender. Some of it was out of his control because his lack of height at Center, but more had to do with his horrible lateral speed. I know, at least some of you, remember how it used to pain us to watch Haywood rot on the bench because Etan was EJ's BFF and because there was little to no doubt that Brendan had slept with EJ's wife.

Booker: He isn't a great rebounder yet, but has shown some signs of life; he averaged almost 8 rpg in February. I think he could end up being a some-what, to a fair amount better rebounder than Etan in this aspect. I think Booker is a good defender, better at moments than I ever saw Etan, and he's only a second year player. We all know defense is something that is learned and gained (yes most players have to show early on that they are capable of playing it for it to develop) and Trevor has shown to be both willing and effective.

Scoring/Passing-

Etan: Had streaks were he could give you some points down low, never truly consistent though; he didn't really have one move that you could say you even had a fair amount of confidence with. What really made him sucktastic on offense is that he couldn't pass worth a damn, or maybe it was because he wasn't a willing passer; we all know the black-hole he was when he got the ball (in his defense he knew he wouldn't get the ball much with Gil-Antawn-Hughes/Butler).

Booker: He's grown lightyears in this aspect since his rookie year. He has solid foot worker, goes up strong and had shown the ability to consistently knock down a lefty or righty hook or give a solid drop step and power up for a layup. He also has shown a good awareness to knowing where his defender is going to be, making it harder for opponents to swat his shot; whats the word I'm looking for....crafty, he just has some eye-opening savvy for a player as young as him. He's also a fast-break offensive player who can get a lot of dunks and layups in transition. I've also seen him make good progress at making good cuts to the rim, which is important when playing with a PG like Wall. His shot is the biggest question, will it continue to show signs of progress? If he can be a reliable 14-17 jumper he could develop into a decent option for kick-outs and making teams pay for doubling other players. I wouldn't say Booker is great at any one aspect of scoring, but I can't say in the same breath he's bad at any of them either, and if anything he's shown some drastic improvements in only year two. Also he's an above average passer for his position. If anything he has the savvy, sensibility and team-first ability to pass the ball when his shot isn't there.

Conclusion-

All in all I'd rather have today's Booker than peak Etan past, present or future. I didn't even cover intangibles such as health, potential, BBIQ, and so on (which Booker again to me dominates) and I think Booker is clearly the better player as well as them having very few similarities. The best comparisons you could offer me for the two are that they are undersized at their positions (Not SF for Booker, but a the 4 and 5 he'll sometimes have to man) and that they both have good energy and motors. Another major aspect is that the jury is still out on Booker (2nd year player) and he still seems to be the far and away better player. I'm not going to go overboard and say that Booker is a perennial All-Star (although one day if we get good as a team he could potentially make one or two) and what not, but he's definitely a piece to the puzzle. I just like everything about him, but most importantly his toughness and mentality. If he turned out to be, like someone else said, a Udonis Haslem-type player with a greater variety of skill and ability, I'd be very, very happy.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Booker isn't a "build around" player. I like him a lot. I thought he should have been in the starting lineup for this group a long time before he finally got there. But he's a role player, not a building block.

I agree, I was merely stating that based off our current roster, Wall and Booker are the only 2 players I care about retaining moving forward.

Exactly. I wouldn't be at all disappointed if anyone on this team is traded with the exception of Wall and Booker. They're the only guys I like and I can envision playing a key role on a 50-win team.

Not me. I can envision a lot of the Wizard players playing key roles on a 50-win team. Wall and Booker. Also, Blatche, Young, and McGee with the right veteran cast. Remember DeShawn Stevenson playing significant minutes in the NBA Finals? A lot of current Wizards can play in the right situation.

Right now, the losing has left a real bad impression. The mistakes by Javale McGee have people really thinking he's a worthless player, and Booker is better. I don't think so. Booker IS a scrapper and one feisty guy, but Javale can do things Trevor cannot dream of doing. McGee on the right team can contribute mightily.

Andray Blatche is a bum for the Wizards. Andray Blatche next to Kevin Garnett would not be a bum. Andray Blatche at C for the Heat would be better than what they have IMO. Blatche could also help a team like Portland, with Camby really slipping. How much better is Kendrick Perkins than Blatche, if at all? Andray could be a decent sixth man for a lot of teams.

Nick Young off the bench for the Lakers could help them. He's not a world-beater but he could contribute. He's not as good as James Harden. He's not as talented physically as Jr Smith. However, could you see Nick Young on the Bulls next to Derrick Rose? I sure could.

Washington's problem is they're too young all over and players just aren't a good fit with each other. Wall doesn't need slashers and streaky players who have no range around him. He needs shooters. Javale doesn't need an undersized PF or a soft slothful PF next to him, he needs a banger with size next to him.

As to who the Wizards could trade, I still say anybody can be traded. Wall won't be, but I suggested trading him for Irving in the past. Wall is great now, but anybody can be traded. I don't think I would be too upset if any Wizard were traded at this point. I think the thing the Wizards SHOULD DO is just move Blatche and Lewis off the roster. They should not move forward with Nick. It is time to part ways with Javale because of too many bad vibes, perhaps. Still, they might be better off getting Joerger as coach and getting a true PF next to McGee.

I think the talent on the Wizards is mainly just young and not a great fit. This team with a power player and some good three-point shooters would be much better. There are players on the Wizards who WILL BE CONTRIBUTORS on good teams for a long time IMO.

[Illuminaire]

Maybe it's the irrational pessimist in me - goodness knows being a Wiz fan breeds that - but Booker's current play concerns me slightly.

See, he's now playing just slightly better than backup quality. He's doing fringe starter type production. Does that mean he won't be satisfied going back to the bench? Because it's great that he's playing like the 25th best PF in the league if he's your first big off the bench, but it's pretty depressing if he's your go to guy from tip-off.

[tontoz]

My gripe with Booker is still his rebounding. He will have some strong rebounding games here and there but just isn't consistent.

I definitely think he won't be happy if he losses his starting job this season. Playing behind Blatche would be especially tough.

[DCZards]

I wouldn't worry about Booker's rebounds or whether or not he'd be unhappy coming off the bench after being a starter. I say we just enjoy what he's giving us right now and worry about what happens down the road when the time comes.

If Booker is the kind of player/person that I think he is, he'll bust his butt to become an even better player and make it hard for anyone other than an elite player to take his starting job. In fact, if the Zards get lucky enough to draft Anthony Davis, I think Booker would be the perfect complement at PF since the Zards are going to want a tough, physical player alongside Davis.

Right now, Booker's numbers are similar to those of Paul Milsap in his first couple of years in the league. And, if Trevor can develop a consistent jumper like Millsap has, I could see him having a similar impact. Booker and Millsap are the same height, Millsap is about 10 lbs heavier, but Booker is the superior athlete.

Not suggesting that Booker will be as good as Millsap, who has turned out to be an excellent PF, but you never know.

[tontoz]

I like Booker but his current rebound rate of 14 doesn't compare well with Milsap's rookie mark of 17.4. With his athleticism there is no reason for him not to be a strong rebounder. His effort on the boards just doesn't seem to be there a lot of nights.

I definitely like what i see from him on offense and defense, but the rebounding needs some attention. Milsap is currently 12th among 4s in rebound rate. Booker is 34th.