Would Hersey Hawkins be near Booker's level in this era

[migya]

Heresy Hawkins was among the best outside shooters of his era, volume and percentage. If he was in this era, would he be at Devin Booker's level and would he be able to be the best player on a contending team as well?

[LA Bird]

No

[MyUniBroDavis]

Smelly take

[70sFan]

No, definitely not prime Booker. He was smaller and he doesn't have any advantage regarding skillset or athleticism.

[homecourtloss]

[MyUniBroDavis]

High tier answer

[Moonbeam]

As much as you're getting some flak for this, I don't think it's outrageous to suggest that Hawkins at his best was on a similar level to Booker. Personally, I'm not that high on Booker as a player and am pretty high on Hawkins, so that is largely shaping my perspective. I agree that Booker has some advantages with size and a more modern skillset, but I don't think he's a better shooter than Hawkins, and I also feel like Hersey was not such a sieve on defense. Booker's still got some time to improve his game further, and I expect him to do just that, but at present, I don't think he's made this comparison as laughable as the replies are suggesting.

[BuddyBuckets]

Hawkins' All Star season was very impressive statistically. But he didn't really sustain that peak at all and I think he was nowhere near as well-rounded offensively as Book is. I think Hawkins is likely a better defender but maybe a touch small to guard SG's

Interesting idea for a topic. Only saw Hawkins play later in his career, he was a bit of an afterthought on offence by then.

[SpreeS]

HH had only one season which we could compare with Booker prime and we dont know if we saw Booker peak.

[Harry Palmer]

I mean, niche doesn’t cover it. Well done, sir.

[migya]

As much as you're getting some flak for this, I don't think it's outrageous to suggest that Hawkins at his best was on a similar level to Booker. Personally, I'm not that high on Booker as a player and am pretty high on Hawkins, so that is largely shaping my perspective. I agree that Booker has some advantages with size and a more modern skillset, but I don't think he's a better shooter than Hawkins, and I also feel like Hersey was not such a sieve on defense. Booker's still got some time to improve his game further, and I expect him to do just that, but at present, I don't think he's made this comparison as laughable as the replies are suggesting.

I'll leave the flak to the rest. You're right that Hawkins was a better defender but his shooting was very good. He became a third option after he left Philly and he settled into those roles well. He could've continued at his level had he been on a team where he was a clear second option, like San Antonio, where he'd have been a very good fit.

[Clyde Frazier]

Nope, but an excuse to give a shout out to Hawkins’ absurd senior year numbers at Bradley: 36.3 PPG, 7.8 RPG, 3.6 APG, 2.6 SPG on 52/39/84 splits (7.1 3PA, 64% TS). They went 26-5 that year.

[tsherkin]

Hawkins didn't have Booker's passing or the breadth of options he had beneath the arc. Booker is more than just a 3pt shooter and was several inches shorter than Booker on top of all that. Sure, similar at the line and perhaps similar in terms of 3pt shooting translated forward to today, but not a comparable level of player.

[Colbinii]

Hawkins was great for his 4-year peak stretch. 20/4/3.5 with 1.9 steals and 2.4 turnovers on 540 TS+ [135 TS+/Year] and 104 eFG+ and 2.0 OBPM and 22% USG% puts him in a class as a solid 3rd option. He wasn't good enough offensively to carry a large burden for a number of reasons, but the main would be lack oflack of playmaking ability.

However, the comparison falls short as Booker was able to be productive on a massive 32 USG% [Nearly 50% higher usage than Hawkins].

I'm not all that high on Booker [Top 10-20 guy] but the gap is clearly there as caliber of players.

[HeartBreakKid]

As much as you're getting some flak for this, I don't think it's outrageous to suggest that Hawkins at his best was on a similar level to Booker. Personally, I'm not that high on Booker as a player and am pretty high on Hawkins, so that is largely shaping my perspective. I agree that Booker has some advantages with size and a more modern skillset, but I don't think he's a better shooter than Hawkins, and I also feel like Hersey was not such a sieve on defense. Booker's still got some time to improve his game further, and I expect him to do just that, but at present, I don't think he's made this comparison as laughable as the replies are suggesting.

I think in part because the poster almost always makes threads that compare 90s players in a favorable light. Hard to take a question seriously when there is a motive behind it.

[ronnymac2]

I'm somebody who likes Hersey Hawkins and believes he's underrated. If he's never made an all-star team, then he's probably the best player to never do so. I might be wrong and maybe he made one. The point I'm trying to make is I appreciate the guy's skillet.

It's definitely outrageous to suggest these two were on the same level. Devin Booker is the prototype shooting guard. He doesn't do anything poorly. Not saying his 2023 season is on the level of a Kobe or Wade or MJ or anything like that, but he was damn sure in the argument for being a top-5 player this past season. That's a level Hawkins never came close to.

[Colbinii]

I prefer Hawkins to Richmond.

[penbeast0]

You may have the wrong Phoenix guard for this comp. I said when the Wiz drafted Brad Beal that he reminded me of Hawkins though his defense regressed as a pro rather than progressing. Of course Hawkins never score with Beal's level of volume but stylistically they reminded me of each other.