Donovan Mitchell or Devin Booker, who would you rather have 5 years from now

[Lockdown504090]

Mitchell athleticism won’t be like this in five years, booker will still be 6’6

[TheZachAttack]

I'm taking Mitchell because I don't like the changes that Booker has made to his game over the past few years and especially this season.

During his best scoring years Booker averaged about 22-23% of his shots inside of 3 feet. This year that percentage has dropped to just 10%. In addition, Booker now shoots almost 40% of his shots between 10-23 feet (midrange) compared to about 30% in his best scoring years. In addition to that he averages another 16% of his shots from the short-mid-range area (3-10 feet) meaning that he now takes about 55% of his shots from low percentage areas of the floor.

He's a decent shooter from these areas 45-48% but the ultimate result is that even if he's a great shotmaker... he's not getting to the line nearly as much (just under 5 times per game versus around 7-7.5 times in his best scoring years).The culmination of all of this is a drop in eFG% to 51.8% and TS% to 56.2% from his best years around 53.5-55% * 58.5-61% respectively.

Maybe this shot selection will work in the playoffs when shotmaking is at a premium, but for now to me it looks like Booker has either regressed or purposefully made changes to become more of a jump shooter that's reliant on making tough midrange shots at the expense of getting to the rim and the free throw line. In fact, he only averages 2.5 shots inside the restricted area per game currently.

Mitchell's shots at the rim are trending downwards as well, but it's as a tradeoff for more 3's as opposed to midrange shots. I will take Mitchell's shot selection including his 4.5 attempts at the rim per game & 10 3's versus Booker's 2.5 shots at the rim and 7 3's instead of the 5 additional midrange shots that Booker takes per game. Mitchell is just as good of a shooter as Booker from the midrange by percentage but more often looks for the better shot than Booker does today.

I don't think Booker is a changed player from "his empty stat days" . Or if I did think that, I would suggest that he plays more like a chucker and someone who would put up empty volume scoring stats without being buoyed by a strong supporting cast and secondary stars around him. In general, I don't really buy into empty stat narratives but for example if you were to switch Beal/Booker teams... I don't think Booker drives better outcomes for the Wizards than what Beal has been able to do. That's not a knock I think the hate players who play with terrible supporting casts get for their team struggling is BS.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The real answer is actually neither Booker or Mitchell and instead Lavine. Lavine gets to the rim even more often than Mitchell and much more often than Booker. Booker/Mitchell are volume shooters that can hit any perimeter shots and get hot, but Lavine is truly an elite shooter. He not only gets to the rim twice the amount of Booker and is a better finisher then them both but he is a much more efficient jump shooter from most areas on the court as well while providing similar levels of secondary playmaking while also having the lowest usage rate of the 3 (and best able to play both on the ball or off of another primary creator).

So, my real answer is Lavine. Lavine may be 2 years older but I think his game will age better than Booker or Mitchell and even in a world where all transition more towards perimeter and midrange jump shooters I think Lavine has the best jump shot. I will take Lavine over the next 5 years over Booker/Mitchell and likely for another 2-3 years after that.

I respect the argument... but a lot of this is flawed.

Booker hasn't needed to get to the rim as much as he did in the first few years, with Ayton, Bridges, and Crowder in the lineup. Plus, hes no longer the primary ball handler (though he is more than capable), with CP3 being there.

Booker has slowly expanded his game in adding in more 3s, more playmaking, and more 1on1 moves to get his shot off. I'd also argue in the postseason, that Booker's game translates better because the mid-range/long 2s are gonna be the shots that people give you the most the way defense is played.

Lavine might very well be the better player, but I'd question if both Mitchell and LaVine's games will age as their athleticism reduces. Booker's game isn't predicated around athleticism, which both Mitchell and LaVine use extremely well to help them get their shots off.

Thanks I agree that this is the right counter argument. I did make a note that I think it's possible that the style of play will translate better to the playoffs. I think that's something that I want to watch during this playoffs and learn. In addition, this is helpful context as somone who doesn't get to see Booker play ALL that often.

I think that's an interesting argument on the Mitchell side. In my opinion in some ways Booker is making a choice that makes him a less efficient offensive player when I don't think he has to do so. I would still rather have a player who tries to get to the rim & the free throw line and can hit tough shots from midrange if he's unable to get there than one that completely avoids the restricted area. In addition, Mitchell has similar midrange shooting percentages to Booker so I think it's a false choice to say that because Mitchell hasn't molded his game as mid-range heavy as Booker that he couldn't start to take more midrange shots as his athleticism declines.

Lavine can also hit midrange 2's especially a dribble or two inside the 3 point line to hit those shots in the playoffs. He has generally been an above average or better shooter in those areas. I disagree that Lavine's game will age more poorly because I think in a world where Lavine can no longer get all the way to the rim he will still be able to create his own shot on the perimeter with his handle and I think Lavine's perimeter jumper is the best weapon or skill that any of this group has.

In addition, getting to the rim is as much about handle, angles, and body control as it is pure explosion. I think even an aging Lavine with declining athleticism will be able to better get to his spots and create more separation than Mitchell or Booker. Now maybe Booker is a slightly better contested shot maker, but I don't want any part of a 30 year old contested perimeter & midrange reliant jump shooter who isn't a true primary playmaker as the focal point of my offense.

What that really means is you have a worse playmaking version of D Lo.

[johanliebert]

Easily Mitchell imo. He has another gear in thr playoffs.

Booker in his first postseason had 47 in a closeout game against the Lakers, 34 in a closeout game against Denver, and back-to-back 40+ point games in the NBA Finals.

What is your evidence that Mitchell has another gear and Booker does not?

Mitchell's last two postseasons (17 games) vs Booker's 2021 (22 games)

PPG/TS%
Mitchell: 33.9 ppg / .640 ts%
Booker: 27.3 ppg / .558 ts%

% of FGs assisted
Mitchell: 9.5% 2P / 27.7% 3P
Booker: 32.1% 2P / 56.8% 3P

APG/TO
Mitchell: 5.2 apg / 3.4 to
Booker: 4.5 apg / 3.7 to

OBPM/ORtg
Mitchell: 8.6 OBPM / 124 ORtg
Booker: 0.7 OBPM / 106 ORtg

These stats may not be perfect but they certainly tell a consistent story with Mitchell leading in every single one. Mitchell scored much higher volume at absurdly higher efficiency while being set up far less and producing more assists with a better A/TO ratio. And Mitchell played alongside worse offensive talent too.

High volume scorer is an understatement he takes about 23 shots per game. What sun players are more offensively talented than bogdanovic and clarkson? Time to do more than run to the stats sheets that’s where these narratives derive from/

[Dutchball97]

Booker in his first postseason had 47 in a closeout game against the Lakers, 34 in a closeout game against Denver, and back-to-back 40+ point games in the NBA Finals.

What is your evidence that Mitchell has another gear and Booker does not?

Mitchell's last two postseasons (17 games) vs Booker's 2021 (22 games)

PPG/TS%
Mitchell: 33.9 ppg / .640 ts%
Booker: 27.3 ppg / .558 ts%

% of FGs assisted
Mitchell: 9.5% 2P / 27.7% 3P
Booker: 32.1% 2P / 56.8% 3P

APG/TO
Mitchell: 5.2 apg / 3.4 to
Booker: 4.5 apg / 3.7 to

OBPM/ORtg
Mitchell: 8.6 OBPM / 124 ORtg
Booker: 0.7 OBPM / 106 ORtg

These stats may not be perfect but they certainly tell a consistent story with Mitchell leading in every single one. Mitchell scored much higher volume at absurdly higher efficiency while being set up far less and producing more assists with a better A/TO ratio. And Mitchell played alongside worse offensive talent too.

High volume scorer is an understatement he takes about 23 shots per game. What sun players are more offensively talented than bogdanovic and clarkson? Time to do more than run to the stats sheets that’s where these narratives derive from/

So you dismiss massive statistical evidence in favor of Mitchell and then ask which Suns players are more offensively talented than Bogdanovic and Clarkson? How are you going to measure this offensive talent if not stats? Or do you just stick to basic shooting % and PPG for your evaluation of offensive talent (pretty much the only way to rate Clarkson and Bogdanovic that highly)?

[rand]

Booker in his first postseason had 47 in a closeout game against the Lakers, 34 in a closeout game against Denver, and back-to-back 40+ point games in the NBA Finals.

What is your evidence that Mitchell has another gear and Booker does not?

Mitchell's last two postseasons (17 games) vs Booker's 2021 (22 games)

PPG/TS%
Mitchell: 33.9 ppg / .640 ts%
Booker: 27.3 ppg / .558 ts%

% of FGs assisted
Mitchell: 9.5% 2P / 27.7% 3P
Booker: 32.1% 2P / 56.8% 3P

APG/TO
Mitchell: 5.2 apg / 3.4 to
Booker: 4.5 apg / 3.7 to

OBPM/ORtg
Mitchell: 8.6 OBPM / 124 ORtg
Booker: 0.7 OBPM / 106 ORtg

These stats may not be perfect but they certainly tell a consistent story with Mitchell leading in every single one. Mitchell scored much higher volume at absurdly higher efficiency while being set up far less and producing more assists with a better A/TO ratio. And Mitchell played alongside worse offensive talent too.

High volume scorer is an understatement he takes about 23 shots per game. What sun players are more offensively talented than bogdanovic and clarkson? Time to do more than run to the stats sheets that’s where these narratives derive from/

You seem not to realize that scoring higher volume (6.6 ppg) at (absurdly) higher efficiency is massively complimentary to Mitchell.

As for Bogdanovic and Clarkson, in the two postseasons captured above Mitchell shared the floor with Bogdanovic for only 52% of Mitchell's minutes and Clarkson only 48%. O'Neale (88%) and Gobert (82%) were the only stable fixtures for Mitchell, with Ingles (56%) and Conley (33%) far behind them.

Meanwhile Booker shared the floor with Paul for 63% of his minutes, Bridges 73%, Crowder 76% and Ayton 84% with the vast majority of the remainder shared with Cam Johnson (35%) and Cam Payne (33%).

Maybe it's time for you to actually look at the stat sheet and critically examine the narratives you've constructed.

[Sushimon]

In 5 Years, definitely Book. His game does not rely on athleticism like Spida. In the physical nature of the game and the quantity of bodies thrown at an allstar, in 5 yrs they are likely to experience dings here and there. This is less likely to affect Booker's game. If you watch him, his game is very controlled and methodical with a combination of elite shooting whereas Spida breaks defenders down by relying on his burst and ability to play above the rim.

Books game speed follows the same cadence as Steph, Klay or Durant. All of whom have experienced significant injuries but have been able to come back and perform at an elite level.

Spidas game speed is like Westbrook (with better shooting ability obviously). When you take away the athletic edge, the player get knocked down to a much lower tier, borderline role player.

[Harry Garris]

It's close but Devin Booker has been a much improved defensive player the past couple of years so I'll take the guy who plays both sides of the floor.

Plus - Donovan Mitchell has been a disaster in clutch situations this year. He's stepped up in the playoffs in big spots in years past so maybe he can turn it around but this season it's been bad.

[LV-Suns]

People who keeps saying Booker is a bad defender hasn’t been paying attention. Ask Mitchell’s teammate who is the better defender.

[Mogspan]

The taller one

[Backcountry]

Mitchell only because Booker has such a punchable face.

[Woodsanity]

I'd probably go Mitchell due to my perceived ability to play defense better than Booker.

But I wouldn't want either as a #1, they need an MVP next to them. (admittedly I have no idea how the Suns are as good as they are with their roster)

This is literally the opposite. None of the Jazz players can guard a garbage can besides Gobert. onovan Mitchell is a much worse defender than Booker who has improved.

[Karate Diop]

Mitchell pretty easily. Booker would flounder if in Mitchell's position.

[LAL1947]

This is hard because they're both good, young players. So I'll default to Devin Booker for now simply because he's a few inches taller (for the defensive implications).

[Funcrusher]

Mitchell and I'm honestly befuddled people are picking Book here. Yeah, I'm going to pick the player 5 years from now who's already clearly better, size/aging athleticism disadvantage notwithstanding

[Statlanta]

Mitchell because he has more playoff experience.

[sp6r=underrated]

I'd probably go Mitchell due to my perceived ability to play defense better than Booker.

But I wouldn't want either as a #1, they need an MVP next to them. (admittedly I have no idea how the Suns are as good as they are with their roster)

This is literally the opposite. None of the Jazz players can guard a garbage can besides Gobert. onovan Mitchell is a much worse defender than Booker who has improved.

People talk about Gobert getting exposed in the PS. That's false. What gets exposed is asking 1 great defender to carry a bunch of miserable defenders.

[MalonesElbows]

It's close. Mitchell is the #1 SG in the league by RPM this year, Booker #3. Mitchell has to work very hard for his points playing with an old school, no range center.

[SunsWinSunsWin]

Book is the better player now and will be in the future. Mitchell is too wild and no way is he a better defender than Book. Maybe in the past but Book has earned himself a reputation of now being one of the better two way players in the game. He also manages the game better than Mitchell and has a killer competitive spirit that is on the same level as MJ and Kobe. Yes, I said it. Competitive spirit wise, he is on their level. The man is proud to call himself a sore loser and he is, in such a great way as a Suns fan.

Am I biased, of course. But I would without hesitation pick Book over the Spida now and from here on out.

[Optimus_Steel]

I think Bookers game Wii age better than Mitchells.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using RealGM mobile app

[KingFox]

Booker for me. He seems to be a lot more efficient