Devin Booker future extension

[Phrazbit]

Allelujah - someone finally gets it, but to add (again) you have to ask why he's always taking tough shots.

Is it just that he has bad team mates and a bad PG (but KD and Durant also did and they improved their 2pt% year on year) or is he just not physically gifted enough to find easier ones?

Cheesebeef loves to rail on Doncic for his lack of athleticism, that he will get killed by bigger and faster players, so there's no reason why the same isn't at play with Booker.

But that's no reason not to pay him the max and it's not like he couldn't tailor his game- if necessary - to become more of a pure shooter (i.e. 3pt baller) and less of a driver, as much as it will be a shame to see the tough shots he makes (relatively infrequently) fall by the wayside.

But you still were knocking him as a shooter in general... and I couldn't disagree more, he has all the makings of a guy who can go down as one of the greatest shooters ever. Even with defenders collapsing on him and his teammates getting no respect, he still puts up crazy numbers, and at an efficiency that is historic for a player his age. He takes too many long 2's (but still crushes the NBA average from that distance) and struggles at the rim... but his rim struggles would be alleviated if the opposition respected his teammates, as is he gets collapsed upon when he drives, and despite how willing he is to dish it off, his teammates, largely have bricks for hands or garner zero respect from distance.

He is an amazing shooter, especially for his age, and any question about him being worth the max, given his age and output, is absolutely bonkers.

If we are not willing to max him then we might as well fold up shop... because his stats for his position and age are matched only by guys who are going in the hall on their first ballot.

 

[SirStefan32]

You think it's possible players might spend a game or five focusing on a certain aspect of their game e.g. passing, rather than play the exact same way for 82 games?

It's a long season, and in a dud one like ours you can afford to let players experiment and get comfortable with less familiar aspects of their game at the expense of their more usual ones.

I have become of one the bigger Bender fans over the season. I love that he has become a good shooter, I love the way he passes the ball, makes good decisions, plays defense, and doesn't complain. That said, he constantly passes open shots. If a player gets the ball within two feet of the rim, doing anything but dunking/ laying it in is not experimenting or focusing on other things. It is stupidity, and it is infuriating. For God's sake, I can remember four instances of this in the last three games. Each time he was so wide open, that *I* could have scored each time. Love Bender, but this one aspect of his game is infuriating.

 

[Covert Rain]

Good grief - it's about the shooting % that forms one part of PER, it just happens that this one part - shooting - carries the greatest weighting when calculating it.

And that's for good reason; it's the point of basketball - to score the ball - and, lucky for us, it's also the easiest and most non-grey area around which to measure someones basketball ability:

Did they put the ball in the hoop or not?

This is 100% measureable.

You can argue Booker takes tougher shots but he still takes them and misses them and there's no prizes for taking hard shots.

Yes, better team mates and a better PG will almost certainly help but what if Booker's slightly limited athleticism is to blame?

Again, his flatlined 2pt% just can't be ignored.


At no stage have I said he doesn't deserve the Max.

The point of basketball is not to score the ball. That happens to be with any sport the method by which you win the game. Booker's job is to LEAD. Something that PER or scoring doesn't show. Booker's job is to put the team in the best possible position to win. His job is to make key shots when they matter or put the team on his back. His job is to try and elevate the play of those around him.

Measurable doesn't mean everything and why coaches and scouts don't look up per and call it a day. There are a ton of intangibles that make up who a player is. If it was all about scoring people like Carmelo Anthony and laundry list of players who have been prolific scorers should have been locks for titles.

You can't simply take a stat without looking who is around him, what level of talent he has, what role HE is being asked to play on this team and say well....people are delusional about how good he is. The funny thing all anybody is talking about is his offense but look how much better the team seems to be when he and the others have been focused on STOPS. He has some work to do in that category but I guarantee you if he gets better on defense it will impact the team much more than improving his scoring average another point per game.

Like I said, I get what you are trying to say but it's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be. If he gets better people around him he won't be taking as many questionable 2 point shots.

 

[Treesquid PhD]

Booker is the James Harden that Babby couldn't trade for, I hope he gets the extension, but with the Euro clowns playing the YMCA competition we keep drafting he might be looking to leave and I don't blame him.

Maybe we need to start asking what can we get for Booker? Because our GM has no idea what he is doing.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

Booker is the James Harden that Babby couldn't trade for, I hope he gets the extension, but with the Euro clowns playing the YMCA competition we keep drafting he might be looking to leave and I don't blame him.

Maybe we need to start asking what can we get for Booker? Because our GM has no idea what he is doing.

This might be the silliest take I have seen yet...

Sounds good man, let’s trade our only legitimate piece out of the off chance he wants out.

Here’s a better idea. How about we do everything from here on out trying to build something solid around him and that way he doesn’t want out at all.

 

[Treesquid PhD]

This might be the silliest take I have seen yet...

Sounds good man, let’s trade our only legitimate piece out of the off chance he wants out.

Here’s a better idea. How about we do everything from here on out trying to build something solid around him and that way he doesn’t want out at all.

That's how I would do it. But the silliest take ever is Robert Sarver and his logic. I'd pay the man, your boy Sarver low balled Joe Jackson when he asked for 5 years 45 million. Maybe you think Jerry is still running the team? Because Sarver is that dumb, the results since 2010 are pretty clearly in my favor.

 

[3rdside]

I have become of one the bigger Bender fans over the season. I love that he has become a good shooter, I love the way he passes the ball, makes good decisions, plays defense, and doesn't complain. That said, he constantly passes open shots. If a player gets the ball within two feet of the rim, doing anything but dunking/ laying it in is not experimenting or focusing on other things. It is stupidity, and it is infuriating. For God's sake, I can remember four instances of this in the last three games. Each time he was so wide open, that *I* could have scored each time. Love Bender, but this one aspect of his game is infuriating.

I'm not saying it is or isn't but those layups he gave for a pass were were a 100% 2pt shot for him so it seems a bit fishy. That being said, never underestimate the lack of relative self confidence some of these euro guys gave either...tbc.

 

[3rdside]

The point of basketball is not to score the ball. That happens to be with any sport the method by which you win the game. Booker's job is to LEAD. Something that PER or scoring doesn't show. Booker's job is to put the team in the best possible position to win. His job is to make key shots when they matter or put the team on his back. His job is to try and elevate the play of those around him.

Measurable doesn't mean everything and why coaches and scouts don't look up per and call it a day. There are a ton of intangibles that make up who a player is. If it was all about scoring people like Carmelo Anthony and laundry list of players who have been prolific scorers should have been locks for titles.

You can't simply take a stat without looking who is around him, what level of talent he has, what role HE is being asked to play on this team and say well....people are delusional about how good he is. The funny thing all anybody is talking about is his offense but look how much better the team seems to be when he and the others have been focused on STOPS. He has some work to do in that category but I guarantee you if he gets better on defense it will impact the team much more than improving his scoring average another point per game.

Like I said, I get what you are trying to say but it's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be. If he gets better people around him he won't be taking as many questionable 2 point shots.

I'm not making anything cut and dry - everyone wants me to be doing that but I'm really not.

And it's going to be hard to argue if you don't think the point of basketball is to score, and score more than the other team.

 

[Covert Rain]

I'm not making anything cut and dry - everyone wants me to be doing that but I'm really not.

And it's going to be hard to argue if you don't think the point of basketball is to score, and score more than the other team.

There isn't an argument. It's not hard to understand that to win in any sports the method of winning is scoring MORE. The other side of that is preventing the other guy from doing so.

I don't think that equates to "the point" being simply scoring.

 

[3rdside]

But you still were knocking him as a shooter in general... and I couldn't disagree more, he has all the makings of a guy who can go down as one of the greatest shooters ever.

Sigh, no I wasn't. I said he isn't a great all around shooter (2pt, 3pt and FT's) because he's not; his 2pt% is bad enough that it drags him into the bottom half of all players playing > 500 minutes for TS%. I think everyone agrees that this is the best statistic for 'all around shooting'.

Even with defenders collapsing on him and his teammates getting no respect, he still puts up crazy numbers

There are no bonus points for taking tough shots and his 2pt%, which is not great and hasn't improved since he joined the league - unlike virtually every other star who played in the NBA - might suggest he just can't create good shots for himself.

and at an efficiency that is historic for a player his age.

I'm not sure I believe this until I see some evidence, but even if you do show me, 'age', while important, may not be as relevant as experience (i have no proof however) i.e who was doing what after how many years in the league rather than who was doing what at what age.

LBJ and KD destroy Booker for 3rd year rookie contract efficiency metrics which is why I'm doubtful about your claim.

He takes too many long 2's (but still crushes the NBA average from that distance) and struggles at the rim... but his rim struggles would be alleviated if the opposition respected his teammates, as is he gets collapsed upon when he drives, and despite how willing he is to dish it off, his teammates, largely have bricks for hands or garner zero respect from distance.

His struggles may also be to do with his relative lack of athleticim and not-long wingspan but yes, better team mates will help.

He is an amazing shooter, especially for his age,

3pt shooter, long 2pt shooter (those where he has a bit more space from the defender) I agree.

and any question about him being worth the max, given his age and output, is absolutely bonkers.

I think he's worth the max and I've always said so - but he's not nearly as big of a slam dunk as some of his predecessors (although he is far more worthy than many others; that Wiggins one is painful).

 

[3rdside]

There isn't an argument. It's not hard to understand that to win in any sports the method of winning is scoring MORE. The other side of that is preventing the other guy from doing so.

I don't think that equates to "the point" being simply scoring.

Not quite sure what your point is but one of the criticism's of PER is that it doesn't reward defensive ability. Or putting it another way, it doesn't penalise bad defensive ability which if it did would reduce Booker's PER further.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

Not quite sure what your point is but one of the criticism's of PER is that it doesn't reward defensive ability. Or putting it another way, it doesn't penalise bad defensive ability which if it did would reduce Booker's PER further.

PER is purely box score driven. That is the fundamental flaw with that stat. For instance it suggests that Westbrook is a very efficient player, but Westbrook has a 51% TS%. That automatically hurts the validity of that stat because Westbrook has very poor shooting stats and he turns the ball over a ton, but because he fills up the box score every night he has one of the highest PERs in the league.

 

[Mainstreet]

You think it's possible players might spend a game or five focusing on a certain aspect of their game e.g. passing, rather than play the exact same way for 82 games?

It's a long season, and in a dud one like ours you can afford to let players experiment and get comfortable with less familiar aspects of their game at the expense of their more usual ones.

As I recall, Bender's foundation was built around him successfully hitting the 3-point shot.

The next step in his progression, as I understand it, is for him to take the ball to the basket usually after a pump fake.

So when Bender passes out of layups, I have to wonder.

 

[Chaplin]

As I recall, Bender's foundation was built around him successfully hitting the 3-point shot.

The next step in his progression, as I understand it, is for him to take the ball to the basket usually after a pump fake.

So when Bender passes out of layups, I have to wonder.

A lot of what he does (or doesn't do in some cases) is mind-boggling. He's nearing the end of his second year! I get that Watson wasn't a good coach, and that almost certainly stunted his growth, but Triano is supposed to be better and a more traditional coach. The information coming out about how practices go and the eye test with Bender and Chriss is more and more proving that Triano is an abject failure in all respects.

How anybody can support anybody on this coaching staff is beyond me. It's inconceivable that Bender and Chriss can't figure this stuff out. Even Ulis looked like a serviceable NBA player last year, but this year, he's barely G-League material.

 

[Mainstreet]

A lot of what he does (or doesn't do in some cases) is mind-boggling. He's nearing the end of his second year! I get that Watson wasn't a good coach, and that almost certainly stunted his growth, but Triano is supposed to be better and a more traditional coach. The information coming out about how practices go and the eye test with Bender and Chriss is more and more proving that Triano is an abject failure in all respects.

How anybody can support anybody on this coaching staff is beyond me. It's inconceivable that Bender and Chriss can't figure this stuff out. Even Ulis looked like a serviceable NBA player last year, but this year, he's barely G-League material.

I think we will see a coaching change after the season after giving Triano the courtesy of an interview.

Coaching may be the easiest thing to change. The Suns have no reason to change coaches now with the lottery coming up. McDonough said in a recent interview the coaching search will start in April.

 

[Carolinacacti]

From what I can tell, a Max contract offer for a rookie coming off his 4 year deal (2 years guaranteed plus 2 years club options exercised and no super max qualifiers - all-nba teams, mvp or dpoy awards) will be for 25% of the cap as they have < 6 years experience. 7 - 10 years with one club entitles you to 30% of cap and > 10 years 35%.

Projected salary cap in 2019 is $108m, so Booker will be in line for $27m with 8% raises over 5 years (Bird rights allowing the latter two; it's 5% and 4 years if these don't exist) which equates to $158m over 5 years.

And it looks like he'll sign that this off season, only 3 years into his 4 year deal, to prevent him from becoming a restricted free agent after 4 years.

Which explains (to the previously ignorant like me) why McD was able to sign guys like warren to great deals; he tempts them with a multi year, 8 figure deal one year in advance of free agency.

I think this discussion will start when Booker is looking for that second Max deal.

 

[sunsfan88]

I have become of one the bigger Bender fans over the season. I love that he has become a good shooter, I love the way he passes the ball, makes good decisions, plays defense, and doesn't complain. That said, he constantly passes open shots. If a player gets the ball within two feet of the rim, doing anything but dunking/ laying it in is not experimenting or focusing on other things. It is stupidity, and it is infuriating. For God's sake, I can remember four instances of this in the last three games. Each time he was so wide open, that *I* could have scored each time. Love Bender, but this one aspect of his game is infuriating.

It's a pretty big aspect. Not taking shots when your supposed to (along with being in game shape consistently) is one of the main things what held Boris Diaw back as well.

 

[SirStefan32]

It's a pretty big aspect. Not taking shots when your supposed to (along with being in game shape consistently) is one of the main things what held Boris Diaw back as well.

Absolutely!

 

[3rdside]

PER is purely box score driven. That is the fundamental flaw with that stat. For instance it suggests that Westbrook is a very efficient player, but Westbrook has a 51% TS%. That automatically hurts the validity of that stat because Westbrook has very poor shooting stats and he turns the ball over a ton, but because he fills up the box score every night he has one of the highest PERs in the league.

How the hell else do you want to measure a players relative worth? PER has its flaws but it considers all aspects of the way a player plays (except defence as I've mentioned); it's why it has so much traction.

If you want to ignore it - and RPM (which is too heavily reliant on team mates) - you know what would be the single best metric to measure a player's worth?

Points Scored considering Shooting % (it's why this has the heaviest weighting in PER).

And here we are back to square one all over again - Booker is not a great All around shooter in current format because of his not great 2pt shooting %.

 

[Hoop Head]

Are we still debating on whether Booker is a good shooter? I don't recall ever hearing anyone call him a bad or poor shooter before reading this thread. His shot selection is what keeps him from raising his percentage higher than it is and that needs to improve but I think it will once he has better teammates to help him offensively. Booker was considered the best shooter in his draft, has made a number of clutch shots, and won the 3pt contest because of his shooting touch. He needs to start taking better shots but that's hard when he's carrying the scoring load for this team because other than Warren no one has consistently contributed more than 10 ppg. Adding another good scorer should help Booker improve his shot selection and his percentage because defenses won't be able to zone in on him like they have the last 2 years.

His shooting percentage hasn't leveled off, it has improved, so I don't know why you keep saying it hasn't. It is close to the same as his rookie year but he's taking almost double the attempts a game, going from 11.4 to 19.6. Compared to last year he's raised his 2pt and 3pt percentage by 2% each. His 2pt% has gone from 44.7% in his 2nd year to 46.5% this year on 18.3 attempts to 19.6 attempts a game. His 3pt shooting has gone from 36.3% on 5.2 attempts to 38.6% on 7.2 attempts this year. He's raised his 2pt FG% and 3pt FG% from last season to this season though by 2% each. If he can raise each by the same amount between last year and this year then he'll be up to 48% on 2pt shots and 40% from 3pt range. If that isn't considered a good shooter than I don't know what is.

I also don't understand saying Lebron's shooting destroys Booker's either considering their shooting efficiency since Lebron had a TS% of .568 in his 3rd year compared to Booker's .566. Lebron was a better shooter on his 2pt FG's but he was a much worse 3pt and FT shooter compared to Booker. A .002 difference in their TS% isn't destroying anything.

 

[3rdside]

1. What part of not-great 2pt% but good otherwise don't you understand?


2 .464% > .447% > .465% in years 1, 2, 3 - improving or flat lining 2pt shooting%?

- Find me a superstar who flatlined (because that's what the above is) their first three years.


3. Durant's 3rd year TS% of .607% - does that destroy Booker's .566% ?


4. I was actually talking about Efficiency metrics overall but yes, shooting came into it (see point 3. above) - either way, on Efficiency, does LBJ's 28.1 and Durant's 26.2 destroy Booker's 18.6?


These are all rhetorical questions for you to ponder by the way as I'm done with this thread.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

1. What part of not-great 2pt% but good otherwise don't you understand?


2 .464% > .447% > .465% in years 1, 2, 3 - improving or flat lining 2pt shooting%?

- Find me a superstar who flatlined (because that's what the above is) their first three years.


3. Durant's 3rd year TS% of .607% - does that destroy Booker's .566% ?


4. I was actually talking about Efficiency metrics overall but yes, shooting came into it (see point 3. above) - either way, on Efficiency, does LBJ's 28.1 and Durant's 26.2 destroy Booker's 18.6?


These are all rhetorical questions for you to ponder by the way as I'm done with this thread.

Durant was also on a very good team in his 3rd year. Where as you could argue that the talent around Booker has gotten worse each year. Had the team continued to get more talented in each of the last 2 years than I think Booker’s efficiency would look better than it currently does. It would also help if we had a good coach that could implement a decent system.

 

[Hoop Head]

Here is a really good article from Scott Bordow about Booker growing into a leadership role with the Suns organically. Definitely worth the read. It discusses his extension and how he views the team and his role on it, now and in the past.


https://www.azcentral.com/story/spo...son-chandler-oklahoma-city-thunder/405367002/

 

[3rdside]

I love this thread so much I'm going to keep on giving:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01.html

Kobe Bryant's stats:

- TS% .550% for his career (less than Booker's .566% this year), even in his personal prime (2 titles no shaq) he was barely above .550%:
- 2pt% .479% for his career (average at best arguably a little below)
- 3pt% .329% for his career (not great at all seeing what guys today are doing)


So when you were saying Booker's role is to lead (CardsSunsDBack?), having looked at what Kobe did, I think there’s weight in saying you can place much less of a premium on statistics in certain cases like Booker’s; if he can hang with mediocre stats (that's putting it as a worst case as he will surely get better with better team mates, coaching and results) and:

- Lead by example in attitude (the arm swipe on Bender trying to help up Adams last night - tough, but I like it).
- Hit the big, tough shot when he's supposed to.

(Both of the above eye of the tiger, as I've called it on this board in the past, and suspected Booker of having it)

Then yes, Booker is looking legit.

The flat lining 2p% stood out as something to possibly be worried about but Bryant's stats have eased the concern for now.

 

[Hoop Head]

I love this thread so much I'm going to keep on giving:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01.html

Kobe Bryant's stats:

- TS% .550% for his career (less than Booker's .566% this year), even in his personal prime (2 titles no shaq) he was barely above .550%:
- 2pt% .479% for his career (average at best arguably a little below)
- 3pt% .329% for his career (not great at all seeing what guys today are doing)


So when you were saying Booker's role is to lead (CardsSunsDBack?), having looked at what Kobe did, I think i'm inclined to believe you - if he can hang with mediocre stats (that's putting it as a worst case as he will surely get better with better team mates, coaching and results) and:

- Lead by example in attitude (the arm swipe on Bender trying to help up Adams last night - tough, but I like it).
- Hit the big, tough shot when he's supposed to.

(Both of the above eye of the tiger, as I've called it on this board in the past, and suspected Booker of having it)

Then yes, Booker is looking legit.

The flat lining 2p% stood out as something to be worried about but Bryant's stats have eased the concern for now.

How is raising his 2pt% from 44.6 last year to 46.5 this year flatlining? He also raised his 3pt% from 36.3% to 38.6% this season. He's been in the league for just 3 years. That's not really long enough to say his shooting has flatlined but whatever, regardless of that it's just not true. He's raised his overall FG% from 42.3% to 43.6% this year and he's also raised his FT% from 83 to 87% this season.

If he can raise all of his shooting the same amount, again, then he'll be shooting 48% on 2pt shots, 40% from 3, 91% from the FT line, and 44 to 45% for his overall FG%. Then he'll be hitting 2 of the 3 criteria for the 50/40/90 club, which only 7 players in NBA history have reached. Here's a link to info on the 50-40-90 club. But he's a bad shooter though. Compare him to other SG's, like Klay, Wade, DeRozan, or Oladipo and you'll see that he's not a bad shooter for a Shooting Guard, at all. If you keep comparing him to Durant you may think he's a bad shooter but really it's Durant that is just a really good shooter, being one of seven players to hit that 50-40-90 mark in a season.

Considering how young he is it isn't a stretch to assume he can raise his shooting in a similar fashion that he did this season. Especially because he should play all year at his natural position and with a real NBA point guard.