Phx-Suns.Net

Indy wrote:I could totally be mis-remembering 1995-2000, but does Booker remind anyone else of Grant Hill in his early days?

I don't really think so. Hill was a slasher, great at attacking the basket. He also had great athleticism that manifested as great defense and good rebounding. He wasn't a great outside shooter. Honestly other than their similar height I don't see much similarity at all.

I'm thinking more about his smoothness and ability to flow without effort.

I'm inclined to think more Michael Finley for the comparison.

You hear a lot about how coaches think a player can be a "point forward" but Grant Hill was the prototype point forward when he came into the league with Detroit (he was a 20/9/7 guy his second year in the league). They would run the offense through him, he could rebound, he was a good defender, and about the only thing he was missing was a great outside shot.

Booker hasn't shown anything you can really hang your hat on so far other than his outside shooting (with a few flashes of other things). I don't see much of a similarity at all.

LazarusLong wrote:I'm inclined to think more Michael Finley for the comparison.

I'm going to say a better-passing version of Allan Houston.

The Bobster wrote:

LazarusLong wrote:I'm inclined to think more Michael Finley for the comparison.

I'm going to say a better-passing version of Allan Houston.

That is a much better comparison. Booker just doesn't have the rebounding prowess of a Hill.

Indy wrote:

The Bobster wrote:

LazarusLong wrote:I'm inclined to think more Michael Finley for the comparison.

I'm going to say a better-passing version of Allan Houston.

That is a much better comparison. Booker just doesn't have the rebounding prowess of a Hill.

Or the height. Hill was 6'8" while Booker is 6'6". Hill was a SF while Booker is a sweet shooting 2 guard.

Shoudl we start a tourney thread or post about it in here? First 4 going on tonight.

I also think Hill has great length while Booker tends to be a bit limited there.

pickle wrote:I also think Hill has great length while Booker tends to be a bit limited there.

Booker is not limited in height. He is good size for a two guard. Hill was a prototypical small forward.

The Bobster wrote:

LazarusLong wrote:I'm inclined to think more Michael Finley for the comparison.

I'm going to say a better-passing version of Allan Houston.

Allan Houston is the comparison I wrote when I first saw Booker in the summer league. First it was supposed to be JJ Redick, due to overall limitations. Now the Klay comps look legit, but after watching more I think Ray Allen is a possibility as best case scenario. Finley's style was more physical (Chicago's Butler, perhaps).

And agreed on Grant Hill. His combination of athleticism, fundamentals and overall productivity are not easy to come by and Booker is just not that kind of player.

Whatever. I just love having a premium prospect. And two B guys at center and SF is not bad either.

Superbone wrote:

pickle wrote:I also think Hill has great length while Booker tends to be a bit limited there.

Booker is not limited in height. He is good size for a two guard. Hill was a prototypical small forward.

Nah I wasn't talking about height. I mentioned this in a game thread way back, but I don't think he has a very long wingspan which is pretty useful with defense. So that is what I meant by length, not the actual height.

Ring_Wanted wrote:

The Bobster wrote:

LazarusLong wrote:I'm inclined to think more Michael Finley for the comparison.

I'm going to say a better-passing version of Allan Houston.

Allan Houston is the comparison I wrote when I first saw Booker in the summer league. First it was supposed to be JJ Redick, due to overall limitations. Now the Klay comps look legit, but after watching more I think Ray Allen is a possibility as best case scenario. Finley's style was more physical (Chicago's Butler, perhaps).

And agreed on Grant Hill. His combination of athleticism, fundamentals and overall productivity are not easy to come by and Booker is just not that kind of player.

Whatever. I just love having a premium prospect. And two B guys at center and SF is not bad either.

Everyone loves the Thompson comparison because they have the same skin tone and can shoot, but like others have said, Booker seems to have more to his game. I think Thompson is a better shooter, but I see more potential as an off the bounce guy in Booker, I also think he'll be a better playmaker. Thompson is supposedly a better defender, but Booker has time to learn.

Side note, where does klay's defensive reputation come from? I don't watch him enough to see first hand, but all the advanced stats I could find don't show him as a good defender. In fact they show him as a sub-par one.

Back to Booker comparisons, I think maybe somewhere between the klay/Houston and Finley/Butler comparisons makes sense. Say a Brandon Roy or Michael redd?

Paul Westphal seems to be a good comparison to me. Its just that too many of you are two young to understand it.

Westphal was a lot more creative on offense. He was a premiere scorer. In 1977-78 he averaged 25 points in 30 minutes a game. I don't think Booker is going to be that kind of player.

He could turn out more like Joe Johnson except a better shooter.

Booker doesn't have the physical tools of Joe Johnson.

Granted, he's only 19 and may yet fill out a bit, but I can't see him ever being like Johnson.

True, Johnson is a lot more physical. He's the former Sun that I figured he had the most in common with - perimeter shooter, good handle, about the same height. Johnson was a lot stronger when he came to the Suns than Booker is now and that really helped him closer to the basket and defensively. Booker's going to need to get a lot stronger and better in both of those areas, and I think he will (how much is the question).

Basically, it comes down to if you're Devin Booker you have an opportunity to become a great player in this league, but it's going to take a lot of dedication and hard work. Is he going to be one of those guys or one of those buys who is happy with a little improvement and a solid career?

The Bobster wrote:He could turn out more like Joe Johnson except a better shooter.

I like that Joe Johnson comp a lot. He was 20 when we got him halfway through his rookie season and he wasn't quite filled out like he is now.

Have you seen the numbers he is putting up with Miami through 10 games? Kind of surprising.

carey wrote:

The Bobster wrote:He could turn out more like Joe Johnson except a better shooter.

I like that Joe Johnson comp a lot. He was 20 when we got him halfway through his rookie season and he wasn't quite filled out like he is now.

Have you seen the numbers he is putting up with Miami through 10 games? Kind of surprising.

He's playing the same as he was in Brooklyn except he's shooting 57% instead of 41%. The advanced stats show that he's shooting from closer in, and that would explain part of it, but he's also just shooting a lot better.

The Bobster wrote:

carey wrote:

The Bobster wrote:He could turn out more like Joe Johnson except a better shooter.

I like that Joe Johnson comp a lot. He was 20 when we got him halfway through his rookie season and he wasn't quite filled out like he is now.

Have you seen the numbers he is putting up with Miami through 10 games? Kind of surprising.

He's playing the same as he was in Brooklyn except he's shooting 57% instead of 41%. The advanced stats show that he's shooting from closer in, and that would explain part of it, but he's also just shooting a lot better.

It's very interesting what they are doing. Their starting line up the other night against Denver was Dragic-Wade-JJ-Deng-Amare. Now Amare only played 11 min and everyone else in the starting line-up played over 30. Whiteside got the rest of the C minutes at 31 and their 2 rookies Winslow and Richardson each got 30 a piece. This Richardson kid can play.