|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2014 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ChrisCrossed wrote: | | As far as whether Harden is a franchise changer, he took the Rockets to he payoffs in his first season with them - and is now bringing them as one of the top 4 teams in the West. Will he ring or find deep playoff success, god no. But he is a player that can turn a franchise around, no denying that. What I'm essentially saying is that it's easier to build around the one way super talents. |
If making the playoffs and maybe going to the second round (or to the WCF if things break just right) is good enough, then sure, you can build around Harden. If you actually want to be a title contender, I'm not so sure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13712
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2014 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | ChrisCrossed wrote: | | As far as whether Harden is a franchise changer, he took the Rockets to he payoffs in his first season with them - and is now bringing them as one of the top 4 teams in the West. Will he ring or find deep playoff success, god no. But he is a player that can turn a franchise around, no denying that. What I'm essentially saying is that it's easier to build around the one way super talents. |
If making the playoffs and maybe going to the second round (or to the WCF if things break just right) is good enough, then sure, you can build around Harden. If you actually want to be a title contender, I'm not so sure. |
So David Robinson was not a franchise player? The furthest he has ever led a team was to the conference finals, once. Or Charles Barkley? He had one great playoff run in his career. Their teams were not title contenders for the majority of their careers. Or Alonzo Mourning? He got his team to the conference finals one year, when things broke right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Telleris
Star Player
Joined: 28 May 2013
Posts: 2371
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2014 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How much does the regular season really matter? Can Harden play defense? sure, Does he? not usually for the first 3 quarters.
Let's say he put in that same effort he puts in, in the 4th quarter for the entire season, what does that do for his team? get them a 3rd seed and a playoff matchup vs golden state (2-1) and okc (1-3) rather than portland (3-1) and san antonio (3-0) ? Reward for effort right there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2014 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dreamshake wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | ChrisCrossed wrote: | | As far as whether Harden is a franchise changer, he took the Rockets to he payoffs in his first season with them - and is now bringing them as one of the top 4 teams in the West. Will he ring or find deep playoff success, god no. But he is a player that can turn a franchise around, no denying that. What I'm essentially saying is that it's easier to build around the one way super talents. |
If making the playoffs and maybe going to the second round (or to the WCF if things break just right) is good enough, then sure, you can build around Harden. If you actually want to be a title contender, I'm not so sure. |
So David Robinson was not a franchise player? The furthest he has ever led a team was to the conference finals, once. Or Charles Barkley? He had one great playoff run in his career. Their teams were not title contenders for the majority of their careers. Or Alonzo Mourning? He got his team to the conference finals one year, when things broke right. |
Who cares? We're not talking about David Robinson or Charles Barkley, nor are we talking about whether David Robinson or Charles Barkley would be good players to build a team around. Try to keep up.
Anyway, I saw David Robinson and Charles Barkley. James Harden is no David Robinson, and he is no Charles Barkley. Not even close. If they were still playing, any GM in the league would trade Harden for either of them in a heartbeat. They are Hall of Famers. Harden is not, and he isn't likely to ever raise his game to that level. Until he does, you are just being silly when you toss out names like that in a discussion of James Harden. Why not toss out Oscar Robertson, too? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13712
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2014 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
Who cares? We're not talking about David Robinson or Charles Barkley, nor are we talking about whether David Robinson or Charles Barkley would be good players to build a team around. Try to keep up. |
I am trying to keep up with your logic. Going by what you seem to be noting then those guys also would not be considered franchise players. A typical season for them was making the playoffs and maybe going to the second round (or to the CF if things break just right, or the Finals in one instance for Barkley).
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
Anyway, I saw David Robinson and Charles Barkley. James Harden is no David Robinson, and he is no Charles Barkley. Not even close. |
Agreed. But Robinson and Barkley's teams typically were not title contenders when they were leading them. If that's the definition of a franchise player then a lot of guys wouldn't qualify.
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
They are Hall of Famers. Harden is not, and he isn't likely to ever raise his game to that level. Until he does, you are just being silly when you toss out names like that in a discussion of James Harden. Why not toss out Oscar Robertson, too? |
Not too many players have a HOF resume by their 5th season. If Harden plays like he is playing now for the remainder of his career then he will make the HOF, just like Alonzo Mourning (who I also mentioned) and Mitch Richmond did. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dreamshake wrote: | | I am trying to keep up with your logic. |
I understand that, but I don't have time to dumb it down for you.
| Dreamshake wrote: | | Going by what you seem to be noting then those guys also would not be considered franchise players. |
Completely wrong. They have nothing to do with my comments about James Harden.
| Dreamshake wrote: | | Agreed. But Robinson and Barkley's teams typically were not title contenders when they were leading them. If that's the definition of a franchise player then a lot of guys wouldn't qualify. |
So what? You seem to be inventing your own discussion and responding to arguments that the rest of us cannot hear.
| Dreamshake wrote: | | Not too many players have a HOF resume by their 5th season. If Harden plays like he is playing now for the remainder of his career then he will make the HOF, just like Alonzo Mourning (who I also mentioned) and Mitch Richmond did. |
Harden is not playing at a HoF level. Could he slip into the Hall in a weak year like Richmond or Calvin Murphy? Sure.
Robinson and Barkley were slam dunk HoFers. If you don't know the difference, then I certainly don't have time to educate you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13712
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 7:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
Harden is not playing at a HoF level. Could he slip into the Hall in a weak year like Richmond or Calvin Murphy? Sure. |
In his 2 years starting he has put up around 25/5/6 a game and will make All NBA teams and finish in the top 10 in MVP voting. Those are HOF numbers if produced consistently. If he slipped in during a weak year then wouldn't he still be a Hall of Famer?
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
So what? You seem to be inventing your own discussion and responding to arguments that the rest of us cannot hear. |
I'm simply noting that being a franchise player doesn't mean your team has to be consistently competing with titles with you on the team. If the criteria is that you have to be winning titles or consistently be doing better than "the 2nd round or the conference finals if things break right" then we haven't had that many franchise guys in league history. But you say those weren't the point of your comments, which I thought they were.
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | Robinson and Barkley were slam dunk HoFers. If you don't know the difference, then I certainly don't have time to educate you. |
You don't have to be a slam dunk HOFer to be a HOF player. If you make it in on your 10th time, or in a "weak year", then you are in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144472
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 9:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dreamshake wrote: | Back on topic, the Warriors and Wizards blew it if they could have had Harden for those packages. He is clearly worth more than what they would have given up. I get that folks weren't sure if he could be a #1 option prior to seeing him do it, but that's a mistake on their part. That's what your scouts and GM's are supposed to be able to do....evaluate talent. That's what Morey did. He used whatever forumlas/rations he has and concluded that Harden could carry a team, and he was right.
Presti had this dude for multiple seasons and decided to let him go. If anyone should have recognized how good Harden was, it was him. He really blew it. |
As for the bolded, obviously they couldn't, or they would have Harden.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13712
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | Dreamshake wrote: | Back on topic, the Warriors and Wizards blew it if they could have had Harden for those packages. He is clearly worth more than what they would have given up. I get that folks weren't sure if he could be a #1 option prior to seeing him do it, but that's a mistake on their part. That's what your scouts and GM's are supposed to be able to do....evaluate talent. That's what Morey did. He used whatever forumlas/rations he has and concluded that Harden could carry a team, and he was right.
Presti had this dude for multiple seasons and decided to let him go. If anyone should have recognized how good Harden was, it was him. He really blew it. |
As for the bolded, obviously they couldn't, or they would have Harden. |
I read the article as GS could have had him for Klay and a pick, but they wanted OKC to take on other contracts. Same for the Wizards (Beal and filler). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dreamshake wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
Harden is not playing at a HoF level. Could he slip into the Hall in a weak year like Richmond or Calvin Murphy? Sure. |
In his 2 years starting he has put up around 25/5/6 a game and will make All NBA teams and finish in the top 10 in MVP voting. Those are HOF numbers if produced consistently. If he slipped in during a weak year then wouldn't he still be a Hall of Famer |
Who cares? James Harden is not a player at the level of David Robinson, Charles Barkley, and Oscar Robinson. Calvin Murphy and K.C Jones are HOFers, but you wouldn't build a championship team around them. If you still don't get it, oh well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13712
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | Dreamshake wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
Harden is not playing at a HoF level. Could he slip into the Hall in a weak year like Richmond or Calvin Murphy? Sure. |
In his 2 years starting he has put up around 25/5/6 a game and will make All NBA teams and finish in the top 10 in MVP voting. Those are HOF numbers if produced consistently. If he slipped in during a weak year then wouldn't he still be a Hall of Famer |
Who cares? James Harden is not a player at the level of David Robinson, Charles Barkley, and Oscar Robinson. Calvin Murphy and K.C Jones are HOFers, but you wouldn't build a championship team around them. If you still don't get it, oh well. |
A championship team wasn't built around any of the players that you mentioned. If you don't get that there is a distinction between a guy who can lead you to a title or build your team around, then oh well. Only around 10-15 guys in the last 3 decades have been good enough to have a title team built around them. If that's your definition of a franchise guy then there haven't been many.
As far as who cares, you are the one saying Harden isn't a HOF type player. So I guess the who cares would be you. Harden is currently playing at a HOF level. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve007
Franchise Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 13227
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dreamshake wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | ChrisCrossed wrote: | | As far as whether Harden is a franchise changer, he took the Rockets to he payoffs in his first season with them - and is now bringing them as one of the top 4 teams in the West. Will he ring or find deep playoff success, god no. But he is a player that can turn a franchise around, no denying that. What I'm essentially saying is that it's easier to build around the one way super talents. |
If making the playoffs and maybe going to the second round (or to the WCF if things break just right) is good enough, then sure, you can build around Harden. If you actually want to be a title contender, I'm not so sure. |
So David Robinson was not a franchise player? The furthest he has ever led a team was to the conference finals, once. Or Charles Barkley? He had one great playoff run in his career. Their teams were not title contenders for the majority of their careers. Or Alonzo Mourning? He got his team to the conference finals one year, when things broke right. |
Barkley didn't have more great playoff runs because his teams ran into the Houston Rockets twice in a row in the second round. In both years they gave the Rockets a 7 game series before Houston advanced and won it all. Phoenix won 56 and 59 games in those years and I always thought of them as title contenders back then.
Robinson and Barkley led their teams to 62 win seasons and the #1 seed when they made the conference finals. San Antonio was probably the favorite to win it all. I have a hard time imagining Harden doing that without Dwight Howard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dreamshake wrote: | | A championship team wasn't built around any of the players that you mentioned. |
Are you just being deliberately obtuse, or do you really not get it? Go back and read my response to CrissCrossed on the previous page of this thread. If you still don't get it, you never will. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13712
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | Dreamshake wrote: | | A championship team wasn't built around any of the players that you mentioned. |
Are you just being deliberately obtuse, or do you really not get it? Go back and read my response to CrissCrossed on the previous page of this thread. If you still don't get it, you never will. |
No, are you? In one of my initial comments I said Harden has yet to show that one can build a title team around him. However, that's similar to some of those other players. I also said I may have taken your comments the wrong way and let it go. You are the one bringing it back up. My comments after that note that Harden is putting up HOF numbers (if he keeps it up). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13712
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 2:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steve007 wrote: |
Barkley didn't have more great playoff runs because his teams ran into the Houston Rockets twice in a row in the second round. In both years they gave the Rockets a 7 game series before Houston advanced and won it all. Phoenix won 56 and 59 games in those years and I always thought of them as title contenders back then. |
The Rockets are sitting on 53 wins this year. If they lose in round 2 I don't see much of a difference. They are considered one of the top 4 teams in the West whose ceiling is the conference finals. IIRC, the Suns were considered the same type of team in 94 and 95. In 94 the Sonics and Rockets were the two contenders in the West. Phoenix finished 3rd. They weren't expected to go to the Finals. In 95 it was the Spurs and Utah.
| Steve007 wrote: | | Robinson and Barkley led their teams to 62 win seasons and the #1 seed when they made the conference finals. San Antonio was probably the favorite to win it all. I have a hard time imagining Harden doing that without Dwight Howard. |
Yes, and that was ONE YEAR for both of them. They both were also 29. James Harden is 24. In most seasons, they were 2nd round or conference finals if things broke right. And yes, I have a hard time seeing Harden do something like that without another star like Howard alongside him. When Robinson did it he had Dennis Rodman, and others. When Barkley did it he had KJ, and others.
No, I don't think Harden is as good as either player. He's damn good at 24 though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve007
Franchise Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 13227
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dreamshake wrote: | | Steve007 wrote: |
Barkley didn't have more great playoff runs because his teams ran into the Houston Rockets twice in a row in the second round. In both years they gave the Rockets a 7 game series before Houston advanced and won it all. Phoenix won 56 and 59 games in those years and I always thought of them as title contenders back then. |
The Rockets are sitting on 53 wins this year. If they lose in round 2 I don't see much of a difference. They are considered one of the top 4 teams in the West whose ceiling is the conference finals. IIRC, the Suns were considered the same type of team in 94 and 95. In 94 the Sonics and Rockets were the two contenders in the West. Phoenix finished 3rd. They weren't expected to go to the Finals. In 95 it was the Spurs and Utah.
| Steve007 wrote: | | Robinson and Barkley led their teams to 62 win seasons and the #1 seed when they made the conference finals. San Antonio was probably the favorite to win it all. I have a hard time imagining Harden doing that without Dwight Howard. |
Yes, and that was ONE YEAR for both of them. They both were also 29. James Harden is 24. In most seasons, they were 2nd round or conference finals if things broke right. And yes, I have a hard time seeing Harden do something like that without another star like Howard alongside him. When Robinson did it he had Dennis Rodman, and others. When Barkley did it he had KJ, and others.
No, I don't think Harden is as good as either player. He's damn good at 24 though. |
The Rockets are considered to be the 4th or 5th best team in the West, and personally I'd rank them 5th best behind a healthy Memphis team. The Suns were not considered to be the same type of team. Also if the Suns beat Houston in 94, they would not have even needed to play Seattle because Seattle got knocked out in the first round. The 95 Suns won 59 games, which is only one less game than Utah won and three fewer games than the Spurs. They were not clearly inferior to those teams. I can't believe you're telling me that a 59 win team that nearly knocked off the NBA champions was not a serious contender. If they get by the Rockets they're probably favored to beat a 53 win Utah team in 94, and I think a series with the Spurs in 95 could have easily gone either way.
Rodman missed 33 games when San Antonio won 62 games, and the next year after he left the team won 59. He was really just a better version of DeAndre Jordan, and not a real star. My point with Howard is I'm not sure that Harden is a clear #1 on the team. I thought one major selling point when he picked the Rockets was they could build a team around him, not build around Harden and force Dwight to follow him.
My point with those teams getting the #1 seed is it wasn't a fluke when they made the conference finals. They didn't need everything to break right.
I think if everything broke right for those teams, they would have been NBA champions.
Edit: A 56 win team that finishes 3rd and is the defending conference champion is not on your list of contenders? That's a first for me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yong
Star Player
Joined: 08 Oct 2009
Posts: 9024
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dreamshake wrote: | | yinoma2001 wrote: | | YuruceWillis wrote: | | Houston got themselves a steal for Harden. H-town gave away pretty much nothing because of OKC's greedy owner wanting to save money instead of competing with a potential dynasty. Wizards also missed out on a big opportunity. |
I know his game has some warts but at $14, 15, 16, and 17m while he enters his prime, I'll take that any day. |
And the worst part is he was willing to accept what they offered if they gave him a trade kicker. Well, according to Harden's version at least.... |
They could have just waived Porkins.
That's what made it extra hilarious. They chose Porkins over Harden LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13712
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steve007 wrote: |
The Rockets are considered to be the 4th or 5th best team in the West, and personally I'd rank them 5th best behind a healthy Memphis team. The Suns were not considered to be the same type of team. |
We can agree to disagree on where the Rockets are ranked. At the end of the day, folks will be surprised to see them win a title, similar to the Suns in 94 and 95. That's what I mean when I say contender. This year there are really only 4 teams that folks expect to win the title. Miami, Indy, SA and OKC. If any other team wins it, even the 56 win Clippers, most will be surprised. Last year Denver had 57 wins. No one expected them to win the title. I hope that clarifies.
| Steve007 wrote: |
Rodman missed 33 games when San Antonio won 62 games, and the next year after he left the team won 59. He was really just a better version of DeAndre Jordan, and not a real star. |
And the next year the Spurs lost 4-2 in round 2. And I don't believe Jordan is considered one of the best rebounders and defenders in league history.
| Steve007 wrote: |
My point with Howard is I'm not sure that Harden is a clear #1 on the team. |
I can't disagree with this. Harden is the top option offensively but Howard brings a lot to the table. He is very important.
| Steve007 wrote: |
My point with those teams getting the #1 seed is it wasn't a fluke when they made the conference finals. They didn't need everything to break right.
I think if everything broke right for those teams, they would have been NBA champions. |
I don't disagree with that. I guess my point was those guys had that type of run once, and even then they were almost 30 (Harden is 24). The majority of their careers were spent not contending for titles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Telleris
Star Player
Joined: 28 May 2013
Posts: 2371
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 3:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
The idea of whether a player can lead a team to a title is basically an after the fact accolade of the nba, no one knows whether they can until they do and it's reliant on the other factors around them.
Does Garnett win a title without the other 2? of course not, Does Lebron? maybe if it was some other 2, but not what he had in Cleveland, Does Kobe without Gasol and Phil? nope, Maybe Shaq was that good in 2000 that it was more interchangeable, but that might well be the last time and he was a force of nature. Last year in games 6 and 7 was maybe the first time since 2005 that a single player willed his team to a title, and even then it required some extreme luck. Durant might well not win one in OKC because the roster has some issues and the coach is the worst of the western conference playoff teams.
Houston has a truly abysmal bench (we're talking double figure negatives against Philadelphia here) and is still carrying leftovers of the pre Harden and especially pre Dwight acquisition, their starting pf is a non lottery 21 yo sophomore who didn't play his rookie season, of course they're not winning this year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve007
Franchise Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 13227
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dreamshake wrote: | | Steve007 wrote: |
The Rockets are considered to be the 4th or 5th best team in the West, and personally I'd rank them 5th best behind a healthy Memphis team. The Suns were not considered to be the same type of team. |
We can agree to disagree on where the Rockets are ranked. At the end of the day, folks will be surprised to see them win a title, similar to the Suns in 94 and 95. That's what I mean when I say contender. This year there are really only 4 teams that folks expect to win the title. Miami, Indy, SA and OKC. If any other team wins it, even the 56 win Clippers, most will be surprised. Last year Denver had 57 wins. No one expected them to win the title. I hope that clarifies. |
I get your main point so I'm just going to nitpick here. The Suns won the most games in 93, and lost to the Finals because they ran into MJ and the Bulls. Then MJ left to play baseball. I don't think anyone would have been surprised to see them win it the next year, even after the season ended and they had 6 fewer wins and the #3 seed. Seattle lost in the first round, and Phoenix was up 2-0 on the Rockets at one point. If Phoenix kept that lead, or won game 7, they would have been favored to make the Finals when they were playing in the conference finals. They were that close to making the Finals again, where they would have not played MJ and the Bulls again. They would have played the Knicks, who won only 1 more game than they did.
I don't think them winning the next year would have been a surprise either. They picked up Danny Manning in the offseason (who did get injured), and I remember having a discussion with a cousin about that team. We were so impressed with the roster and thought they were going to win it that year. I don't remember thinking that we were saying anything out of the ordinary at the time.
Denver came out of nowhere to get that record and were overlooked by Miami (and Miami had a huge winning streak that was getting a ton of attention while Denver was playing its best basketball) and the other top teams in the West. Personally, I think Denver was the real deal, and they weren't a full strength in the playoffs, and ran into a Golden State team that would have a shot at beating any team in the league. Denver played the top teams much more effectively than the Rockets have. That's the biggest reason I'm skeptical of the Rockets. This isn't a great comparison but I sort of have the same feeling about the Rockets that I had about the 98 Lakers, who won 61 games. I think the future looks more promising for them, and like I doubted the Lakers ability to beat the Jazz and Bulls that year (in fact I even doubted their ability to beat Seattle and Indiana that year), I have serious doubts that Houston can beat the top teams in the league in the playoffs today.
I'm really curious what you think of the Rockets matching up with the Spurs in the playoffs though. I believe that Houston swept the season series but I never watched any of those games. Do you think they have a decent shot at beating the Spurs in a hypothetical matchup?
| Quote: | | Steve007 wrote: |
Rodman missed 33 games when San Antonio won 62 games, and the next year after he left the team won 59. He was really just a better version of DeAndre Jordan, and not a real star. |
And the next year the Spurs lost 4-2 in round 2. And I don't believe Jordan is considered one of the best rebounders and defenders in league history. |
I think the loss in round 2 has more to do with matchups than the idea that the Spurs got worse. They lost in round 2 because their opponent was tougher. They ran into the Jazz with Stockton and Malone. In the previous year when they made the conference finals, they ran into a Laker team in the second round that was led by Cedric Ceballos. I don't think that Laker team would have beaten either Spurs team.
I might have a lower opinion of Rodman than most. I think some people vastly overrate him. I remember him having problems with the coach in San Antonio, and Phil Jackson was able to deal with him better than most coaches probably could. He caused some problems with the Lakers at the end of his career, and I remember Pat Riley in Miami said he was willing to pick Rodman up if Rodman would follow the team rules. Miami was arguably the best team in the East at the time, but Rodman never tried to join that team. I'm not surprised that he didn't seem interested in playing for Riley. I guess following the team rules was too hard for him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wolfpaclaker wrote: | James is a fantastic player to get your team to the playoffs and have a few great prime years for you.
However as someone mentioned above remains to be seen whether he is championship number 1 material. When Dwight missed these games recently Houston went from the team they are most of season to barely a .500 team
And for a superstar he is one of the most inconsistent ones in terms of his FG percentage and shot making.
That said it was a great trade for Houston and would have been just as good for Washington or GST. It's not like these teams were giving up comparable talent like Curry or Wall for him. Their GMs missed out big time IMO. |
This was true over a much larger sample size as well. In 2011, they went 34-32, which is 42 wins over an 82 game season. Last year, the Rockets added Harden (who supposedly "broke out"), Lin, & Asik...and won a whopping 3 more games.
He doesn't move the needle nearly as much as the Rockets fans here think he does. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144472
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2014 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dreamshake wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | Dreamshake wrote: | Back on topic, the Warriors and Wizards blew it if they could have had Harden for those packages. He is clearly worth more than what they would have given up. I get that folks weren't sure if he could be a #1 option prior to seeing him do it, but that's a mistake on their part. That's what your scouts and GM's are supposed to be able to do....evaluate talent. That's what Morey did. He used whatever forumlas/rations he has and concluded that Harden could carry a team, and he was right.
Presti had this dude for multiple seasons and decided to let him go. If anyone should have recognized how good Harden was, it was him. He really blew it. |
As for the bolded, obviously they couldn't, or they would have Harden. |
I read the article as GS could have had him for Klay and a pick, but they wanted OKC to take on other contracts. Same for the Wizards (Beal and filler). |
That is what I read too, that they didn't think Harden was worth just Klay and a pick, they wanted to dump bad contracts with them. I would guess that when you consider both sides of the ball, GS is very happy with Klay.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
