James Harden is a superstar

[JordansBulls]

25 PER and .270 WS48. superstar is not a hyperbole at all.

By the end of the year we will know and then you will know if they need Westbrook anymore.

[USA]

17ppg on 46% is now superstar status. More superstars in this league than I though.

[ahonui06]

That superstar Harden came back to Earth last night.

[Jase]

he's black Manu Ginobili who's gonna be in the league for a LONG time.

Best part of your post, by far.

That said, maybe we could anoint him as a star before he claim he's a superstar. There are very few superstars in this game.

[bastillon]

17ppg on 46% is now superstar status. More superstars in this league than I though.

tell me how many 17 ppg players have 130 ORTG. then look at NBA's history and repeat the process.

the answer is none.

[tsherkin]

17ppg on 46% is now superstar status. More superstars in this league than I though.

tell me how many 17 ppg players have 130 ORTG. then look at NBA's history and repeat the process.

the answer is none.

Counter: how can a bench player be a superstar, insane productivity or not? It's outside the definition of the term. Harden certainly has potential, but wait until he's the starter and primary player on a team before using that. There are but a handful of such players in the league at any given time. He's performing exceptionally well very early in the season, but he's also not positioned to answer the question of whether or not he is a superstar and alongside Durant, he won't answer that question.

[bastillon]

that'd be relevant if Harden was benched because Sefolosha was a better player. Harden is a bench player because he's leading the bench amazingly well and nobody on OKC's roster has ability to create openings when Durant is on the bench. same way Manu and Havlicek were bench players, but that had nothing to do with their abilities.

tsherk answer my post in the next Harden thread.

[tsherkin]

that'd be relevant if Harden was benched because Sefolosha was a better player.

No, it remains relevant. One of the reasons Manu isn't a superstar is that he plays better off of the bench because it helps him conserve his energy, he gets at least a little more time against the second unit and he doesn't burn out on big minutes. He's useful in that role for a variety of reasons and it makes strong strategic sense, but it does muddle the issue enough that it would be senseless to label him a superstar based on what he does. Completely and utterly senseless. It doesn't mean that, by extension, he would necessarily fail in the role of a legitimate superstar, but there are no superstar bench players, it's antithetical to the definition.

EDIT: Naturally, I should add that because the difference in minutes-played isn't humongous compared to certain other players, it's not as far-fetched a notion as some may think. My entire purpose in this thread is not to rail against the idea that Harden COULD be a superstar; I have been thoroughly impressed by his play to date, as I think would be anyone with eyes and some basic sense.

I'm saying that it's foolish to attempt to compare him against star players and act as if their context is remotely similar. The burden upon a legitimate superstar is very, very different than that placed upon Harden's shoulders at this time. He's positioned effectively, performing admirably but he's just not in a place where you can answer this question. That is the limit of what I am saying.

[daschysta]

This isn't fair to Harden.

He doesn't get the attention on defense that legitimate star players do.

He's a very good player, and on a team by himself I could see him being a star level player, but alot of the good he can do now is due to lessened defensive pressure due to RW and KD. You can't translate things like efficiency across contexts and act like all things would stay the same.

He certainly isn't a "superstar" only Kevin Durant is on that team.

Harden is a great player though.

[turk3d]

17ppg on 46% is now superstar status. More superstars in this league than I though.

tell me how many 17 ppg players have 130 ORTG. then look at NBA's history and repeat the process.

the answer is none.

Do it for an entire season and then we'll talk. Not after just 7 or 8 games.

[old rem]

So many people were willing to dismiss Harden, just look at Old Rem scoffing at the fact that Harden isn't a starter. Just silly.

Harden displayed very advanced ability even as a freshman and moreso as a sophmore in college. I was sad when Minnesota didn't get a chance to draft him. What I'm hoping, is that Minnesota clears some cap space and offers Harden a crap ton of money and Oklahoma doesn't have the cap space to hold on to him. A Rubio/Love/Harden pairing would be ridiculous.

I'm not sure if Harden will be a superstar as I am very hesitant to hand out titles like that, but he will be a star player. He can be a Brandon Roy type if not a bit better.

The thread say SUPERSTAR for crap sake. His capability is quite good but his own team isn't that keen on his D and if as a shoot-score guy he is a SUPERSTAR (or even a star) then he's still far behind Monta Ellis or Kevin Martin and closer to Nick Young or OJ Mayo. If I'm playing the Thunder...Harden is almost an afterthought. Was not MY call to not start Harden...but...kids......look at the headline here...IS A SUPERSTAR? IS ? Not...might be someday.
If you are a SHOOTING G and never racked up a 30 pt game, are not getting big time assists, big time D....you ain't there. Harden is a good player but it's too soon to even tag him as a STAR...so obviously, ridiculous to claim he is a SUPERSTAR.

[KiDeezy]

There tons of stars in the league, however SUPERstar is a title reserved for people who can lead and turn teams into contenders. People like Bosh, Amare, Ellis, Joe Johnson, etc. are STARS. However the only SUPERSTARS in this league are Kobe, Lebron, Wade, Rose, Durant, Paul, Dwight, Dirk, and Carmelo

[tsherkin]

he's still far behind Monta Ellis or Kevin Martin and closer to Nick Young or OJ Mayo.

Let's scale that back. He's clearly WAY better than OJ Mayo or Nick Young, and I think we'd need to take a long pause before saying he's "far behind" Monta Ellis, too.

[Rapcity_11]

he's still far behind Monta Ellis or Kevin Martin and closer to Nick Young or OJ Mayo.

Let's scale that back. He's clearly WAY better than OJ Mayo or Nick Young, and I think we'd need to take a long pause before saying he's "far behind" Monta Ellis, too.

At this point it's rather obvious Harden is better than Ellis.

[tsherkin]

At this point it's rather obvious Harden is better than Ellis.

Mmmm... I don't know if I'd go quite that far. I'm not a fan of Ellis' scoring game, but it's really hard to evaluate two players in such utterly different contexts. I'd like to see what Harden would do if he were put on the Warriors in Monta's place, you know?

[Rapcity_11]

At this point it's rather obvious Harden is better than Ellis.

Mmmm... I don't know if I'd go quite that far. I'm not a fan of Ellis' scoring game, but it's really hard to evaluate two players in such utterly different contexts. I'd like to see what Harden would do if he were put on the Warriors in Monta's place, you know?

It's getting to the point where Harden is the floor general for the Thunder for basically all of his minutes and especially in the 4th quarter. He creates elite offense, regardless of who is on the floor with him. Given the ball more, he produces more. This isn't one of those scenarios where a player can't handle the added usage.

For example in the game vs. the Spurs, the Harden/Collison PnR was killing the Spurs and Pop kept switching up the PnR defense, yet nothing worked because Harden kept making the right play. Harden is seeing defenses stack against him in the PnR and just does the right thing. It's eerily similar to Nash.

Check out some of the offensive units production this year from 82 games. Maynor-Cook-Harden-Collison-Mohammed is scoring 1.33 points per possession as the #3 minute unit.

Also, if you're not a fan of Monta's scoring game, there's not much else there.

[fallacy]

At this point it's rather obvious Harden is better than Ellis.

Mmmm... I don't know if I'd go quite that far. I'm not a fan of Ellis' scoring game, but it's really hard to evaluate two players in such utterly different contexts. I'd like to see what Harden would do if he were put on the Warriors in Monta's place, you know?

I just looked up Monta's efficiency ratings and my god... They are beyond terrible

Monta - 99 OffRtg (anything below 100 is god-awful), .493 ts% (seriously?), 18.9 PER (decent)
Harden- 129 OffRtg, .643 ts%, 23.5 PER

Monta's raw numbers are always going to be better because he plays over 40 minutes a game and he throws up over twice as many shots a game as Harden.

It's a touch choice between the two, it depends if you like terrible efficiency and good raw numbers on tons of shots; or if you like extremely high efficiency and high percentages on a relatively low amount of shots


I like efficiency

[Krodis]

If someone is vastly more productive in a "lesser" role than someone who is in a "greater" role, so what? He's still more productive. I could understand the implication that Ellis would do better in a different role, but he hasn't been in a different role for YEARS. I don't think you can penalize Harden or apologize for Ellis because Harden is in a correct role and Ellis is stretching himself.

[kobe_vs_jordan]

At this point it's rather obvious Harden is better than Ellis.

Mmmm... I don't know if I'd go quite that far. I'm not a fan of Ellis' scoring game, but it's really hard to evaluate two players in such utterly different contexts. I'd like to see what Harden would do if he were put on the Warriors in Monta's place, you know?

I just looked up Monta's efficiency ratings and my god... They are beyond terrible

Monta - 99 OffRtg (anything below 100 is god-awful), .493 ts% (seriously?), 18.9 PER (decent)
Harden- 129 OffRtg, .643 ts%, 23.5 PER

Monta's raw numbers are always going to be better because he plays over 40 minutes a game and he throws up over twice as many shots a game as Harden.

It's a touch choice between the two, it depends if you like terrible efficiency and good raw numbers on tons of shots; or if you like extremely high efficiency and high percentages on a relatively low amount of shots


I like efficiency

Think it would be more fair to judge players off last year stats than 8 games. One hot streak or cold streak skews stats in a small sample

[Blame Rasho]

he's still far behind Monta Ellis or Kevin Martin and closer to Nick Young or OJ Mayo.

Let's scale that back. He's clearly WAY better than OJ Mayo or Nick Young, and I think we'd need to take a long pause before saying he's "far behind" Monta Ellis, too.

He has a unhealthy obsession with defending Monta Ellis... so with that in mind... just scoff when he goes off the tangent regarding him.