Jazz fan here thinks Harden is a jerk who let your city down

[Hoops Addict]

Jazz fan here, coming in peace.

I think Harden is a weasel for turning down the OKC offer which was huge, just to get 10-15% more money.

I personally would rather play with the great Kevin Durant from UTexas who anyone smart would love to play with.



I made a post on the Jazz site, wishing Harden no luck and hoping he gets a minor injury so Houston does not offer the max, but the same amount OKC offered. I also wish Houston is the 7th or 8th seed for the next 5 years and said Harden has a filthy beard.

Good luck to the Thunder....I cheer for your team when you play Miami or the Lakers.

Good luck!

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=1210097

================================================================================================
I don't wish him a career ending injury, just something that is temporary that would make Houston offer him less than the Max, actually the exact amount OCK offered him.

Hell yeah.......go for the money. He has the right to do that, but I am just saying if he is offered $52 M for 4 years....or about $13.3 M a year, and he turns it down since he wants $15 M a year, than 10% more money is worth more than your love for your team and fans.

It is ok to just go for the money only, and don"t care about the fans or OKC.

http://withleather.uproxx.com/2012/10/t ... en-already

The fans in OKC are having a BBQ with Harden's jersies. They don;t think it is great he refused to sign.

It would be sacrificing a little money, but he gets to play on his first team with Durant and Westborook.

I just hope he plays for Houston and is the 7th or 8th seed for 5 years in a row and does not win any playoff games.

Of course, if he got a deal from Portland like Matthews did, maybe $9M a year instead of $5M, then of course you have to take that and not apoligize for it, but for 10% more? Meh.....I do not like him much and think there are some cigarette butts and bottle caps in his dirty beard.

[Thunderhead]

No he did not let us down. He did the right thing for him, he took 78 mill guaranteed now , over 53 million guaranteed.

I would've done the same.

[wizkid27]

Where is the 78 mil coming from? I was thinking it was 60... Did I miss something?

I'm indifferent. It is Harden's choice whether or not to sign the extension and we decided to deal him. We could've waited a couple of days, we could've waited until next summer but our front office chose to act now. I just don't really have any hard feelings either way...

[Thunderhead]

He will sign a five year contract with the Rockets, that will be in the 78 mil range.

And the Thunder could not wait, they had to move now.

Because Harden was not going to play for less than the max and the Thunder were not gonna pay the max.

The deal with the Rocket was not gonna be on the table another three days. Morey needed this time to hammer out an extension with Harden.

And if the Thunder let this go past Oct 31, the quality of players coming back in a Harden deal, would start slowly declining, until they got to next summer, when they would get nothing for him. A sign and trade does the Thunder no good, Thunder don't need to take on salary.

This whole idea the Thunder could wait , is bogus. Once they decided to not pay the max, then resolving the issue before Oct 31 became imperative. It was now or never.

My only complaint with Harden , is that I wish he had told the Thunder he wanted nothing less than a max , a month ago. Then both teams could've had their new players in training camp.

And now the Thunder can use the first part of the season to incorporate KMart and still be ready for a playoff run, it will just be more difficult to get the top seed.

[Thunderhead]

See, here is what happens when you wait . Its best to make a decision and move on it and get on with the future.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/b ... 03978.post

[wizkid27]

I agree with you that our options would've been limited and our front office knew that and took the conservative approach by getting a decent return now instead of waiting a few days to see if Harden caved, waiting the season to see if we could win a championship, etc.

That is why, while I think it will hurt the team's performance, it isn't an awful decision. If the alternative was signing Harden, making a one season run at it, and then selling draft picks for years to try and stay afloat financially leading to a bad team in the long term, I think I'm good with how we took a bit of a hit now but made this a more sustainable endeavor.

[countrybama24]

Hell yeah.......go for the money. He has the right to do that, but I am just saying if he is offered $52 M for 4 years....or about $13.3 M a year, and he turns it down since he wants $15 M a year, than 10% more money is worth more than your love for your team and fans.

Alternatively, that 10% less outweighed what Harden was worth to the management, including the sacrifices he made coming off the bench, taking less shots etc. Hows that for loyalty and love for your players?

The Thunder are very profitable, and made $30-50M last year. Their owner is worth billions. And Harden is the greedy one?

Good for Harden. He stood up for what he was worth. If you do a "favor" taking less, what favors will the team do you for? In all likelihood, they'll turn around and trade you once their tax bill gets too high.

[Thunderhead]

Hell yeah.......go for the money. He has the right to do that, but I am just saying if he is offered $52 M for 4 years....or about $13.3 M a year, and he turns it down since he wants $15 M a year, than 10% more money is worth more than your love for your team and fans.

Alternatively, that 10% less outweighed what Harden was worth to the management, including the sacrifices he made coming off the bench, taking less shots etc. Hows that for loyalty and love for your players?

The Thunder are very profitable, and made $30-50M last year. Their owner is worth billions. And Harden is the greedy one?

Good for Harden. He stood up for what he was worth. If you do a "favor" taking less, what favors will the team do you for? In all likelihood, they'll turn around and trade you once their tax bill gets too high.

I don't know where you get your profit numbers for the OKC owners .............. but they spent $50 million plus to get out of Seattle, this on top of over paying for the Sonics by what Forbes says , could be another $100 mill. They deserve the chance to get that money back.

But really, you got it all wrong, most large market teams can not afford to pay three max players and another near max. NYC, LA, Boston ............. that's about the only markets who can do that.

Thunder did what they had to do for the future well being of the franchise. Rather than shoot their wad for one year shot at a Champ, they choose to be very good for the next several years.

[countrybama24]

I don't know where you get your profit numbers for the OKC owners .............. but they spent $50 million plus to get out of Seattle, this on top of over paying for the Sonics by what Forbes says , could be another $100 mill. They deserve the chance to get that money back.

But really, you got it all wrong, most large market teams can not afford to pay three max players and another near max. NYC, LA, Boston ............. that's about the only markets who can do that.

Thunder did what they had to do for the future well being of the franchise. Rather than shoot their wad for one year shot at a Champ, they choose to be very good for the next several years.

I got my profit numbers from Forbes ("operating income"). The franchise made $24.5M last year.

http://www.forbes.com/teams/oklahoma-city-thunder/

That's less than Boston ($7.7M) and the Lakers ($24.3M).

They hardly "overpaid" for the Sonics, considering they could easily sell the Thunder and make all their money back. And they had to give away $50M to preserve the facade of the ownerships "good faith" effort to keep the team, thats just what it costs to move a franchise from another city. Why go through all that to run the team on the cheap?

[Thunderhead]

I don't know where you get your profit numbers for the OKC owners .............. but they spent $50 million plus to get out of Seattle, this on top of over paying for the Sonics by what Forbes says , could be another $100 mill. They deserve the chance to get that money back.

But really, you got it all wrong, most large market teams can not afford to pay three max players and another near max. NYC, LA, Boston ............. that's about the only markets who can do that.

Thunder did what they had to do for the future well being of the franchise. Rather than shoot their wad for one year shot at a Champ, they choose to be very good for the next several years.

I got my profit numbers from Forbes ("operating income"). The franchise made $24.5M last year.

http://www.forbes.com/teams/oklahoma-city-thunder/

That's less than Boston ($7.7M) and the Lakers ($24.3M).

They hardly "overpaid" for the Sonics, considering they could easily sell the Thunder and make all their money back. And they had to give away $50M to preserve the facade of the ownerships "good faith" effort to keep the team, thats just what it costs to move a franchise from another city. Why go through all that to run the team on the cheap?

And the Thunder made that profit , because most of the team is on their rookie contracts, that won't last very long.

Yes, they did over pay for the Sonics, its in the Seattle media at the time, if you want to go search the archives.

And paying off the 1995 KeyArena bonds, had nothing to do with being willing to work to get a new arena in Seattle. Paying off the bonds was what got them out of the lease.

In fact, it was that 1995 lease agreement, and the 1995 bond issue, related to the renovation of KeyArena in 1995 ......... that was the death of the Sonics in Seattle. It was an albatross around the neck of the franchise, that sent it into a death spiral.

Bennett took a proposal to the Washington state legislature , for a $500 million arena, of which he was willing to put $200 million in ................ that's plenty of good faith buddy. But the proposal never got out a committee.

As for Bennett flipping the franchise quickly for a profit ........... what color is the sky in your world ? No local wealthy in Seattle wanted to touch that thing with a 10 foot pole. Do you really think that Howard Schultz never offered the franchise to local wealthy men ???? Bwaahahahaha The locals were too smart buy that money loser.

The Sonics only had value .......... to be MOVED.

Or if Seattle had agreed to build a new arena and tear up the old lease agreement. And that was not happening, due to the aforementioned 1995 KeyArena bond issue and the political mood of Seattle taxpayers.

Truth hurts boys, old Sonics fans just can't deal with the truth.

[Thunderhead]

I got my profit numbers from Forbes ("operating income"). The franchise made $24.5M last year.

http://www.forbes.com/teams/oklahoma-city-thunder/

That's less than Boston ($7.7M) and the Lakers ($24.3M).

They hardly "overpaid" for the Sonics, considering they could easily sell the Thunder and make all their money back. And they had to give away $50M to preserve the facade of the ownerships "good faith" effort to keep the team, thats just what it costs to move a franchise from another city. Why go through all that to run the team on the cheap?

And btw, you said above

The Thunder are very profitable, and made $30-50M last year. Their owner is worth billions. And Harden is the greedy one?

But then you claim the real number is 25 million.

Embellish much ?

Trying to make a point that does not hold water by embellishing ?

Bwahahaha, yeah OK, that's nothin new for internet message boards, especially here.

[slick_watts]

Business decisions are a reality in professional sports. Market size is a reality in professional sports. OKC probably had plans to pay some punitive tax to retain James, but drew a line in the sand at some point. James has been playing off the bench even though he is a starting caliber player, he was already making a sacrifice for the team. Sometimes two sides can't come together. It's easy for me to sit here and say OKC should have given him 4/60 and went for the title. But I don't have $100M to pay the 2014 bill+tax, either.

[countrybama24]

And btw, you said above

The Thunder are very profitable, and made $30-50M last year. Their owner is worth billions. And Harden is the greedy one?

But then you claim the real number is 25 million.

Embellish much ?

Trying to make a point that does not hold water by embellishing ?

Bwahahaha, yeah OK, that's nothin new for internet message boards, especially here.

Ya my bad, I read the 30-50M number as being for one year in the Simmons article, it was actually the last two. Not really an "embellishment" considering I quoted the correct number directly afterwards (embellishment would require some level of intent to deceive), just a mistake.

Since my only point was OKC is extremely profitable, and thus could afford to keep Harden, it doesn't really affect my argument at all. But keep defending your billionaire owner, I'm sure he has only the most noble intentions at heart while cutting salary to cash in on KD and Westbrook. Who needs championships when you can have more $$$?

[OlDirtMcBert]

I think it was foolish to trade Harden and not Westbrook. Harden is mature beyond his years, and Westbrook is a streaky baby that depends solely on athleticism.

[Effigy]

Yeah, Harden's not a jerk. If OKC offered the $60 million and he demanded a trade to a team that could pay him the fifth year, then maybe he's a jerk. But OKC tried to lowball him and he refused. He looked good today.

[KL78192020]

Oh please. They overpaid Perkins and screwed harden. Looks at the contracts getting thrown around to scrubs like Demar, Taj, injury prone players like Curry, and Gordon. Harden is a steal at that price.

[countrybama24]

Harden is a superstar who was willing to come off the bench. Sorry he wouldn't take being a 2nd tier guy on the team in shots, role AND salary. Can you name any players who fit that description (superstar sitting on the bench, getting less shots than two other perimeter players AND being paid less)? At all? Ever? It would have been an unprecedented sacrifice.

I can't even blame Presti. It's on ownership, they wanted to stay extremely profitable rather than only borderline profitable. I can't imagine they couldn't have just raised ticket prices, which i thought were underpriced (hence all the sold out games). I know the fans don't want to hear that, but (also) as a Jazz fan who has to root for a team without superstars and rarely is truly a contender, I would make that trade every single time.

[CKRT]

i dont think the thunder were selling out games because the tickets were cheap.

[countrybama24]

i dont think the thunder were selling out games because the tickets were cheap.

They could clearly charge more and still sell out. Thats my only point.

[Catchall]

Teams like Utah and OKC need to pick their battles and decide which positions they want to spend big money on. For example, the Jazz decided that they didn't want to spend max money on a PG and looked to trade DWill.

I'm guessing your GM decided that maxing out Westbrook, Durant and Harden made you too perimeter oriented, so the idea was to keep RW and KD and move some marbles to the front court. They must have decided that Harden was the most replaceable of the three. Lamb is a good prospect, and you'll have picks/trade chips to go after a decent big to pair with Ibaka. It's a reasonable move.