James Harden is a superstar

[giordunk]

Best performance of the season by anyone last night by James. I was so shocked watching that comeback happen.

[lorak]

Harden's on/off net is -2.1 this season. Both offense and defense are better with him on the bench. Any explanation?

It's definitely a good question to ask. Not that we should jump on the on/off quickly if there's no explanation, but it definitely warrants analysis. Wish we hadn't suffered a loss of APM data.

I tread very cautiously here in particular because Harden had such good numbers in OKC.

year place (RAPM)
2010 109th (+0.3)
2011 96th (+0.9)
2012 35th (+3.0)

So except of last year he wasn't anything special. And his very good result (but not superstar like) in 2012 was mainly because of unreal efficiency (.660 TS%, including .390 from 3P land).

This season he's average 3P shooter, very turnover prone and doesn't play a lot of D.

Overall Rockets S5 is not too good in 3P shots (Harden and Parsons are average, Lin is poor) and is very TOV prone (Harden, Lin and Asik) + of course defense. Not all of that is Harden's fault, but definitely he's part of that and it seems the biggest part.

On the other hand bench is excellent from 3P range (40.1% with 12.4 FGM per 48), less TOV prone and plays better defense.

So for me it looks like Harden is overrated right now. His box score numbers are inflated by pace (Rockets are by far the fastest team in the NBA) and style of play (pro offensive). He struggles with his new role taking a lot of bad shots (especially from long range), turns the ball over a lot and is unable to play good defense and good offense at the same time. Definitely player, who could be superstar in the future, but doesn't play like one right now.

[CKRT]

I'm not seeing the "takes lots of bad shots" when he's literally trying his best to get a good three, shot at the rim, or a foul. So that's a little overblown on your part. That's something we would say about Jennings, Monta, JR Smith, etc.

[Sasaki]

On the other hand bench is excellent from 3P range (40.1% with 12.4 FGM per 48), less TOV prone and plays better defense.

You're telling me that the Houston Rockets play better defense when Omer Asik isn't on the court.

[bastillon]

DStern, literally I can't believe what I'm reading right now. you're making a case against Harden because bench plays well ? what does that have to do with Harden himself ? I mean they're play well with him considering who's on the floor when he's playing. now why would it matter how they perform without him since different lineups are in the game then ?

Rockets are one of the best offensive teams in the league right now. Harden is basically carrying them on his back offensively. you can't say he doesn't impact the game offensively. his production is really astonishing and that translates to team results cuz Rockets offense plays well.

with/without and on/off are not the same thing. it's not even close to being the same. with/without has larger samples, more consistent lineups and we're only using that when player misses a lot of games anyway. in this case Harden's off court data is as if he missed like 2 or 3 games. why would you draw any major conclusions out of it ? it just doesn't seem consistent with your general approach.

I agree that boxscore stats don't capture Harden's abilities well right now. they're inflated because of high pace and Harden can struggle against set playoff defenses. that's something most of us in this thread agree with. but that doesn't mean his impact isn't large. Rockets are over .500 and that's not because of Lin and Asik. Harden's individual boxscore stats are only part of the reason why he's getting so much recognition. it's more because of the combination of winning and is efficiency.

[Sasaki]

I guess I disagree simply because as far as most Rockets fans are concerned, our bench has been pretty damn bad. All of them are pretty much 3 point shooters and not much more. So when they're on, it's fine. When they're not.....

[lorak]

On the other hand bench is excellent from 3P range (40.1% with 12.4 FGM per 48), less TOV prone and plays better defense.

You're telling me that the Houston Rockets play better defense when Omer Asik isn't on the court.

No. When I say "bench" then in this case it means "all lineups without Harden".

And Rockets play very good defense with Asik on the floor - if they would keep that level of D during whole season, they would be top 10 team on defense (currently they are 21st).

BTW, Asik himself is bad offensive player (TOV, FT%) but also his offensive liability limits Harden. Asik can finish only at rim and that area is also biggest Harden's strength. But because of Asik presence his efficiency at rim is much worse than last year in Oklahoma, when he played a lot in small lineups with Ibaka as C.

[Krodis]

I think you're trying to make a mountain out of half of a season's worth of raw +/- data, which is generally just a bad idea. Especially given, as I have said, the Rockets are an elite offensive team with him ON the court. So unless you buy the idea that the Rockets' bench is really, truly a Top 3 offensive team in the NBA.

Do you buy the idea that the Rockets' bench is an elite offensive team and that Carlos Delfino is having a Nashian offensive impact? Because by buying the raw +/- numbers, that's basically the only conclusion you're coming to.

[lorak]

Rockets bench (all lineups without Harden) is +4.8 on offense. That's not elite (for sure not Nashian like offense).

[Krodis]

The Rockets with him off the court have an ORTG of 110.3, good for 4th in the NBA. Of course, they're 5th with him on the court. Carlos Delfino has the best offensive +/- on the team with any significant amount of minutes (+6.7). Given that Lin, Harden, Parsons, and Asik all have negative offensive on/offs, and the Rockets are Top 5 in the NBA in offense, the only logical conclusion if we were to take raw +/- at face value is that Carlos Delfino is carrying a team to a Top 5 offense.

[lorak]

The Rockets with him off the court have an ORTG of 110.3, good for 4th in the NBA. Of course, they're 5th with him on the court. Carlos Delfino has the best offensive +/- on the team with any significant amount of minutes (+6.7). Given that Lin, Harden, Parsons, and Asik all have negative offensive on/offs, and the Rockets are Top 5 in the NBA in offense, the only logical conclusion if we were to take raw +/- at face value is that Carlos Delfino is carrying a team to a Top 5 offense.

That's not only logical conclusion. It isn't even logical at all.
Keep in mind that bench in this case means all lineups without Harden. And some lineups have Delfino with Asik or Parson or Lin but no Harden. So it's possible other S5 players play better offensively without Harden on the floor. It's also very possible that Delfino makes Harden's life easier (better spacing for example -what is true BTW, Harden's numbers are better with Delfino on the floor).

For example Lin without Harden scores a lot more and is hitting threes with incredibly better efficiency. Similar story with Parsons - without Harden he shot threes a lot better - and Asik - more pts and better efficiency without Harden. Team passing also seems better (more versitale without Harden).

So maybe Harden plays to much hero basketball? He obviously struggles with adjusting to his no 1 option role (3P, mid range, even at rim + TOV and defense) and that could hurt team. It seems to be the case here.

[Krodis]

So, you think Harden is hurting the team, which means you think the Rockets as currently constructed are a Top 3 or 4 offensive team without Harden? That doesn't exactly pass the smell test.

Things like 3 point shooting with and without a player is exactly the kind of thing that tends to be flukey on a small sample size.

I really think you're extrapolating too much, making conclusions where conclusions shouldn't be made. I mean, the team without Harden has played what, 600 something minutes? What kind of conclusions would you have made based on teams and players some 13-14 games into the season? Because that's the sample size without Harden.

[lorak]

So, you think

It's not about what I think, but what facts show. And we clearly see that 3 of 4 (Lin, Parsons, Asik) S5 players play better without Harden. And overall lineups without James shot better, turn ball over less and play better defense. + Harden himself is having down year in terms of shooting on all areas (3P, midrange, at rim). So it means he struggles in his new role and still need time to adjust the way his individual play will be optimal from team point of view. So far his box score numbers are definitely way better than his real value (impact). He's not superstar. Yet.

[kaitanuva]

Simple eye test shows that he single handled won us about 5 games all by himself in the clutch this season.

I don't care what your definition of superstar is, but here we have a guy that closes out games for us. Call him whatever you want, he gets us wins.

[Krodis]

Parsons isn't actually playing better without Harden, the sample size of Asik is all of 250 minutes, and while Lin is playing better without Harden, it's still only 320 minutes, is predicated almost entirely Lin shooting an unrealistic 45% from three, (whopping sample size: 31 attempts) and Harden is also playing better without Lin.

Maybe Lin is dragging Harden down.

The "facts" don't show anything. You're misusing statistics. No one claims that raw +/- is a good indicator on a sample size of less than 1 season. Most people don't think raw +/- is a good indicator at all, no matter the sample size.

[lorak]

I'm not even using +/- here... but keep trying.

[Krodis]

No, you're right, the presence of James Harden is stopping Jeremy Lin from being a glorious 45% three point shooter, which we know he is based on the whopping 31 attempts he's taken this year without Harden. Definitely more reliable than his career average (32%). Harden is also definitely holding Parsons from being a 41% three point shooter as well. Those 54 attempts without Harden are more reliable than his career average (35%).

Your agenda is obvious.

[lorak]

DStern, literally I can't believe what I'm reading right now. you're making a case against Harden because bench plays well ?

Not only bench. Lin, Asik and Parsons too.

with/without and on/off are not the same thing. it's not even close to being the same. with/without has larger samples, more consistent lineups and we're only using that when player misses a lot of games anyway. in this case Harden's off court data is as if he missed like 2 or 3 games. why would you draw any major conclusions out of it ? it just doesn't seem consistent with your general approach.

Harden's off court data this season is equal to 13 games. Good enough to use in with/without analysis.

I agree that boxscore stats don't capture Harden's abilities well right now. they're inflated because of high pace and Harden can struggle against set playoff defenses. that's something most of us in this thread agree with. but that doesn't mean his impact isn't large. Rockets are over .500 and that's not because of Lin and Asik.

Well, remember when last season you (and many other people too) were comparing Lin to Nash and almost everybody agree on that Asik is one of the best defensive big men in the league? So now I should believe there are not as valuable?

[lorak]

No, you're right, the presence of James Harden is stopping Jeremy Lin from being a glorious 45% three point shooter, which we know he is based on the whopping 31 attempts he's taken this year without Harden. Definitely more reliable than his career average (32%). Harden is also definitely holding Parsons from being a 41% three point shooter as well. Those 54 attempts without Harden are more reliable than his career average (35%).

Your agenda is obvious.

Look, sure, Lin's and Parson's 3P shooting without Harden is small sample. But 3P variance only explains a little bit of bad Harden's on/off. If we adjust for that he still would be probably around 0. So what, should we also adjust for that defense is better without him? Or that team turnover less without him? And so on. There's simply too many different elements which suggest that Harden isn't as good as his box score numbers are saying.

[Krodis]

But the team's turnover rate is identical with and without him. And regardless, no matter what you say, 633 minutes is a small sample size. The Bobcats were above .500 after 13 games this year. Noise is a huge issue.