James Harden or Manu Ginobili, for a single year run

[picc]

Not even a debate worth discussing to be honest.

We'll miss your input then as you pursue endeavors elsewhere.

[dhsilv2]

It goes without saying that Harden is a more talented player

Does it? Harden is a generational guy and his durability during his prime was in a different universe. But Manu's talent is insane.

[dhsilv2]

Harden will just inevitably let you down in the playoffs, he has an unprecedented 15 year track record of going down in flames.

It's not even a ringless thing, his individual play drops off a cliff in the playoffs, and the more critical the game or series gets, the worse he plays.

Yes this is why its a question.

James Harden is unquestionably a far better regular season player than Manu. By laps and miles. And yet if he's running your team you can almost pencil in a nuclear level meltdown in the playoffs. While Manu is a reliable playoff performer.

Is that enough to choose Ginobili over him?

Maybe. But Ginobili running a team without the benefit of the Spurs system isn't something we've ever seen, and there's no way he could replicate James' volume and endurance over the course of a whole season, as the number one option and focus of a defense for 82 games. James was an ironman and an offensive savant who could handle any load given to him (ayo). But would you choose a Ferrari over a Honda for a race if you knew the Ferrari's engine would blow with 90% certainty?

I don't know. If I felt assured of the answer I wouldn't have asked.

Which system? The spurs changed their offense multiple times through his career. Early on it everything ran to Duncan. Then the spurs opened up the game to let Manu and Parker free style in transition and push tempo. Then they moved into a motion offense.

Manu thrived in all that. I don't get this "system" talk. There was no one system and Manu would come off the bench and the Spurs would change up how they played even then...

[-Luke-]

I guess the 19 players ahead of Harden are (in no particular order):

LeBron, Durant, Curry, Duncan, KG, Dirk, CP3, Nash, Shaq, Jokic, Giannis, Shai, Wade, Embiid, AD, Kawhi, T-Mac, Luka (?)

That's 18. Who else? Pierce, Butler, Paul George, Gasol? Or is one of the above 18 players not on the list? It's not Kidd because he was already in the episode before this. Also not Westbrook and Iverson.

Edit:
Embarrassing, I forgot Kobe. So the 18 above plus Kobe?

[TheNG]

I just want to ask all the people who are saying "Manu": Are you willing to give him max contract? Because otherwise I don't think it's a fair comparison...

[red96]

This is a silly conversation imo. Put Manu on a team with no Duncan, Parker, Pop, and force him to carry a team as the best player, adding 6-8 mpg more than hes ever averaged, while having to beat the double team on nearly every possession, and watch his efficiency and defense drop. Manu leading an average squad would be play-in at best, but more likely to miss the playoffs.

Manu was blessed to be in one of, if not the best situation for a player of his level and talent in the last 30 years of the league.

[Peregrine01]

I guess the 19 players ahead of Harden are (in no particular order):

LeBron, Durant, Curry, Duncan, KG, Dirk, CP3, Nash, Shaq, Jokic, Giannis, Shai, Wade, Embiid, AD, Kawhi, T-Mac, Luka (?)

That's 18. Who else? Pierce, Butler, Paul George, Gasol? Or is one of the above 18 players not on the list? It's not Kidd because he was already in the episode before this. Also not Westbrook and Iverson.

Edit:
Embarrassing, I forgot Kobe. So the 18 above plus Kobe?

I doubt that T-Mac gets placed above Harden. Embiid is a question mark too given lack of postseason success but I can see an argument because of his defense. Pierce, Butler, PG and Gasol were all in the honorable mentions category. If I had to guess, the missing player would be Dame.

[Peregrine01]

I just want to ask all the people who are saying "Manu": Are you willing to give him max contract? Because otherwise I don't think it's a fair comparison...

This is for a single year run. Multi-year isn't really a question given Harden's durability.

[dhsilv2]

I just want to ask all the people who are saying "Manu": Are you willing to give him max contract? Because otherwise I don't think it's a fair comparison...

I'd give Manu the super max in a heart beat...I'd just hope I get to give it to him in 2005 lol.

[TheNG]

I just want to ask all the people who are saying "Manu": Are you willing to give him max contract? Because otherwise I don't think it's a fair comparison...

This is for a single year run. Multi-year isn't really a question given Harden's durability.

That's not my point. Even for a single year Harden's salary is assumed (in people minds) to be as one of the highest paid players in the league. My question to all the people picking Manu is whether they apply the same standard for Ginobili.

[benson13]

In all seriousness though, I'd take Manu. Obviously Harden has been the better player. He's got an MVP.

If we're assuming either guy is the team's best player, well then said team isn't winning a championship. I'd probably sit both and tank for a better pick.

And I'd much rather have Manu as a second option than Harden.

[Peregrine01]

I just want to ask all the people who are saying "Manu": Are you willing to give him max contract? Because otherwise I don't think it's a fair comparison...

This is for a single year run. Multi-year isn't really a question given Harden's durability.

That's not my point. Even for a single year Harden's salary is assumed (in people minds) to be as one of the highest paid players in the league. My question to all the people picking Manu is whether they apply the same standard for Ginobili.

I would take Manu over Harden for a single year to win a championship presuming the team is already good. He can't carry a team like Harden can in the regular season but he's one of the best playoff performers we've seen this century. And the playoffs are an entirely different game from the regular season.

[TheNG]

This is for a single year run. Multi-year isn't really a question given Harden's durability.

That's not my point. Even for a single year Harden's salary is assumed (in people minds) to be as one of the highest paid players in the league. My question to all the people picking Manu is whether they apply the same standard for Ginobili.

I would take Manu over Harden for a single year to win a championship presuming the team is already good. He can't carry a team like Harden can in the regular season but he's one of the best playoff performers we've seen this century. And the playoffs are an entirely different game from the regular season.

That's a very low standard that doesn't mean a lot. A good team probably have enough good players earning a lot so by saying "presuming" you imply you are not willing to pay Manu as a max player.

[picc]

Which system? The spurs changed their offense multiple times through his career. Early on it everything ran to Duncan. Then the spurs opened up the game to let Manu and Parker free style in transition and push tempo. Then they moved into a motion offense.

Manu thrived in all that. I don't get this "system" talk. There was no one system and Manu would come off the bench and the Spurs would change up how they played even then...

All the ones you mentioned and a few others. All the ones where he was neither the primary offensive or defensive player on the team and got to come in and play to all his strengths in shorter bursts while often deferring or sharing significant loads to a bevy of other talented players on both sides throughout the entirety of his Spurs' tenure.

Mainly that one.

[picc]

I guess the 19 players ahead of Harden are (in no particular order):

LeBron, Durant, Curry, Duncan, KG, Dirk, CP3, Nash, Shaq, Jokic, Giannis, Shai, Wade, Embiid, AD, Kawhi, T-Mac, Luka (?)

That's 18. Who else? Pierce, Butler, Paul George, Gasol? Or is one of the above 18 players not on the list? It's not Kidd because he was already in the episode before this. Also not Westbrook and Iverson.

Edit:
Embarrassing, I forgot Kobe. So the 18 above plus Kobe?

I doubt that T-Mac gets placed above Harden. Embiid is a question mark too given lack of postseason success but I can see an argument because of his defense. Pierce, Butler, PG and Gasol were all in the honorable mentions category. If I had to guess, the missing player would be Dame.

Dame was in the HM category. I think it's Tmac.

[Doctor MJ]

Which system? The spurs changed their offense multiple times through his career. Early on it everything ran to Duncan. Then the spurs opened up the game to let Manu and Parker free style in transition and push tempo. Then they moved into a motion offense.

Manu thrived in all that. I don't get this "system" talk. There was no one system and Manu would come off the bench and the Spurs would change up how they played even then...

All the ones you mentioned and a few others. All the ones where he was neither the primary offensive or defensive player on the team and got to come in and play to all his strengths in shorter bursts while often deferring or sharing significant loads to a bevy of other talented players on both sides throughout the entirety of his Spurs' tenure. Mainly that one.

I have to say, I think it's clear cut that the Spurs "system" just held Ginobili back. Pop was literally getting mad at Ginobili playing pace & space in the time right before the NBA was about to realize that pace & space was literally just better than what NBA thinkers thought they knew.

We should not forget that the 21st century revolution in the NBA came by taking ideas from European basketball that could have been implemented in the NBA decades earlier.

Now, you can argue that Pop made the right move in staggering Ginobili's minutes, but this had nothing to do with why, say, Ginobili ran circles around the entirety of Team USA in 2004. When USA played Argentina in the semi-finals of that tourney, there was no doubt that Ginobili was the most effective player on the floor over any of the Americans - including Duncan - and it certainly had nothing to do with conserving Ginobili's energy.

Anyway, my overarching thought for this debate:

* I think Harden vs Ginobili is quite debatable.
* I don't say that because I consider Harden to be generally overrated.
* I say it because I think Ginobili in his time was just about the most underrated player I can imagine, because of what we thought we knew, that wasn't actually true.

[Doctor MJ]

I just want to ask all the people who are saying "Manu": Are you willing to give him max contract? Because otherwise I don't think it's a fair comparison...

Yes, I'd have given him a max contract.

[red96]

I guess the 19 players ahead of Harden are (in no particular order):

LeBron, Durant, Curry, Duncan, KG, Dirk, CP3, Nash, Shaq, Jokic, Giannis, Shai, Wade, Embiid, AD, Kawhi, T-Mac, Luka (?)

That's 18. Who else? Pierce, Butler, Paul George, Gasol? Or is one of the above 18 players not on the list? It's not Kidd because he was already in the episode before this. Also not Westbrook and Iverson.

Edit:
Embarrassing, I forgot Kobe. So the 18 above plus Kobe?

I doubt that T-Mac gets placed above Harden. Embiid is a question mark too given lack of postseason success but I can see an argument because of his defense. Pierce, Butler, PG and Gasol were all in the honorable mentions category. If I had to guess, the missing player would be Dame.

Dame was in the HM category. I think it's Tmac.

TMac argument holds 0 weight. By what measure could TMAC > Harden? Not by #'s, efficiency, longevity, accolades, durability, or playoffs success.

[picc]

Which system? The spurs changed their offense multiple times through his career. Early on it everything ran to Duncan. Then the spurs opened up the game to let Manu and Parker free style in transition and push tempo. Then they moved into a motion offense.

Manu thrived in all that. I don't get this "system" talk. There was no one system and Manu would come off the bench and the Spurs would change up how they played even then...

All the ones you mentioned and a few others. All the ones where he was neither the primary offensive or defensive player on the team and got to come in and play to all his strengths in shorter bursts while often deferring or sharing significant loads to a bevy of other talented players on both sides throughout the entirety of his Spurs' tenure. Mainly that one.

I have to say, I think it's clear cut that the Spurs "system" just held Ginobili back. Pop was literally getting mad at Ginobili playing pace & space in the time right before the NBA was about to realize that pace & space was literally just better than what NBA thinkers thought they knew.

We should not forget that the 21st century revolution in the NBA came by taking ideas from European basketball that could have been implemented in the NBA decades earlier.

Now, you can argue that Pop made the right move in staggering Ginobili's minutes, but this had nothing to do with why, say, Ginobili ran circles around the entirety of Team USA in 2004. When USA played Argentina in the semi-finals of that tourney, there was no doubt that Ginobili was the most effective player on the floor over any of the Americans - including Duncan - and it certainly had nothing to do with conserving Ginobili's energy.

Anyway, my overarching thought for this debate:

* I think Harden vs Ginobili is quite debatable.
* I don't say that because I consider Harden to be generally overrated.
* I say it because I think Ginobili in his time was just about the most underrated player I can imagine, because of what we thought we knew, that wasn't actually true.

It deflated his stats and volume and held him back in some ways. It inflated his efficiency and game economy and helped him in others.

[picc]

TMac argument holds 0 weight. By what measure could TMAC > Harden?

I can think of plenty but I'd rather stick to the topic here tbh.