James Harden traded to the Rockets

Sinant · Post #1201 » by **Sinant** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 2:56 am

CHA_77_Bobcats wrote:
therealbig3 wrote:
Absolutely. How is it not arguable?

The fact that Westbrook and Durant didn't die.

You clearly haven't seen the little chart pictures that show how Harden was secretly the best player on the Thunder.

Gotta read more charts man.

twozeroMM · Post #1202 » by **twozeroMM** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 2:57 am

ibraheim718 wrote:
twozeroMM wrote:^^ What exactly does Harden do better then Gordon? Besides being a little better in play making

TwentyOne920 wrote:Harden played around 460 minutes without Durant and Westbrook.

What manner is Eric Gordon better than James Harden apart from points per game?

This comparison is just like the Rose Westbrook comparison. They have very similar numbers, but Rose is just the better player in many people eyes. Same goes for Gordon being better then Harden.

A little better at play making? He's a lot better at playmaking, he's also a better finisher.. especially with contact.

I give up lol, I would just take Gordon over Harden if he stayed healthy. Don't get me wrong tho, there both good players that have bright futures in this league.

Oh and Gordon has that 4th courter signature skill in 2k

Post #1203 » by **og15** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 3:01 am

Bball Reasons wrote:Gordon isn't nearly the player Harden is. You're taking crazy pills. This would be true even if he could stay healthy. The fact that he CAN'T makes the discussion even more ridiculous.

Gordon can score just as well, was quite efficient in his one long stretch as a 20+ PPG scorer. 22.3 pts / .566 TS%, and he can also handle the ball and be used as a playmaker, 4.4 APG in that same season. Lastly, he's been commended for his defense by every coach he has, so he's certainly not inferior defensively.

The injury issue is obviously a big thing, and if he can't be healthy, Harden is better for a team, but purely on production and ability, the only reason Harden could be thought of as being at a different level is because he's played for a superior team.

It's fine for one to think Harden is better, but speaking as if they are on different levels as players is not accurate.

therealbig3 · Post #1204 » by **therealbig3** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 3:41 am

Sinant wrote:
CHA_77_Bobcats wrote:
therealbig3 wrote:
Absolutely. How is it not arguable?

The fact that Westbrook and Durant didn't die.

You clearly haven't seen the little chart pictures that show how Harden was secretly the best player on the Thunder.

Gotta read more charts man.

I said Harden was arguably the second best player on the Thunder last year. I was referring to Durant as the best.

Westbrook is obviously better than Harden now? Really? Nobody said that last year during the regular season and throughout the playoffs. Revisionist history.

In fact, Harden was considered better by some because he was a far better playmaker that was far more efficient that played more under control than Westbrook, and Westbrook was called a chucker. I don't agree with Westbrook being a chucker, but there's definitely an argument to be made for Harden.

Post #1205 » by **Slava** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:18 am

Was reading through the ESPN 5 on 5 and stumbled on this thing:

Adande: The Heat and Lakers should love it. With Harden, the Thunder were only 19 points away from sweeping Miami in the Finals -- and that was with a subpar Harden in the team's first trip to the last round

Anyone know what he meant here?

ClayDavis · Post #1206 » by **ClayDavis** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:24 am

SlavaMedvedenko wrote:Was reading through the ESPN 5 on 5 and stumbled on this thing:

Adande: The Heat and Lakers should love it. With Harden, the Thunder were only 19 points away from sweeping Miami in the Finals -- and that was with a subpar Harden in the team's first trip to the last round

Anyone know what he meant here?

the thunder were close to winning the finals and that was with harden being absolute garbage. the series was 5 games but it was much closer than it seemed. now that harden factor is gone both teams can breath a sign of relief.
heat probably hate this more than the lakers. the heat were counting on the thunder blocking the lakers cause seriously who do you fear more perkins or dwight?

Post #1207 » by **Slava** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:33 am

ClayDavis wrote:
SlavaMedvedenko wrote:Was reading through the ESPN 5 on 5 and stumbled on this thing:

Adande: The Heat and Lakers should love it. With Harden, the Thunder were only 19 points away from sweeping Miami in the Finals -- and that was with a subpar Harden in the team's first trip to the last round

Anyone know what he meant here?

the thunder were close to winning the finals and that was with harden being absolute garbage. the series was 5 games but it was much closer than it seemed. now that harden factor is gone both teams can breath a sign of relief.
heat probably hate this more than the lakers. the heat were counting on the thunder blocking the lakers cause seriously who do you fear more perkins or dwight?

No I meant the 19 points away from sweeping Miami in the finals part. I don't understand how he arrived at that calculation.

Sedale Threatt · Post #1208 » by **Sedale Threatt** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:35 am

That's the amount of points they would have needed to win Games 2-4.

jstnw89 · Post #1209 » by **jstnw89** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:35 am

SlavaMedvedenko wrote:No I meant the 19 points away from sweeping Miami in the finals part. I don't understand how he arrived at that calculation.

Some use of Mathematics

Bball Reasons · Post #1210 » by **Bball Reasons** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:35 am

SlavaMedvedenko wrote:
ClayDavis wrote:
SlavaMedvedenko wrote:Was reading through the ESPN 5 on 5 and stumbled on this thing:

Anyone know what he meant here?

the thunder were close to winning the finals and that was with harden being absolute garbage. the series was 5 games but it was much closer than it seemed. now that harden factor is gone both teams can breath a sign of relief.
heat probably hate this more than the lakers. the heat were counting on the thunder blocking the lakers cause seriously who do you fear more perkins or dwight?

No I meant the 19 points away from sweeping Miami in the finals part. I don't understand how he arrived at that calculation.

Without looking, I'm guessing the overall point differential was +19 for the Heat through 4 games.

Bertrob · Post #1211 » by **Bertrob** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:37 am

Sedale Threatt wrote:That's the amount of points they would have needed to win Games 2-4.

Nope that adds up to 16

Sedale Threatt · Post #1212 » by **Sedale Threatt** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:37 am

Game 2: 100-96, five points
Game 3: 91-85, seven points
Game 4: 104-98, seven points

19 points total

Bertrob · Post #1213 » by **Bertrob** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:40 am

Sedale Threatt wrote:Game 2: 100-96, five points
Game 3: 91-85, seven points
Game 4: 104-98, seven points

19 points total

Oh yeah you have to add a point to each game cause if not it'd be tied
:banghead:

my mistake

Post #1214 » by **Slava** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:41 am

Am I the only one who thinks its a bit daft? I mean you cannot spin a 4-1 loss to a 4-0 win by just adding the point differential right?

Bertrob · Post #1215 » by **Bertrob** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:42 am

SlavaMedvedenko wrote:Am I the only one who thinks its a bit daft? I mean you cannot spin a 4-1 loss to a 4-0 win by just adding the point differential right?

J.A Adande is the definition of "daft"

Sedale Threatt · Post #1216 » by **Sedale Threatt** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:42 am

bertrob wrote:Oh yeah you have to add a point to each game cause if not it'd be tied
my mistake

I did the same thing at first...

Sedale Threatt · Post #1217 » by **Sedale Threatt** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:43 am

SlavaMedvedenko wrote:Am I the only one who thinks its a bit daft? I mean you cannot spin a 4-1 loss to a 4-0 win by just adding the point differential right?

Yes, especially because a 6.3 MOV is not a small thing. That would have put you third or fourth best in the league last year over the entire season.

Super Selby · Post #1218 » by **Super Selby** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:45 am

stop baiting.

-kt.

dznutzz · Post #1219 » by **dznutzz** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 6:08 am

i'm not sold on harden.

the rockets now have 2 guys trying to prove themselves

CKRT · Post #1220 » by **CKRT** » Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:12 am

ropjhk wrote:If you had to trade Harden then the value that OKC got was pretty good. The thing is that they didn't have to trade Harden. This shows us what kind of owner Bennett is. He's not the type who will open his wallet to get his team over the hump.

Actually Bennett/OKC's ownership would've payed, but Presti chose the model of sustainability over winning.