The Paul George Vs James Harden Debate

[WillyJakkz]

2 guys I was wrong about.

I knew both were talented and always liked the 2 but George I thought was too laid back to be the man but w/ Granger getting hurt he stepped his game up while Harden I thought was good but wasn't a max player...silly me dude showed his ass off in Houston this season as the man so w/ that said...

Who's the better player?


Paul George

or


James Harden

[GSP]

Harden is better right now but Id want George on my team.

[BlackIce]

Harden, anyone saying George is being prisoner of the moment imo. Harden is an elite ball handler, gets to the line better and in general is a franchise type offensive talent. Paul George is one of my favourites right now, but his defensive ability doesn't make up for the difference in efficiency and overall offensive ability.

[An Unbiased Fan]

Harden's offense is more impactful than PG's defense. On a team like Houston, what would PG do? his lack of offensive ability would land that squad a good lottery pick. Think Gerald Wallace on the Bobcats.

Harden on Indy would been pretty interesting.

[TheChosen618]

As of right now, Harden is better. George isn't a consistent offensive threat right now specifically with shot making and shot creating. I think George will end up being the better player and has more potential though.

I'm not sure how much Harden will improve from this point forward.

[B_Creamy]

Harden's offense is more impactful than PG's defense. On a team like Houston, what would PG do? his lack of offensive ability would land that squad a good lottery pick. Think Gerald Wallace on the Bobcats.

Harden on Indy would been pretty interesting.

Gerald Wallace is a very apt comparison. Peak Wallace and PG are similar defenders while PG is a better playmaker and Wallace is a far better rebounder and more efficient scorer. In these terms I think there's an big gap between those guys and an offensive talent like Harden.

[tsherkin]

I agree with AUF, although as George improves, this will be a very interesting debate. He's still a very good player and an exciting young talent.

[Vinsanity420]

Cool thread... this is probably closer than most people think. Harden and George are literally right next to each other in the IPV data.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub ... alse&gid=0

In the end I agree with the consensus that Harden's offense is more valuable. Harden's ridiculous +5.0 value makes it easier for a team to build around than a 2 way star like Paul George.

[richboy]

Harden's offense is more impactful than PG's defense. On a team like Houston, what would PG do? his lack of offensive ability would land that squad a good lottery pick. Think Gerald Wallace on the Bobcats.

Harden on Indy would been pretty interesting.

What is that actually based on though. Houston played good offense without Harden. They also played much better defense without Harden. Lin and Parsons played much better without Harden so your getting more from them. I actually could see Lin, George, and Parsons as a 3 putting up more offense than Harden, Lin, Parsons.

Houston is a weird team because they were horrible defensively despite adding better defensive players besides Harden. OKC lost Harden and became an elite defense. Switch George and Harden you do have a shot to have some of the best defensive personnel in the entire league.

Like I say its not always what you do its how you do it. How much you take away from your teammates to get yours. Your changing a extremely high usage PNR player for a low usage guy in Paul George. George had the lowest usage of a player that averaged 17 ppg ore more in the league. That was not a center or PF. Parsons and Lin likely raise production. They do become a better defensive team. I couldn't see a reason why Houston be just as good with George than Harden.

[CBA]

I agree with AUF, although as George improves, this will be a very interesting debate. He's still a very good player and an exciting young talent.

They're only separated by 9 months.

[tsherkin]

I agree with AUF, although as George improves, this will be a very interesting debate. He's still a very good player and an exciting young talent.

They're only separated by 9 months.

And? I wasn't making an age-based comment, just noting that George is an exciting player who happens to be young.

[Johnny Firpo]

Yeah, until George further improves his offense, there is no debate imo. Harden at the moment, handily. Once George hits 22PPG on, say, 56-57%TS, i think i'll choose him. That would be a big, although not impossible offensive jump for him.

[tsherkin]

I think that if George can learn how to not suck at offense besides 3pt shooting, then he'd probably already be a 54-55% TS player. He takes way too many threes for his talent level, and he sucks ass at everything between the rim and the 3pt line. He needs a mid-range game, kind of like Harden, only he doesn't draw fouls at an elite level, so his efficiency is mediocre and his variance from game to game is high because he takes a half-dozen 3s per game and doesn't do anything else terribly well as a scorer.

Honestly, though, small changes like better off-ball movement and maybe a better floater and he'd be good enough on O that this would become a much more interesting argument, because he does pass pretty well and he has good athleticism, great size, etc. These playoffs, he's been marginally above average on the entire PS offensively speaking because he's been drawing at over .500 FTA/FGA, but that's not really sustainable for him.

We'll see. He's got the tools and he's got the time. He isn't likely to be an elite offensive player, but he's got the chance to improve from where he is, and when you factor in his diversity as a player and his absence of need to really chuck, he could potentially be very, very good.

[john248]

Cool thread... this is probably closer than most people think. Harden and George are literally right next to each other in the IPV data.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub ... alse&gid=0

In the end I agree with the consensus that Harden's offense is more valuable. Harden's ridiculous +5.0 value makes it easier for a team to build around than a 2 way star like Paul George.

+1 to the above quote. Harden is just great at dribble penetration, drawing fouls, and making plays which makes him able to carry an offense well. PG is showing flashes of that, but his defense isn't enough to put him over what Harden does.

[Jersey Generals]

Both, with them playing right next to each other. Near perfect fit.

[G35]

I'll say this if George is on the Rockets and Harden is on the Pacers I think Rockets get better and the Pacers don't. George would improve the Rockets defense while still having good enough scoring with Parsons/Beverly/Garcia/Lin.

I don't see the Pacers being better with Harden in his current iso-heavy/foul drawing form. I think George's versatility brings more to a team until Harden rounds out his offense.....

[DreDay]

Easily George. Hardens offense is overrated. In the playoffs, Harden is a ball hogging scrub who makes your team worse and takes up a quarter of the salary cap.

[Basileus777]

Defense is half the game. Harden is awful on that end and George is one of the best defensive wings in the league. It's George.

[daschysta]

George destroy Harden head to head if that matters to anyone, Harden has looked like Garbage whenever George guards him.

[Swingy]

Harden comfortably for me. I think PG is the 2nd best perimeter defender after LeBron, but it's not impactful enough to override Harden's scoring and passing ability. George did show me signs of improving his foul drawing rate by quite a bit in the future, but until he does it consistently, I'll take Harden without blinking.