[Media Conspiracy] "Harden has more help"...since WHEN?

The bench is a strength and there are a number of players on the Rockets that can step up at any time. Beverly in game 1, Lou in the middle of game 2, etc.

The frustration is the narrative that everyone expected them to be this good from the beginning and that they're too good of a team for Harden to be MVP.

We have a group of guys that play well together, bought into the system and know their role. But Harden is the engine and he deserves credit for buying in himself, bringing everyone along with him, and trusting his teammates to make plays over the entire season.

 

again, WB's teammates have GOT to get just unbelievably sick of that s***.

 

That's because Westbrook decided the Thunder had a better chance at winning if he started jacking up ill-advised shots and letting his teammates stand around on offense. If he'd kept his ego in check, they might have won this game.

Against a team like this year's Rockets, you don't have to give them much more than a tiny opening for them to erupt for 10-12 points in a couple of minutes. Those horrible shots by Russ provided the Rox with an opportunity to win.

 

We do have a better team because Harden is a better teammate. If Harden was with the Thunder they would be a better team because Harden is a better teammate.

 

The narrative that everyone expected them to be good doesn't exist. In fact, very few people expected them to be this good. That's why the preseason projections were so low.

Furthermore, the narrative that the strength of Harden's supporting cast precludes him from winning the MVP also doesn't exist.

If anything, the narrative on clutchfans has been "the Rockets' supporting cast must be weaker than OKC's supporting cast b/c that's what preseason projections indicated." And that narrative has been debunked by reality.

 

I think the media suffers from some issues of understanding. There's a difference between having more help, and using more help. Let's say I hop into a math exam, and my classmates are allowed to use calculators but I'm not. They have more help. Now let's say I'm a pompous son of a b**** and decide I'm too good to use a calculator, then that's me deciding not to use more help. Westbrook wants to be a one man show, and it isn't that the talent around him is trash. Maybe it doesn't have the depth the Warriors or Spurs have, but for Christ's sake it isn't the Brooklyn Nets either.

 

And to further the analogy...your calculator would actually start to become dumb and faulty due to lack of use. So when you get to a point where you have no choice but to use it, it gives you the wrong answers.

 

Okc payroll higher than Rockets.

 

I'm talking about the media not clutchfans.

Nobody expected us to be good. Agreed. The media has conveniently forgotten that we were afterthoughts going into this season, as was Harden. They have portrayed the Rockets as doing what we all thought they would.

The Thunder were almost universally favored to be ahead in the standings and even though they finished exactly where almost everyone thought they would, the narrative has been look what Westbrook has done with the Thunder and that roster.

The strength of Harden's supporting cast has absolutely been used against him in the MVP case. There have been a lot of mental gymnastics used to create a case for a 6th seed MVP.

The Rockets' supporting cast has obviously been superior. Whether that's due to talent, coaching, or fit, I don't know. But OKC didn't have a trash roster to start the season. Nobody thought that.

 

Yes, and that's because a lot of the OKC supporting cast didn't meet their expectations.

Think of it as a mathematical equation. Westbrook + Supporting cast = Projected Wins. If the supporting cast underperforms, then the only way for OKC to meet its projected wins is if Westbrook outperforms.

Yes, but expectations are trumped by reality, and the reality is that no one in OKC's supporting cast reached their expectations except Kanter.

 

There is media bias. Coolaid already said it. When the voters voted for Curry two years ago, they didn't hold the fact that his team had more help than the Rockets at the time. Now they seem to factor that into their voting criteria.

It wasn't criteria when Magic Johnson won MVP, or Lebron James, or Michael Jordan. But for some reason this year and this year only it is part of the MVP criteria?

It is ridiculous. #1, Harden should get credit for making his teammates better, and for Houston's better record.

Those are two things that should give Harden the edge.

If I look at things that could give Westbrook the edge, it's his record with triple doubles. That's only thing (I also understand that it can be argued about how OKC system seems to be set up for the express purpose of getting Westbrook those triple doubles).

I will also admit that I'm a homer Rockets fan hypocrite. Because two years ago when Curry won the MVP, one of the reasons I thought Harden deserved it more was because he had less help. But that was only one of the reasons. My main reason is that I felt that if you switch the two stars positions GSW would have been as good if not better, and the Rockets would have been worse. I believe that if you switch Harden with Westbook the Thunder would be improved from where they are now, and the Rockets wouldn't be as good as they are now.

In the long run, the Rockets have bigger goals than individual awards.

 

Sure that's one way to look at it. Or maybe they played worse because Westbrook didn't involve them or even remotely try and make them better. You could argue it either way. The only fact we have is that OKC is exactly what we thought they were.

 

I think the question your missing is why did "a lot of the OKC supporting cast" not meet their expectations? What was the breakdown that caused so many sources to believe "a lot" of the Thunder players were going to be more productive than they actually were?

 

There were plenty of reasons why the OKC supporting cast was overestimated at the beginning of the season.

Oladipo was the #2/3 option in Orlando (with Fournier behind Vucevic). In OKC, he'd be the undisputed #2 on an offensively deficient team so people expected a breakout year. After, all, that's what's expected after signing an $84mm/4 year extension, right? It didn't happen. I expected him to be more like Bradley Beal, but instead, he was a rich man's version of Courtney Lee.

Roberson? Roberson shot 31% from the 3pt line last year. That was terrible, and you'd think there would be nowhere to go but up. And surely, with more playing time and an offseason to improve, this 21 year old wing would at least become an Ariza-esque type of 3/D player, right? Wrong. He shot even worse this year. 24.6%. And that number is even more cringe-worthy when you realize that he only shoots 3's when he's wide, wide open.

Adams? He had some great showings against San Antonio in the 2016 playoffs, but disappeared against Golden State. Nevertheless, this 22 year old center showed a lot of potential and signed a $100mm contract in the offseason. Surely 2017 would be a breakout season, right? It turns out it wasn't. He plays solid defense, but his offensive abilities are limited to finishing layups/dunks created by teammates or offensive rebounds. In other words, he's in the same tier as Tristan Thompson. Thompson makes about $16.5mm/year and was overpaid for the sake of keeping together a championship team. For a guy who is about to be paid $25mm/year, Steven Adams should be a lot better than he is.

I know everyone wants to blame the underperformance of OKC's supporting cast on Westbrook, and he's a convenient scapegoat, but you have to allow for the possibility that some of these players simply won't meet their projections. You see it all the time with young players and big contracts. Do you remember when Ariza signed with us back in 2009? He was 24 years old, had just played an integral role on a championship team, and looked ready to have a breakout season as the cornerstone of our rebuilding team. And we all remember how that went.

 

Literally the Thunder were playing better when EVERYONE was involved. It turned into a **** show for them when Westbrook wanted to play superhero ball.

Yes they lost the lead when Westbrook sat in the 3rd, but all he had to do was move the ball around like he did in the first half when he came back and they probably would of taken the lead back and possibly the W.

 

Since when? Since the beginning of the 4th quarter.

 

btw how many assists on average for the brow when playing with Anderson and Gordon?

How much winning percentage when both healthy?

 

Westbrook passes to get assists.

James Harden makes the right play.

 

I hope Westicle's teammates open up a huge can of quit on him tonight. The media has **** on them all season for being worthless anyways......what's the point of even trying?? And it's not like Billy Donovan is saying or doing a damn thing to dispel the notion that they suck. In fact, he perpetuates it.