That's fair enough, but still no sense to blow up the team after the very first year of what was a successful reboot. Give it time...give it time...
Thank you. And understood. I get not wanting the Rockets to become unwatchable and enter a decade plus long dark era. I just want to win championship rings much more than caring about them being consistently relevant (i sat through and watched and actually went to many many games during the Francis, Mobley, Moochie, Taylor, Cato, Griffin era, happy to do so again if necessary) and have decent trust of DM to do well in the draft (even though he seems to be better drafting sleeper picks than lotto picks...)
No doubt you are being realistic about it. If trading harden, it needs to be a rebuild for young players and lotto picks. You arent spouting dumb crap like harden for john wall. Im just of a different mindset. I dont want to start a rebuild/tanking process
Yeah, I just don't view the year as successfully as some. Did I anticipate 55 wins and the 3rd seed and the second round? No... but in case you haven't noticed by now, my view is always towards rings or bust. While I recognize and appreciate all they did well, I think the long-term view of this rebuild is pretty clear, mostly especially given the team's lack of assets to improve so much as for it to be meaningful. 5 years, all playoff exits, most with Harden under-performing... shouldn't result in give it time, imo.
1) Of course it was successful. Highly successful. By any objective measure it was a huge success. 2) Rings or bust is the wrong mentality to have. The Rockets, in all realistic measure, have zero chance at beating the Warriors, and the certainly have no chance in the next 5 years without Harden. If this is the mentality, then I can assure you that it's going to be a bust. 3) I won't argue that Harden's been good in the final games of the year. He hasn't. But I'm wondering why many seem to ignore all the other games where he does well. 4) If the Rockets can get off the Anderson contract (big if), then there is a pretty obvious way for them to substantially improve. Will they be Warriors-level? I don't think so, but "Not the most talented team of all time" is a bad reason to blow it up.
I just dont think its smart business to tear down a team with the 3rd best record in the nba. I mean if we woulda won game 5 then we could be in the WCF right now. Yeah harden AND gordon choked at the end there but we still woulda won in regulation if we had another big guy to stop that manu layup that tied the game with 30 sec left. I think the probability of that kind of stuff breaking right at least once over the next 3-5 years is greater then building a championship team by tanking for the next 5-10 years. As @don grahamleone said, there are at least 25-30 big men in the nba that woulda helped us win that series if we had them. You never know if currys ankles will break down again, you never know if spurs will all be old other than kawhi finally. I mean nba history is full of dudes who "couldnt get it done" until they did! I think the smarter approach is to try to add another star by any means neccesaary and get more big man/wing depth. Need more rim protection and cant play trevor 38 min a night. We had the 3rd best record in the nba. We are within striking distance. Thats not something that NBA executives walk away from
Yep, I got you. I do. Though do want to be clear for those thinking I spouting trading Harden for some future pick... I'm talking about seeing who gets the #1 pick tonight (draft lottery) and seeing if they'd be willing to move that pick (in a really good draft) PLUS other assets. I think you mentioned Wiggins as you might not get what you wish for. Looking at that... I get that the Twolves disappointed. everyone thought they'd be a playoff threat for real this year. and they started so freaking slow. And absolutely Wiggins had some down games. But he's way ahead of where Harden was at a similar age. He's basically not Lebron, and overshadowed by KAT who has been better. But the TWolves are going to be good in the next 3-4 years. Really really good. They'll slowly surround those guys with the right role players.
And given this time, what do you expect to happen? Ariza, Beverley, Anderson, and Gordon aren't getting any better, and our free agent options are limited. We could trade Gordon or Anderson, but Gordon outperformed his contract, and we specifically wanted a stretch 4. How many stretch 4's are both better than Anderson and on the trading block? And even if Capela takes a big step forward next year, that's still not nearly enough to close the gap between us and the Warriors/Spurs. So how do you expect us to improve as a team? Logically, you'd have to think that Harden would improve tremendously, and if that's the case, what makes you think that? Since his peak in 2015, he hasn't added any new skillsets to his game, and I think he was in better physical shape back then.
Is he way ahead though? Wiggins averaged 23.6 points. At 22 same age harden averaged almost 17 in less minutes,shots, and usage. He was the second youngest ever to win that 6th man award. He averaged around 25 the very next year. Im skeptical that wiggins will ever be better than harden was this year
That's to each their own. My mentality is different than yours... which is fine. C'mon? Seriously? I mean you can't understand why folks like TMac, CP3 are so consistently noted as being playoff chokers?? It doesn't mean these guys aren't HOF candidates (clearly, they are). But its obvious why the end games matter MUCH more than the other ones. I mean if anything tells us this more clearly, its the resting phenomenon. Pop has just given games away. Lebron has just given games away. I mean while I think he was still going for the #1 seed, Lebron resting basically gave Boston the #1 seed, because Lebron really didn't care about it. It's the regular season. While I don't think the Rockets can move Anderson purely for cap space, let's assume for a second they can. For one, they'd obviously have to sweeten that deal, so that's giving away draft picks and/or a Harrell or Dekker type. Which is probably ok. Those aren't really all that valuable. But for two, what's the obvious way? Gordon Hayward? Blake Griffin? Paul Millsap. I mean I get here is no tampering... but how is that obvious? There's virtually no sign that any of those players in any way is interested in coming to Houston. That's just a prayer as much as anything. NM that fact that Blake is always injured come playoff time. But fine, assume the Rockets can create max cap space and get one of those guys. Hey, I'll of course be cheering for them, but I'm pretty sure I know how seasons with that team will end.
Was this Wiggins 21 year or 22 year? Harden did 2 years at Arizona State. Wiggins only did 1 in college. I could argue compare their 21 year, but you could also argue it's year 3 in the nba that matters. In any case, not really sure how you can argue that Wiggins isn't ahead. Maybe not way ahead, but ahead. Even if Harden was purposefully kept in that 6th man role, he had 7 total starts through his first three years. To be clear though, I don't see James Harden's upside in Andrew Wiggins. But I do see lots of upside in the Twolves and the plan they've put in place. It certainly depends a lot on luck / solid scouting and drafting. The Wolves ended up with Wiggins, KAT, Lavine. The Warriors got Curry, Klay and Dray - not to mention Harrison Barnes. The Sixers ended up with MCW, Noel, Embiid (always injured) and ?? (Simmons) and more draft picks. The Pelicans couldn't continue to build around Davis. The Kings draft history is like a horror movie.
This is a complete hypothetical. Most importantly they didn't win Game 5 (primarily because of Harden... Gordon choked once, Harden kept turning the ball over, kept the dribble dribble in effect, etc.), so I can only draw conclusions on what has happened. But even if they had, no clue if they would have won game 6 or 7. I can envision a scenario where Harden doesn't go back into that game and they pull it out and the series. I've seen that story before. Ha. To me that's like the Rockets of 2 years ago who thought they were so close. Or the Blazers of last offseason who were jazzed about a second round appearance. It should have come as no surprise to anyone that the Rockets struggled last year (Harden and Dwight were never clicking, McHale was always in way over his head, Lawson is a high usage ball in his hand guy if at his best), just as it was completely mindblowing that anyone thought the Blazers were all of a sudden an on the up team because they beat a Clippers squad without their best players. I'm sure the Clippers fans have been thinking the same thing, too. Alternative theory. There's a reason why that stuff doesn't break right. Because there's no clear leader, dominant playoff performer leading the way. Actually, it did break right once. Harden was on the bench during that breaking right. I'm just trying to shortcut the Rockets past a 5-10 year tanking period. Again, not all about Harden. A BIG failure was losing Howard for nothing. Had to get assets in return for him. Got nothing. Then they've spent their cap space. I think the NBA is as full of guys who never got it done than those who finally did. For every Pierce or KG or Dirk, there's a Nique, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, Nash, Miller, Ewing, Melo, Dwight, Russ, etc. KD would be (and still is) in that group. But absolutely you never know. And that speaks more to how they've ended the season again. With a horrible performance. With another post-season of under-performance by their star. It wasn't just getting beat. They beat themselves.
Well the cruel reality is that only 1/30 teams win every year and most players never get it done. My argument hinges on the fact that the probability of harden breaking through and morey adding more guys combined with other teams potential bad luck is greater then entering the ultimate crap shoot and starting over. Some teams stay stuck in that mode for 20 years... Both odds are rare. Im gonna throw out random numbers. You dont chuck away a 15% chance to win the titke every year for 5 years to start over and build a team that MIGHT eventually get 10-20 percent chance later. You try to milk the 15 percent chance years while you can. Starting over is NOT productive. @tinman always likes to point out that 2 years ago was the 1st time we made the 3rd round since barkley You could lose relevancy for 20 plus years if you give up on what we are trying to build
I'm talking playoff games. He's had many great ones. Those seem to be ignored. However...he's had some bad ones as well, and those are seen as unequivocal PROOF of his incapability. I find it strange. The answer is somewhere in between. Of course. Literally every foreseeable season has a 99.99% chance of not winning a ring. There is zero way around that. This does not mean that the team will stop trying to play basketball. I hate to break it to you. We are not the Sixers. Maybe when Les sells the team we will be, but for now, I guess we are destined for "unsuccessful" seasons.
It blows my mind how stupid and short-sighted sports fans are... Trading Harden, barring a miracle draft, would be the stupidest move this team has ever made. And lulz at him being a "choker". God knows what happened in game 6, and it was indefensible, but I assure you he didn't choke.
Can you answer the question? You want to give the Rockets "time", but what do you expect to happen in this "time"?
I expect zero championships within the next 5 years with Harden as the only star on his team. That much is a guarantee. I expect zero championships within the next 5 years with Markelle Fultz or Lonzo Ball as the only star on their team. That much is a guarantee. See the similarity? Y'all want championship caliber teams with multiple stars, but you want to trade away the only star.
Yes, but if we trade for draft picks, we aren't just getting Fultz (or whoever). We're also getting early lottery picks in the subsequent years (through either trade or by being a bad team). In other words, if you're able to trade Harden for picks and young players, then in 5 years from now, you'd be closer to a championship than you'd be if you kept Harden. And during those 5 years, both strategies would have the same probability of winning a title (0%).
