<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/dYEcMCVG6DA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> I think you are loking at the Terry comparison because they both celebrate after they make a HUGE 3-pointer. Harden with the "down" 3 point sign, and Jason Terry with the "jet" motion with his hands James Harden is better than Jason Terry, because he actually has PG Skills, and is extremely smart with making decisions, while attacking the basket. The Hawks traded Terry, because he couldnt play the point, He was always a chucker. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/UgoOS1FGcmw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Do i want James Harden on the Rockets..... NO, same reason i didnt want Ginobili on the Rockets. I dont like Floppers
I think he's overrated by many in the media and doesn't get a lot of criticism because he plays with Durant and Westbrook, so he can probably command max dollars, but I don't think he deserves it yet. He seems to disappear in big games and in the Olympics he was definitely at the bottom of the totem pole. He's a good player and still young so can improve.
it's such nonsense tbh, and people keep saying it over and over. The guy had 3 bad finals games. were the other 2 great finals games not big? how about those great conference finals games? were they small? lets just go back to how LeBron disappears and isn't worth the max.
Having a player who can create his own shot outside of an offensive system where every play has to be run to perfection is worth the max... yes. Johnson needs to play off of others to score efficiently, Harden just needs the ball, and a big body to set a pick.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/MPyQayf8vpc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> agreed not a clutch player also people are dogging out Jason Terry like he is a bum, Jason terry used to kill the Rockets. Im glad he left the Mavs to be honest, some nights i preferred Dirk shoot the ball againist us than Terry. Terry just wouldnt miss in his prime all 3 have won the 6th man award, so its a moot point for comparisons... but i found James Harden DX profile really funny.. check it out http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/James-Harden-1241/ http://www.nbadraft.net/players/james-harden
I like Harden, I do but I don't see that much of a difference between Harden and Johnson honestly. Harden is in the perfect situation where he is either playing against backups or handling the ball when other players can't leave their man to help. I think Johnson 4 years ago anyway, could do many of the same things in that type of a role. I do not think James Harden is a franchise level player or the type your offer mazx money to; but again I like him in his current role.
they are very different players. two great shooters, but a legit playmaker in Harden vs. a big strong 2 who can iso a bit, post up other 2s a bit, defends much better, but not at the same level as a playmaker (Johnson). in terms of overall impact though, i agree, they are comparable. That said.... i think "max contract" causes people to black out. It's one thing to give Joe Johnson "max" of 20 mil a year. It's another thing when the max is 14-15 mil a year. Joe Johnson is not worth 20 mil, especially given the risk of physical decline. But he'd be easily worth 14-15 mil if he was still a 23 year old with no health concerns.
Harden's upside is a healthy Brandon Roy. He's the type of gamble a team like the Rockets needs to take. But he probably won't come here.
I dont know where this whole "gamble" thing is coming from. He wouldn't be getting the veteran's max contract that Johnson or Kobe Bryant got right before the new CBA hit. On average you are looking at 14M a year since he is coming off his rookie contract. Even if he produces identicle numbers as he did last season then he's well worth it to a team that is going to be flirting with the league minimum in salary this year and next. Plus, if Joe Johnson can be traded making 22M a year then Im pretty sure Morey could find a way to trade Harden making 14M a year if he didn't exactly live up to promise. To me its not a gamble at all. Its a no-brainer whether you love him or not.
It wouldn't really make sense for the Rockets to offer Harden a max. He is indeed an all star player but not a superstar. James Harden is very talented with high upside but he isn't good enough to be the alpha male type player on a contender. He is a great 2nd tier player to the big stars in the league. Any team that would throw the max at James Harden would end up similar to the Hawks when they offered Joe Johnson the max. They will end up a good team but not a contender. Both Harden and Johnson are similar in many ways. Both can shoot the ball very well, can create their own shot and create for others as well. They can do a little of everything on the offensive end. They both are very good scorers but doesn't impact the game like Lebron, Durant, Kobe, Wade etc. A team that would offer him the max would be handcuff in the cap situation for many years which limits them in acquiring more talent. The Rockets do have tons of cap space right now and I don't see them using that up for a guy like Harden. I think Morey would sign Harden at the right price but the max is just too out of reach. Plus if Jeremy Lamb becomes the lethal scorer and a capable defender, they really don't need Harden. They can use that cap space and upgrade other positions which make a lot more sense given the direction this team is going. The development of our young players play the biggest role in the rebuilding process. As of now, I just don't really see any current stars that would fit this team. The upcoming free agents like Chris Paul or Harden wouldn't help this team out of mediocrity and the other big names are pretty much staying with their current team. The only thing is for our young guys to develop into stars and the upcoming lottery in the next few years. Just draft the right player in the top picks and develop our current players is basically the only direction for this team.
The guys on the radio show were right. Harden is not a max player. Just wouldn't make sense to put him in front of Lamb.
If Lamb develops really well into a lethal scorer and a capable defender, would you still sign Harden and have Lamb back him up or would you continue to skip on Harden and give Lamb the opportunity to thrive and develop more?
Absolutely right. Lamb is clearly the better asset to have. I mean, sure, he hasn't actually played an NBA game yet, was a lower draft pick, put up less prolific college stats, and has worse measurements generally, but he could be a pretty solid player. I think it's about time we get negative reps around here for stupid comments like the above. I think we're now at the 12th month and 10th thread about this and it doesn't matter how many times the smarter posters try and explain the exact nature, terms and types of a James Harden max contract and why it isn't a Joe Johnson type max contract for example, and you still get people who either don't read or for some reason can't comprehend what they're reading. Never mind the fact that Harden's 21.1 PER is better than Joe's highest and that Harden has the upside of not being a starter yet, not being "the man" yet, and only being 23 years old. A max contract offer to Harden would be a no brainer, regardless of what happens with anybody else on the team. That's not how you handicap your franchise. It's how you save it.
Dobro - I think "gamble" is being used in the sense that its unclear whether he would regress or not. Currently, there's a belief that Harden's deficiencies are being hidden by the fact that he's playing w/ WB and KD. He's not being asked to carry a large burden. The question remains whether he can perform at or above the same level of production when there's more pressure/burden on him to perform/carry the team. I believe its a good "gamble." It's a gamble in the most basic sense (can player X perform as well in a different situation?) that we consider when looking at ANY player, but it's a gamble nonetheless. A gamble well worth it in my opinon.
As of today I would still trade for(and sign in the summer) Harden regardless of what you think Lamb "might be." The first word in your statement was the word if. Since we really just dont know what kind of player Lamb is going to be, you take a player like Harden any day of the week when you can get him and dont think twice. Worse, comes to worst and you have Harden come off the bench in the same role he's in now if Lamb turns out to be the second coming of Michael. Having a Lin/Lamb/Harden guard combo sounds pretty cool to me. 3 guard rotations are really what you would like to have as a coach anyways so you can shorten the rotation to 8 or 9.
Im going to respectfully disagree with that actually because late in games the majority of last season Harden was the guy who was relied upon to create offense. Plus, he did take a beating in the media for his performance in the finals. If he's not burdened with responsibility in OKC then Im not sure why he took so much heat for his performance in a couple of games. KD and RW get more stats and headlines, but Harden is a very important part of what they do. Much like the Asik signing and extended role, even if he continues to do what he has done the last year consistently, he's worth it.
