Hey he might have a point if you are only counting the times Harden is actually holding his man. A lot of the time he's out there running around like a confused child.
The Harden defense debate is quite intriguing. Eye test or stats? Does he not pursue his cover but just swipes at the ball from behind? Does he not fight over the P&R and just depends on the switch and the resulting mismatch? Are the shooting guards of the league a motley bunch overall and Harden reaps the benefits of guarding less than stellar players? The answers to those questions are not obvious. Maybe I will look into it.
It is an interesting debate. The theory of "making a good offensive player work on defense" comes to mind. Take a guy like Tony Allen. He's a good defender, but since he doesn't do much on offense (allowing the good offensive player time to rest), how much does it hurt him on defense (having a "rested" player). What ratio of good/bad offense/defense works best is the question. Would take some detailed research. The obvious advantage is getting the good offensive player in foul trouble.
It's trolling to think George is slightly better than Harden? Hopefully you don't truly believe that. If you wanna see trolling, read post #93. A poster gave one of the league's best defenders ZERO credit in helping his team's defense.
I am not sure that I understand enough to broach this topic. Ideally I would assume that the optimal line of player development is to attain proficiency in either offense or defense and then spend years developing the other. Energy consumption has to play a major role. How many players have the physiological makeup to expend that amount of effort on both sides of the court? The ability to go 100% on both sides of the ball is, I believe, critical. And rare. However an argument can be made that defense in the NBA is more about team coordination than individual effort. A good case in point is D-Mo. Is he currently much more effective on the defensive end than two months ago? Certainly. Is he expending more effort? I would argue no. He actually is less frenetic these days, much more self contained, with a much better focus on his defensive assignment and the required rotations. Thus he is running much less. Playing more efficiently. I have just talked myself out of confronting this question. When it can be answered perhaps we will be able to properly evaluate the defensive contributions of players.
I do believe that. Harden has a season and a half of work. You could say two if you count his last half season in OKC. George had a good playoff series against the Heat, and six weeks of great play this season. He has been more bad than good this season believe it or not and you are already saying he is better than Harden? You are trolling.
George has struggled offensively in his last 30 games now. 41% shooting in January, taking 18 shots and getting 21 points. 35% shooting in February, taking 17 shots and getting 17 points. In his last 30 games he is shooting less than 41% on the field, 33% from 3PT, and is basically averaging 20 points on 17 shots. Whiles I do agree that the Rockets needs to hide Harden's poor defensive on some occasions, I would also argue that the Paul George is hurting the Pacers a lot offensively. You have guys like Lance Stephenson, who is shooting 50% on the field, taking only 11 shots. You have David West, who is also shooting a high percentage, taking only 12 shots. Even George Hill has been better on the floor than Paul George has been in the last two months, but he doesn't get many shots. So whiles the Rockets do have a tendency to bail Harden out on defense, the Pacers are equally bailing out Paul George for his high volume, low efficiency shooting.
Someone called George the next Kobe. I think, given his new penchant for taking lots of low-percentage shots and hitting, well, a low-percentage of them, that this is a pretty accurate comparison.
I understand your position since you're accustomed to ZERO defense Harden. You think if a player shoots poorly, he must've had a bad game or played poorly. This is mostly true regarding players with no defense, but some players do play defense. Paul does it at an elite level and he brings it every game. He doesn't have to necessarily shoot well to play well. So go ahead and fake like basketball is only about offense. '12-'13 George .531 TS / .491 eFG / 7.6 rebs / 4.1 asts / 2.8 TOs / 1.8stls Harden .600 / .504 / 4.9 / 5.8 / 3.8 / 1.8 '13-'14 George .563TS / .506eFG / 6.4rebs / 3.4asts / 2.8TOs / 1.8stls Harden .600 / .510 / 4.7 / 5.3 / 3.7 / 1.4 These numbers mostly show offense (Harden's "advantage") and George is still very comparable over the last 1 1/2 seasons. Doesn't matter which player was hot and which one wasn't, these are their averages. Add the defensive advantage for Paul and he owns an easy argument for the better player. To say "it's not close" is THE definition of trolling. In fact, the mere suggestion that "it's not close" would lead someone to say something as foolish as Paul has no effect on IND's defense. Keep 'em coming
Without starting an argument may I remind you that there is no statistical evidence that over the course of this season that Harden has been a poor defender? Eye tests are notoriously inaccurate.
Would you say the notion Paul is slightly better than Harden overall is tolling? Not saying you agree, just the simple notion.
disagree.... there is Durant and Lebron and then everyone else.. why is CP3 so damn overrated? He hasn't won or proven anything. So far he has had as much success as Carmelo has in his career. Melo actually has gone further in the playoffs.. The clips were still winning even when he was injured.
Of course, but that is not the point I was making. George is very very good defensively, but it is impossible to quantify. Especially given that he plays with some of the best defensive players in the NBA. I am not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that it is a difficult point to prove.
Upon further minor consideration this is an interesting question. Could it be possible that both the Rockets and the Pacers would be better teams if George and Harden suddenly switched teams? It is certainly possible. Would the Rockets be better on defense and the Pacers suddenly become a much better offensive team?
Unless we're talking Clipper game 1 defense, the increase in defense wouldn't offset the loss of offense due to the demands of their position.
Most certainly possible. But would a starting wing rotation of Lin, George and Parsons miss a single beat on offense? I have no idea.
Here's something you don't want to hear.... The 8 games Harden missed this season, the Rockets - forced more points - allowed less points - won at a greater % Not saying I'm not glad to have Harden, just stating facts since most fans can't get off their high horse.
