Embid is the only guy with a ceiling higher than what Harden has already achieved and that is largely because of position. Of course he has some real injury concerns, as well, which are factored in. Wiggins has the potential to maybe get there. Parker is lower. All have real questions and it is likely that none ever make 1 All-NBA first team. We certainly want Harden to take the next step with defense, but come the hell on with this stuff. It is really unbelievable someone could have this opinion.
Again, none of those guys that you mentioned were guys that the NBA were waiting for. Beasley was though, the other guys...not so much. Darko was also a surprise pick at where he went. Also, the Cavs were trading to make the team more appealing to Lebron...but all the rumored deals had them still getting a Top pick + Sure talent...not just giving up all of their top picks. They were not trading out of the draft completely and it likely would have taken the farm for them to give up the pick. There is a reason why the #1 pick is pretty much never traded. It is because of that, it's also because Harden just isn't a special player. People aren't sure if he's a guy you build around or a complimentary star. With his playoff performances and his occasional lapses on defense for stretches at a time it makes him Just another star player but not the first tier guys. If Harden was a first tier guy you'd take him and his flopping. Every star flops for calls any ways. Durant and how he plays is despicable to me at times, when his team needs points he does that cheap under move nearly every time and that's just sick...but NO ONE would say no to Durant. People would say no to Harden, because there is still A LOT he has to prove. You and most of the people here are thinking about this from the Rockets side, not the cavs. I said the Rockets wouldn't do the trade. I'm saying the Cavs wouldn't either and that's the point. Again, this is not about if the Rockets would do the trade. It is about if Harden is WORTH it for the Cavs or Bucks to do. That's all. The Rockets wouldn't do the trade because they don't have to make that risk. The Cavs DO. Even if they get Harden it's still a risk. Betting on Harden right now is STILL a risk, with a lower floor. Even still, the #1 pick is more than 50% chance of being at least a all-star...so it is still a low floor risk for them...although it's the Cavs and It's cleveland so there is that too... I don't understand how 1 first All-NBA team makes everything alright. It doesn't. You're telling me you wouldn't trade Joakim Noah for the #1 pick then? I mean he's a sure thing right? That's all that matters, potential means nothing... There is a reason why Morey acquires all these young players (now to our detriment IMO) because he knows teams value potential. Teams in the NBA are always looking for the GUY and always rolling the dice for that guy. We've seen teams with established superstars tank seasons for the #1 draft pick. It is not something given away WITH bonuses. I think it is just as silly that some people think Harden is worth the #1 pick AND Kyrie Irving...
Of course Cleveland would have traded the #1 and Kyrie Irving for Harden, Irving isn't all that good and he's a cancer and after Embiid had the medical apocalypse, this draft really lost its lustre. Harden would probably have more all nba selections then either will have combined if he never played another game.
You sure about that? They were willing to trade the pick away...but to stay within the top 5. Irving by GMs is still thought of extremely highly as a prospect. That's not coming from me, that's coming from the GM poll since he was 3rd behind Lebron and Durant on who would they pick to build a team around going into the previous season...so I really doubt they'd trade Irving AND the #1 pick for Harden. Irving for Harden, yeah that would be a steal for them, but any other way? Nah I seriously doubt it
I have no idea what you mean by saying 'none of the guys that i mentioned were guys that the NBA was waiting for' Read Kwame Brown's scouting report on that link that I posted. Besides the differences in size and position, they were saying the exact same thing about Brown then that they are saying about Wiggins now: incredible athleticism, great in the open floor, good defender. Needs to work on his offense, needs to work on his shot. I'm not saying Wiggins is going to be a bust, I think he will be a good player. But that is all we have, a guess. Those links I shared were all pre-draft writeups of those players. I could post a lot more. Pretty good endorsements for players that didn't do much in the NBA. They are almost funny to read now when you consider how badly those picks panned out. Again, I have no idea where you are getting this from. Are you just making that up? The link that I posted earlier was a mock draft done BEFORE the 2003 draft. Chad Ford raved about Darko and predicted he would be drafted #2. At the exact spot that he was actually drafted. How was he a surprise to be drafted there? What is your definition of a special player? Two seasons ago, before we traded for Harden, the Rockets were predicted to finish at the very bottom of the Western Conference. Everyone was saying that after years of treading water and mediocrity, we were finally tanking for a good draft pick. Then we trade for Harden, and he is undeniably the best player on our team and the main reason we made the playoffs. Sure, there were other players who had pretty good seasons, especially Asik, but Harden was the sole reason that we made the playoffs. Carmelo Anthony and Kyrie Irving couldn't do that this past season even though they were playing in one of the worst conferences in a long time. Harden changed the entire outlook of our franchise. Before we had Harden, we spent years in mediocrity. Picking #14 in the draft every year- not good enough to actually compete but not bad enough to get good draft picks. Without him, we would not have gotten Dwight Howard (when we tried to trade for Dwight before we had Harden, he let us know that he wouldn't have signed an extension here even if we got him). Then we trade for Harden, and his awesome play attracts Dwight. Once we have both of them, and we are being listed as potential places that LBJ might want to go. Or Carmelo might want to go. Or potentially getting Love to sign an extension here. None of those may happen. But without Harden on our team, they wouldn't have even been possibilities. That, to me, is the very definition of a special player. What do you mean by not first tier guy? He made first team All-NBA last season. He was 5th in the MVP voting. Before last season started, ESPN's NBA rank, had him ranked #4. Sure, we could talk about his deficiencies. He is a bad defender and he hasn't had success in the playoffs. Steph Curry is a bad defender, and hasn't had success in the playoffs. Kyrie Irving and is a bad defender and hasn't even made the playoffs. Kevin Love isn't a very good defender and hasn't made the playoffs. Lamarcus Aldridge hasn't had playoff success. Chris Paul hasn't had very much playoff success. Kevin Durant has really only been successful in one of his playoff runs- coincidentally, it was the year that he also had James Harden on his team. Sure- Harden is not on Lebron's level and he is not on Durant's level. Are those the only two in your supposed top tier? I have no idea if the Cavs would do this trade. It was never an option for them. I respect your opinion that you value the #1 pick in this draft more than Harden, I just thoroughly and completely disagree with it. The Cavs have been one of the worst run teams for the past couple of years, and if they turned down an offer of Harden for the #1 pick that would be insanity on their part and a far dumber move than signing Andrew Bynum, or taking Anthony Bennett with last year's #1 pick. What in the world would be the risk if they traded Harden? I bet, right now, they are hoping that Andrew Wiggins might turn out to be a multiple time All-Star, that he might make the first team All-NBA, or that he might come in the top 5 of MVP voting. They would be ecstatic if Wiggins could do these things. And he might....or he might not. James Harden already has.
What I mean is that Wiggins and Parker were guys the NBA have been waiting for...these guys were stars since they were 16. That's what I mean. Kwame was a special case, because the NBA was still in that phase where high-school players still the allure. Again, the potential of what they could be is what they were drafting them for. Chad Ford may have thought that, but there were many people that thought he should have never went over Carmelo. The arguments for that draft was between Carmelo and Lebron. That's the definition of a great player. Not so sure about special as in generational player. Yes. 1st Tier Lebron Durant They are the only two in the NBA. Well let me tell you why the Cavs probably would not do this trade below. The risk is that Harden as of right now is seen as a paper tiger. He as a superstar player and all of his accolades has left A LOT to be desired in the playoffs when playing for the Rockets. Some people are suggesting that he can't do it as a lead guy, and people will suggest such until he does it. What is the point of having a superstar player if he does not play like a superstar in the playoffs? Harden should have wiped the floor with his matchup, instead it came out at about even. That's a BIG issue. You are right, Harden accomplished all of those things...off the back of a regular season. His ranking in that ESPN thing, it will be lower. Mark my words on that. He got 4th in MVP from regular season performances. When you acquire a superstar, you go all in on that player. I don't think the Cavs would be willing to go all-in on Harden, just like Knick fans when asked if they would want Harden for basically letting Melo go, the response you will find is no. I'm sure they all know what he is capable of, but he has to start showing it in the post-season, otherwise what is really the point? You get superstars to win the post season. Also, teams like their own guy. The moment when Wiggins puts on that cap, that's their own guy. They see it as a clean slate, something they can work with and build with. I get it, over and over again. Harden is a great player, I never said he wasn't. I'm saying his flaws are pretty big flaws right now and time is clicking for him to fix them. Harden is still a gamble. Here is why. Not all players just improve year to year. Sometimes they get stagnant and stay where they are at (Joe Johnson) and if Harden stays where he is at, he's not going to be some perennial first teamer like Kobe was...or Lebron, or Durant...stagnancy may as well be regression if you aren't the best of the best. Also, some players just flat out regress for whatever reason there is. This is not even factoring in Cleveland as a city and if James would stay there. The same question can be said for Wiggins too...but they can lock him down in Cleveland much longer than they can Harden. It would be crazy to trade for him for that reason alone from the Cavs standpoint. This applies to the bucks too of course.
I am a little bit confused. I might be misunderstanding you, but it seems that you have had three arguments about why the Cavs (or the Bucks) wouldn't want to trade the #1 or #2 pick for James Harden. 1) They wouldn't trade for James Harden because there is a lot of potential for Wiggins or Parker to be "top tier, special" players. Yes. They do have that potential. Earlier in your post, you said that the #1 pick had about a 50% chance of being a "hit" player, a great player. But you have farther differentiated a hit player from a top tier player, which you have as exclusively LBJ and KD. Even if you say that there is a 50% chance of getting a hit in the draft and getting a star player, I would much much much rather take James Harden, who you know is going to be 100% chance of being a star player. And if you say that you want to keep the #1 pick because you are holding out for the LBJ/KD class of player, then the percentage plummets way below 50%. Way below 10%. Way below 5%. How many drafts have there been? And how many players, total, would you put in that LBJ/KD class? Before them, you had Kobe? He wasn't taken #1. Before that, I guess MJ? He wasn't taken #1. Before MJ, you had Larry Bird, who wasn't drafted #1. And Magic Johnson, who was drafted #1. I might be missing some people because I don't know how you would classify some of the other good to great players. But if you are looking for the generational talents, the chances of finding that in the draft is extremely rare. And keeping a draft pick for the slim possibility of that over taking an established, young star is not smart. 2) The Cavs wouldn't trade their pick because they are trying to attract LBJ. I have no idea what LBJ is thinking. I don't know if he has any interest in playing alongside Harden. But I would have to imagine that he would much rather play with a player that is already considered great and could help take the load off of him during the season, as opposed to a player who may or may not pan out and even if he does it would be years before he did. 3) The Cavs wouldn't trade for Harden because they couldn't keep him in Cleveland in free agency. Harden signed a 5 year max deal with us. If he was traded to Cleveland this offseason, he would have 3 more years to play for them. Wiggins, as a rookie, has a 3 year contract with an option for the 4th year. They might have an easier time resigning him after that because they were the team he was always with in the NBA, but they may not. NBA teams are afraid about making big trades for guys who could walk after one year. They wouldn't be concerned about making a trade if they could have that guy for 3 years before trying to resign him. Wiggins only has the option for one more year, not enough of a factor to play into this scenario. James Harden definitely has some red flags and concerns. Saying that people will always say he can't win in the playoffs until he wins is fair- that is exactly what they said about LBJ before he won (when he was on the right team with the right pieces around him), it is what they will start saying about KD, it is what they say about Carmelo and CP3 and others as well. James Harden is a great player, but he isn't a perfect player. Just like every single player in the NBA, he needs to have the right pieces around him as well. But it would be ridiculous to give up on him, at 24 years old, to take what you have already called a 50% chance of the other player developing in time to what James Harden already is. We might just have to agree to disagree about this. And if so, that's alright. I will respect your opinion, I will just also be glad that Morey is our GM instead.
Well Harden isn't a generational star, at least he has yet to prove it. That's the point I'm trying to make. Parker and Wiggins has that potential to be...Harden doesn't. Even if it is a 1% chance it's better than 0%. Teams are willing to risk their finances by tanking for such talents, that says everything. Teams like Boston and the Lakers and a score of other teams are willing to deal with empty seats and humiliation for a chance at such players. Trading away established young players like Jrue Holiday for a top 5 pick because they are willing to take that chance. Which is what I maintain, teams are willing to take the gamble. Hitting on that gamble is too big a reward to ignore. Well the cavs idea was to get a established player AND stay in the top 5. It was never to trade completely out of the top 5, at least I've heard nothing of the sort. But you're right, we don't know what Lebron wants. Wiggins will be a RFA before he hits the actual FA, so the Cavs get 2 contracts with him, he'll be there for around 7 years before he actually gets to test FA...unless he sucks of course and they look to unload him. So yeah, they keep their #1 pick a lot longer than they would Harden who will hit the real FA when his contract is up. Which is a pretty big point if you ask me. Well Lebron was making the finals and winning MVPs before he won and having massive playoffs success, so were the other guys. At least moreso than Harden has when leading his own team. Who said anything about giving up on him though? I'm saying that the Cavs or Bucks wouldn't make the trade therefore he wouldn't be worth #1 or #2 pick.
This thread has devolved pretty far from what the original question was. That's ok though. It's clear we have a difference in philosophies. James Harden is 100% an All-Star and 100% a great player. Will he ever be a once-in-a-generation player? No, I don't think he ever will be. But will he be a really good player, good enough to turn the Rockets around into consistently making the playoffs and, with the right pieces around him, seriously compete for a championship over the course of the next several years? Yes, I think he is. If you were willing to trade that for a guy who might have around a 50% chance at being an All-Star quality player, with about a 50% chance of being a bust- but he also might have a less than 1% chance of becoming a generational, top tier player, then go right ahead. I wouldn't. Before we had James Harden, we were stuck heading towards another mediocre season and late lottery pick. Because of James Harden, we have added another big time player. We aren't there quite yet, but we have positioned ourselves into position of being just a couple of pieces away from seriously competing for a championship. I would take that any day over the #1 pick. I'm done debating about this. I appreciate your input and your opinions, and I'm fine with agreeing to disagree! Oh, and go Rockets!
I'm sorry, but a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. There is no generational franchise player(s) in this draft. Embiid is the only player who truly has the physical attributes and skillset and he has some major injury concerns. For all Harden's faults, he has actually walked the walk and has an actual NBA resume of All Star, 1st team NBA, and an outside shot at MVP. It's laughable to suggest to to trade away a player with Harden's resume for a shot at someone who on paper may have a higher potential.
Stars for #1 picks never happen because teams with stars are looking to win and teams with #1 picks suck like hell. Without using 20/20 hindsight, the only draft pick I would've traded Harden for in the past 25 years is Tim Duncan. I wouldn't have even traded him for LeBron or Durant. I would've been wrong on LeBron, who developed at an astronomical pace, but even Durant took a couple of years to reach current-Harden type of ability. By then, Dwight would be in his 30s and perhaps leaving the Rockets to chase rings elsewhere. Teams generally try to win championships when they can, not try to continually be pretty good.
It has definitely been flipped around, the question was what was Harden worth in this draft, not would you trade Harden for the #1 or #2 pick in the draft. I am saying that the Cavs or Bucks wouldn't make the trade, therefore he's not worth that in this draft. So yeah it has devolved, because that's what I've mainly been debating. That the Cavs or Bucks wouldn't do it. You all are approaching me with "We wouldn't trade Harden." and I've been responding with "The Cavs wouldn't trade Wiggins either."
