The way the Lebron James argument works in my head goes like this. Kid A and Kid B are both taking the same college algebra course in high school. Kid A already knows what he/she wants to do which is graduate and become a CS major. Kid B on the other hand isn't really fascinated by math and would rather be a journalist. Kid A is the smarter one of the two when it comes to math. Kid A is already advanced and has knowledge in statistics and calculus even while Kid B sort of hates that stuff. That being said, Kid A is confident in his/her math skills so he/she doesn't take the semester that serious. Skips some classes, on his/her phone sometimes during class, and when it comes to tests he/she would only go through the review sheet the night before and again before the test just to remind him/herself of how to do most of the problems. Semester ends and Kid A finishes with a 87 grade average. Not bad for someone who coasted the entire semester. Finished the class with a top five grade out of like 28 kids. Kid B on the other hand spent his/her semester in a completely different way. Went to every class, studied at home for about hour or two, did multiple problems, even found a friend to study with, and spent countless nights reviewing for each exam. Result? Finished the semester with a 93 grade average. Finished with the best grade in the entire class. Let me ask you a question and understand (Max) that I'm not talking about who is smarter here. I'm going to ask who did better during that semester(regular season?) It's obvious that Kid B did better. There is no denying that Harden is having a better season than Lebron even if it's just so slight. You may want to take Kid A over Kid B if it was a huge final(s) that accounted for over 40% of the entire grade, but Kid B did better in this scenario. James Harden is our Kid B. He's not coasting and he's not taking games off. He is doing everything he can for us in the regular season so the Rockets can be put in a better position to win it all. And Oklahoma City can have Kid C who just isn't nearly as good as Kid B.
It's a good thing that Harden's game is still allowed to do the talking. Stephen A. is tough to listen to, but that white dude is way tougher to listen to. What's his name anyway? I thought he was a boxing expert.
If we go 14-32 the rest of the way we can still hit that 41-41 mark and probably the 14 seed in the draft. Make it happen Morey.
I'm glad Harden is getting some shine. I don't believe this debate though. Kellerman's argument was so shallow it's like he picked the short straw in the production meeting. It's like he had to take the reverse just for there to be a disagreement.
So Lebumb James who orchestrated two separate super teams, because he can't do it on his own, that James, is the MVP over this James Harden? And even with these super teams, lead by Lebron still got beat by inferior talented TEAMS....? Though Max is right about one thing, at least one of the three Golden State, San Antonio, or Houston will exit in the 2nd round, simple mathematics. But right off the bat he assumes it's the Rockets, exposing his bias against the Rockets. He fails in giving much support to his opinion, other than Lebron James would make this Rockets team better, and James Harden would make the Cavs much worse. He reminds me of analysis we'd do as middle school students; which were usually won by the loudest mouth out there, or the best one liners. But those analysis lacked substance. And we're usually wrong!!!!
Lol at Kellerman! First, he picked Westbrook to be a lock for MVP. Now that Harden is leading the MVP race, he picked LeBron.
April '15, I was in OKC and asked someone about MVP. He said Curry, Westbrook, then LeBron. There's plenty ass-ache.
Kellerman is trying to use the argument "if you trade Lebron to Houston or OKC, they would get better where as Cleveland would get worse" Honestly I don't know if that's true but that is mainly because of fit. Harden wouldn't fit very well with Kyrie in Cleveland and Lebron here we would a jam at the forward positions and no one at guard. I love Bev and Gordon but they are not even close to full time playmakers. Ennis just isn't very good. I guess Lebron could do some "point forward" stuff but you wouldn't want him doing that full time. The better question than Kellerman's is, instead of trading the players to the other team, rather "what would happen to that team if you just removed that player"? Instead of trading Lebron to the Rockets for Harden, what would happen if you just took Lebron off of the Cavs and took Harden off of the Rockets? The Cavs, with Kyrie and Love and some other good complementary players, would still be a good team and most likely still have a top seed in the Eastern Conference although maybe behind Toronto. The Rockets, on the other hand, still have some good role players, but would be lost without Harden. He is the engine that makes this entire 27-9 car run. I know our bench has been improving, but have they seen the drastic difference to our offense with Harden on the court vs off? There is still a lot of season left to play and a lot of other things may happen, but at this point the MVP should be Harden and it's not even close.
