The point is that the "failures" are overblown. Has Harden won a championship? No. Has Lillard? No. Harden has been consistently successful in the playoffs. He has taken the Rockets to the conference finals twice (including to the brink of advancing to the Finals), and had huge performances to defeat the Spurs and advance to the Finals with the Thunder in 2012. Harden has been great in the playoffs, over a long period of time. Has he had a few bad games in the playoffs? Sure. However, Harden's poor playoff games seem to get more press than the failures of other comparable stars. Every other good or great player has had terrible playoff performances in their careers, including Kobe, LeBron, MJ, and yes, Lillard. I think everyone can remember LeBron's meltdown in the 2011 Finals. Kobe quit in the 2006 playoffs against the Suns, and had a terrible Game 7 in the 2010 Finals. MJ was known for his playoff success, but he had a serious gaffe that cost them the Magic series in '95. Lillard's relatively poor playoff stats and bad playoff losses have already been mentioned in this thread. The reality is that Harden is in rare and elite company with his playoff performances:
I guess "great in the playoffs" is subjective. Is 41.4% from the field and 32.5% from three over 74 games as a Rocket great? Harden's playoff resume is filled with a number of mediocre/inefficient performances, a number of very good games, and a few inexplicable stinkers that leave you scratching your head. As I said, without the great playoff moments -- like a game winner or two -- it is the stinkers that will stand out in people's memory.
I think I remember reading on backpick's GOAT analysis that most stars suffer loss in efficiency in playoffs, which was one of the reasons he gave Hakeem his proper recognition - that he was among the rare few whose efficiency n overall production rise in the playoffs. If this is true, then perhaps a fairer way to gauge is to compare Harden's efficiency/production differential in regular vs post season and compare it to other superstars. I don't have the wherewithal to pull up those numbers but would be really interested to see the results.
Well Ok then. If the argument comes down to a slight drop in FG% (while maintaining very good overall stats and TS%) then the argument is kind of pointless. To you, the failures matter more than the successes, and I clearly can't talk you out of it.
it’s unfortunate that some of James’ best performances have been Team losses . Specifically game 1 and 2 vs GS in 14-15 . He basically had 30 point triple doubles both games and all anyone remembers is his one **** up at the end of game 2 (I think) not that harden is totally absolved for blame , but in 16-17 loss to the spurs I’m convinced he was concussed . I also blame MDA for wearing him down . 17-18 and 18/19 have just been tough . Lots of factors both ways , ultimately GS was just likely A way better team . James ain’t dead yet . He will still have opportunities (maybe this year is one) . He’s looked like a more mature player the last couple years and has really been steady . If the supporting cast and Robin can show up consistently enough then I think it’s right there for the taking .
One thing that really annoyed me about Harden is how much his 3 point percentage seem to go down in the playoffs and he will keep shooting them. I think it has gotten better in recent years, but I just have so many bad memories of him heaving shots out of frustration because he's sulking.
That's the nature of sports. Like I said, Harden just doesn't have any signature playoff moments that will stick in people's memories, so it's the failures that people will remember. If he wins a championship or comes up with a few big-time playoff moments, the narrative will shift. That's how it has been for a lot of great players over the years. Pointing to PPG or true shooting % on a stat sheet is not going to convince the doubters. It's the high leverage moments that are remembered.
I named several of his successes in my previous post. Do you think Harden's performances were not critical factors to a Thunder Finals appearance and two Rockets Conference Finals appearances, including nearly beating GS? While short of a championship, these seasons were "successful" by most reasonable definitions. Or would Harden have to hit a championship-winning buzzer beater for you to consider him successful?
You mentioned his play as a super role player with OKC (where in the Finals he famously slumped badly), and leading the Rockets to two conference finals. The first conference finals, the Rockets made it due to a miracle comeback against the Clippers in game 6 that occurred with Harden benched in the fourth quarter. He shot below 40% in that series and averaged 5 turnovers a game. He had a solid, though inefficient (35% from field, 7 turnovers), game 7. As for the other conference finals showing against GSW -- we lost in 7 games despite having HCA, and Harden's 3-point shooting was atrocious for most of that series. Yes, as a team we took them to 7 games and that's better than anyone else, and it was bad luck to lose CP3 for the last two games. But a "great" playoff performer finds a way to win one of those final two games. Certainly finds a way to win game 7, at home, when up 20 points halfway through the game. This should count as a "success" for him? I think you are selling him short. No one is going to look at those runs and conclude "See, this show that Harden is someone you can expect will deliver big when the stakes are highest."
In 2010, the Lakers beat the Celtics in game 7 to win the championship, despite Kobe shooting 6-24. Should that count as a "success" for him? I suppose no one is going to look at the 2010 Lakers championship and conclude "See, this shows that Kobe is someone you can expect will deliver big when the stakes are the highest."
No they aren't, because he is a MVP caliber player and the standard he's held to is CHAMPIONSHIP. And he's played below standards in the playoffs with some absolute stinkers thrown in for good measure, all while looking lethargic along the way.
Yes. He had a bad game for sure. But his FIFTH title capped off his career. He was the primary player on a team that repeated. He had numerous other big moments on the way to TITLES to highlight. If Harden had a horrid game 7 and his team still won while winning his FIFTH title then folks would cut him slack too. For example, hardly anyone talks about Jordan having a subpar Finals in 1996. He already had THREE titles prior to that. Perfection isn't required. Winning, for a player like Harden, is.
Wait what? I am black and I have been listening to Bill Simmons for about 5 years and I don't feel that way. He is the furthest from racist get over yourself dude speaking for a whole group of people.
I agree that Harden's next challenge is a championship to truly achieve recognition with the all-time greats. Jordan, LeBron, Kobe, Shaq, Olajuwon, et al, are above him because they are champions. No argument here. My Kobe comparison above was rhetorical, to show that even the all-time greats have stinkers under pressure in important games. However, this discussion started with a comparison to Damian Lillard, and his great playoff performances. The argument was stating that Harden has underperformed in the playoffs compared to Lillard. While Lillard has hit a couple of spectacular series-winning shots, he has not had close to the same overall playoff success as Harden.
If Kobe’s team lost, and if he never had any offsetting great moments in the playoffs over his long career, then yeah people would rightly think of him as a disappointing playoff performer.
Fair enough, but I think cherry-picking negative stats and poor individual games from otherwise successful Rockets seasons is not fair either. 2015 and 2018 were good, successful Rockets seasons, and Harden was the primary reason for them. We're not talking about yearly first-round flameouts here.
