[Debbie Downer] Forbes: Why Chris Paul and James Harden Together Isn't As Great As We All Want

Tim Wood at Forbes rains on our parade:

Spoiler

Stop the presses, we have another superteam in the making. Or do we?

Despite recent debate that the concept began in the '60s and '80s with the Celtics and Lakers, the truest definition of this term — established superstars in their prime joining forces — is a new phenomenon. And yet, it's happening so much in today's NBA that we are almost numb to the term.

It's a great narrative, it gets clicks and every team's front office seems to be angling to one-up each other for the next superteam headline. The latest example is the Chris Paul trade to the Houston Rockets.

Yes, putting Paul in the same backcourt as MVP-in-any-other-season James Harden creates an assist duo unlike the NBA has ever seen. But what has it truly done for the Rockets? That's the underbelly of the trade that few really want to acknowledge in the early analysis of the deal.

Let's start with age. Chris Paul is 32. By NBA standards, this isn't over the hill. But we're not talking about CP3 in his prime. He played 61 games last season, his lowest total since 2011-12. His minutes per game (31.5) were the lowest of his career, perhaps just a part of the overall trend of sitting stars more during the regular season.

But if we're trying to say that we've put together a superteam backcourt here, I'd argue it's just not the case. Harden and Paul are too alike. There, I said it. And it's not because they are seemingly both so unselfish. The reality is Harden finished first and Paul seventh last season in ball time of possession.

And then what if both want to play off the point and be the shooting option? Harden is far from your traditional point guard and likely sees Paul's arrival as an opportunity to play 2 or 3 more. But early buzz post-trade has been that Paul was attracted to Houston by the possibility of playing off ball more himself.

Daryl Morey has worked a lot of wonders in his time in Houston, so he has earned a lot of "In Daryl We Trust" wiggle room. But the reality is his Moneyball approach has not won titles. He hasn't taken the Rockets to the NBA Finals and has made just one conference final during his decade-long tenure. They have lost four times in the first round and missed the playoffs all together three times.

To me, this feels more like a win-now desperation move to keep up the Warrior Joneses than a sound long-term investment. You have a foursome of Curry, Durant, Thompson and Green in their prime. It's no match. Listening to Rockets brass announce the trade, their explanation that they're simply trying to keep up in the NBA weapons race is a great sound bite but not sound roster planning.

D'Antoni is best when he is allowed to experiment with matchups and coach younger players into his shoot-quick system. Will a far-from-durable Paul truly be up for that style of play and if not, can D'Antoni quickly pivot to play to Paul's strengths?

The most telling stat here is looking at FiveThirtyEight's assessment that yields one more win for the Rockets than last season. When I look at this trade, I feel like that's being extremely generous. Vegas is equally lukewarm to the deal, as SportsBookReview.com points out that the Rockets went from 25-to-1 to 15-to-1 odds. Translation: the Rockets went from mid-level longshot to, well, just a longshot. Doesn't exactly inspire you to print the 2018 NBA Champions t-shirts, does it?

If you want to sell me on this deal as being a great keep-away move, I will buy that. Paul in a proven-winner environment in San Antonio with Popovich and weapons like Kawhi and LaMarcus to feed was a scary prospect. So in merely blocking that deal from happening, that's a win.

Here, you're injecting a player who has been at the forefront of an underperforming superteam trio with the Clippers into a team that has yet to figure out the formula for making that next step into the NBA elite. Argue that injuries derailed what could have been all you want, but numbers and trophy counts don't lie.

The entire NBA is rooting for D'Antoni. He's a nice guy that has endured a pair of high-profile raw deals in New York and L.A., but I fear he's being set up to fail once again here.

Paul has never propelled his team to live up to the hype in the NBA. When I think of Paul, I think of one of the biggest team choke jobs in sports history. The Clippers lost in seven games to the Rockets in the second round in the 2015 playoffs, the height of the epic fail blowing a 19-point third quarter lead in Game 6. You don't think of Paul's buzzer-beater, game-winning Game 7 shot in the first round against the Spurs. I really want to, because his gutsiness with a bad hammy was stuff of Willis Reed-level legend. But history won't allow it.

Paul is defined by a lot of "what ifs" in his NBA career. So asking any true NBA fan to expect that baggage to melt away into a magical melding with D'Antoni, Harden and a middling supporting cast, it's asking a big leap of faith that neither Paul nor the Rockets have earned.

Tim Wood is the former managing editor of Bleacher Report and the founder of Pix Populi Sports. Follow Pix Populi on Twitter @PixPopuliSports.

 

I don't agree that it's just clickbait. They writer makes some valid points, even if they amount to a worst-case scenario. Paul, Harden, and D'Antoni have a lot left to prove when it comes to contention.

That said, if you can get Chris Paul, you get Chris Paul. I love Pat Beverley, but no one on the planet thinks Paul isn't a massive upgrade. Dekker and Harrell were ok, but there are more bench forwards where they came from. Most importantly, the Rockets are set up to chase a third star. Who wouldn't want to play with Chris Paul?