James Harden does not have the heart of a champion.

Last night's was a coin toss game. It could have gone either way. Kudos to Harden's effort on the defensive end. But it is funny how lot of fans are using that to excuse his overall poor performance in a Game 7. It took a surge of shooting accuracy from both Gordon and Covington to keep us in the game. If either of those two guys shot like their usual selves in the series, it wouldn't be that close at the end.

If Harden was a second fiddle, it would have been okay, even heroic for the block. But he is our franchise player, the best scorer in the league. He is supposed to have the responsibility to carry the team on his back to the promised land. Instead, he put us in danger of what could have been an exceedingly embarrassing lost of a first round playoffs series.

Some people compared Harden's block to Hakeem's Game 7 block of Stark. But Hakeem scored 25 point in a 90-point game, grabbed 10 rebounds and dished out 7 assists. That's what championship franchise players do to carry the team.

Last night we escaped a potential disaster, giving Harden some more time to re-assert himself as championship-caliber superstar. IMO, he doesn't have to actually win a championship to prove himself. (I've always hated the ring-counting. There are lots of other factors he cannot control.) But if we lose with Harden carrying the team in his best form in elimination games, that would show us he really has the heart of a champion.

 

i mean it also took an epicly crappy shooting performance from gordon for this series to not be over way sooner. is harden supposed to just drag gordon over the finish line for all 7 games? gordon owed harden a good game. or a game over 20% from the field. even with this game, harden had a 28 PER, 62 TS%, and 0.291 WS/48 for the series. that's how good the other games were. if he had this game in game 1 or 2, we might've lost in 6.

i mean, hakeem is better than harden. hakeem also shot 10-25 in game 7 so not exactly the greatest. i think he even had a pretty bad offensive game 7 against phoenix one of those years. but again, game 7's are notoriously low-scoring, defensive affairs. lebron was 9-24 in game 7 against the warriors (obviously 4-15 is pretty bad). harden isn't going to be one of the 10 greatest players ever. almost everybody not in the top 10 has some bad playoff moments on their resume. and even the top 10 guys not named jordan failed from time to time.

 

it's funny. when westbrook got hurt, people started saying okc was the favorite. because they had the best record in the west for the last half of the season (or some long period of time). because they matched up well. then we won games 1 and 2 and suddenly it was supposed to be a cakewalk and we were terrible if we didn't sweep them. if that other thread was true, we were the first team to ever win a series while taking 50 fewer free throws than our opponent. so not only a good opponent, not only no westbrook, but an epic ref screwjob, and we still won. just some halfway even reffing and we take at least one of the 3 losses and this is an easier series.

 

We should see things relatively.

Yes, Harden had a bad shooting night, move on.

Yes, he clutch blocked but it was an offensively challenged rookie, folks forgot Dort was just that, an undrafted rookie with no real playoff experience.
It spoke volumes for Dort's maturity if nothing else.


I find it comical that both Harden lovers and haters do exactly the same, cherry picking his deeds.

 

No, it's clearly you since you're the only one who has said something to that effect.

Is that your shtick? To rely on strawman arguments?

 

Like I said, Harden didn't have to win to prove himself. Donovan Mitchell lost in Game 7. But nobody said he didn't carry his team in the most important game of the season. If Harden played his heart out, scored 30 points on 12-30 shooting against tough defense and we still lost, I'd think he had done his job as the best player on a championship contender. (BTW, OKC would have to play real good to beat that performance.)

It's not just that he shot poorly. It's the way he carried himself on offense when he shot poorly. He stopped being aggressive. He became sloppy. He made bad decisions. That's what's disappointing. When I watched the game, I said, "I can't believe I feel better seeing Westbrook having the ball than seeing Harden having the ball." If you knew how nervous I was every time Westbrook had the ball, you'd know how much faith I'd lost in Harden that night.

If LeBron, or Kawhi, or Durant, or Lillard or any of those guys played like that in an elimination game, we'd be making fun of them.

 

My point is that he's inexperienced. His playoff experience from his rookie season wouldn't have prepared him for these playoffs since his role and expectations were vastly different.

Using your logic, a 2nd year player should make the same decisions as a veteran in his 8th year.

And let's not kid ourselves. Do you think OKC fans are happy with SGA's overall playoff performance? He played terribly in game 1, game 5, and game 6.

And how is this relevant to their matchup against us?

OKC needed more from SGA. For whatever reason (probably his inexperience), in some games, he let himself be taken out of the game and kept deferring to others.

You're not showing anything. You're generalizing and hoping I won't call you out on it.

Gallinari played terribly in games 4 (9 pts), 5 (1 pt), and 7 (4 pts). It's laughable that you would characterize his overall performance as "killing us".

Again, Portland wasn't a traditional 8th seed. Nurkic missed the entire season, but because of the restart, he was able to play for the playoffs. If you can't acknowledge this, then you're being intellectually dishonest.

And again, Jokic would've dominated Steven Adams. Sure, CP3 would've had success in the PNR, but based on the regular season, not to the level of success Jokic would've had. And who would've guarded Jamal Murray?

There's a reason Vegas essentially had OKC as the least likeliest winner of the WCF.

 

You're using franchise players to compare to SGA, and you say my point is flawed? Like I said, guys in comparable roles.

 

Said it another thread. I will repeat it here.

Harden in game 7 was a game leading +11.5 and a 4th quarter leading +26.5 in net rating.

Because putting the ball in the basket is not the only thing an individual player can do to help his team win the minutes he is on the floor.

Westbrook was a -5.5 for the game and a -42.9 in the 4th quarter in net rating.

Because a player can “look” like he’s helping and individually score buckets but not be helping his team overall outscore the other team while he is on the floor.

 

Michael Porter Jr is also inexperienced, this Jamal Murra's second playoffs also. Both are inexperienced. Right? Guess that's a huge advantage for the Cippers, must have been an advantage for Utah as well right? . Like what kind of argument is this, you are saying because he's a second year player its a heavy advantage for us?? It wasnt, it wouldnt be for any playoff team. Shai is a good player. Like this is a non argument. Shai was not even the third best player and yet you are keying in on him for what reason idk.

17 PPG on 57 TS%, yea that's not bad. They shouldnt be angry, we we went to 7 games.

It was good lineup with the best net rating, regular season match ups dont matter but cumulative data over 81 games do matter And that lineup was effective all season.

Chris Paul and Schroder were better players than him. He was right to defer. If Gallo was scoring 15 PPG on 57 TS% you can defer to him too.

Lol im giving you the data. It's not my fault if you dont believe me.

He scored 29 in game 1, 17 in game 2, 20 in game 3, game 4 they won lool, and 25 in game 6. He kept them alive most games and the 2 games he played badly in they won one of them. Your point isnt there nor is it backed up by facts.

I acknowledge this, but I also acknowledge that they werent that much better, they lost to a clippers 3rd string team and almost lost Brooklyn and many other bad teams trying to make the playoffs. Their defense was super bad.

Regular season...does not matter dude. Denver looked great in the regular season, but now? No way Jokic would get abused by Shai, Cp3 and Schroder, that three guard lineup would tear him to bits. You could put Dort or Cp3 on him, Jamal Murray is not westbrook, Cp3 would not have issues with him.

Vegas can be wrong too. Did they tell you Utah-Denver was going 7?

 

Yes, your point is flawed. You relied on comparisons to top-10 GOATs. In other words, your argument is based on outliers.

You're using the word "franchise player" too loosely. Franchise players should be superstars. Was Arenas a superstar? Towns?

At this point, what you're asking for is ridiculous. You want me to list players who had top roles on playoff teams early in their careers and DIDN'T evolve into stars? Come on.

 

Dont forget that "Mr Clutch" Chris FRAUD was a MINUS FIVE in the elimination game after taking his little passive aggressive jab at James.

Just sayin'.

 

And Michael Porter Jr's minutes were cut because he kept making mistakes. This is Jamal Murray's 4th year in the league. There's a huge difference between a 2nd year player and a 4th year player.

Yes, SGA's inexperience was an advantage for us, as it would be for any experienced playoff team. When he's inconsistent, that's an advantage for the opponent. When he's missing shots to the point that he passes on open looks, that's an advantage for the opponent. When his defensive lapses (due to this being his 2nd year in the league) are continuously exploited, that's an advantage for the opponent.

Are you seriously trying to argue that experience/inexperience doesn't matter in the playoffs? Because that's a foolish assertion.

You're giving me biased data. A player can have 2 monster games and 5 terrible games, and his overall stats will look ok. That's why you need to use more critical thinking.

My points are absolutely factual. He did score 1 point in a game. He did score 4 points in a game. Someone asserted (not sure if it was you) that he was a capable scorer. If that's the case, he wouldn't have 3 games scoring less than 10 pts.

Again, look at all the surprising playoff upsets in NBA history. And then look at the regular season record and point differential between those teams in the playoffs. You're going to be surprised at what you find.

For instance, in 2007, the 1st seed Mavericks lost to the 8th seed Warriors. In the regular season, the Warriors swept the Mavericks.

In 1994, when the 1st seed Sonics lost to the 8th seed Nuggets, they split the regular season series.

Denver was favored to win the series.

 

Single game +/- can be misleading because it is not just about that individual player. It has a lot to do with who were playing on the floor with him and against him. Take lasts night's Toronto game for example, Siakam was +12 and Lowry was +2. Nobody would say that Siakam was the guy who carried the team to a victory.

And it's not just the numbers. You'd have to watch the game. See the way they play, and see the body language. Harden didn't seem to want to lead the offense anymore.

Someone suggested earlier that because Harden knew Scott Foster wouldn't give him the calls, so he didn't try to drive to the basket. I don't know how true it is. But that's a BS excuse. You are the star player in a do or die game. You force the action. You dare the refs to make calls by bringing it to them. If you shy away from it, then they have succeeded to make you do exactly what they want you to do.

 

Games 3,4, 6, and 7 were all coin toss games. Luckily one of them finally flipped in the Rockets’ favor. Harden played well offensively in the series overall, and was very consistent as a defender and playmaker throughout the series, including game 7. He shot like crap in Game 7, but turned it on in the 4th quarter scoring a couple of buckets, assisting on several others, and making huge defensive plays. No, it wasn’t some 40+ point explosion, but that was never going to happen against this OKC team, who were scrapping and clawing on every possession. Hard for Harden to be in his “best form” against that team. However, he found a way to impact the game, and they won the series.

 

Please. Oh please clutchfans. Can we stop with the “if you watched the game” “you’d have to watch the game”.... Who is on this website and not watching the games?

I specifically didn’t include the single game +/-

Harden was a +9
Westbrook was a -3

I chose the more insightful net rating

What people say after watching a game and what is reality often do not align in basketball analysis.

Toronto was a +14.7 net rating with Siakam on the floor and a +1.0 net rating with Lowry on the floor. Believe what you want. Siakam was more impactful throughout the game in out scoring Boston. Much more so.

Harden scored or assisted on 13 of our last 14 points. How is that not leading the offense?

It may have not happened in the manor you personally would like.
It may not have happened in the manor most would expect of one of the best individual scorers in league history.
But it did happen.

For fans of the team that popularized the term “no stats all star” and taught us the ways of looking deeper into the numbers I’m surprised at how often it goes ignored in favor of the old eye ball test and traditional box score numbers,

 

It is bizarre really, the only thing I can think of is that James loses his confidence at times, and a guy that scores nearly 40 a night, should not be losing his confidence.

He has a bad case of the YIPS - especially in big games.

Just relax and let it fly james.

DD

 

But its only his second year in the playoffs. It's big thing dude. Regular season and playoffs are not the same thing. That's why people talk all the time about playoff experience and not regular season experience. Porter Jr is still getting minutes and is still very clearly helping their team offensively. My point is that these guys arent harming their teams so much or giving the other team's a huge advantage because they are young. And Shai himself was the third best player so it wasnt incumbent upon him to be super amazing this series. He was good enough and we got taken to 7.

It's an advantage but its not something that was gonna make or break the series for us? You know who was actually, Schroder, Cp3. He'll get better defensively but he never would have been good enough to cover Harden, Gordon, or Westbrook. Like he's not making any all NBA defenses in the future. And again OKC's team defense was still really good that series as well. So as much as you wanna harp on Shai they still defended well as a team. I dont even what your point is here? Young people are inexperienced therefor advantage to opponent? Congratulations? But again this is such a shallow way too look at it. He was their third best player and did exactly what was expected of him. He didnt play worse. And his defense clearly didnt hamper them as they were able to defend well with him on the court.

Your assertions lack any depth or facts behind them.

Lol Im giving you data from the game. Like every single game, we went through. In most games he played this series, he was good. 5 out of 7 games he played good enough for them to win. That is good. You are just too proud to admit you are wrong even when the facts are being presented.

Lol, dude people have dud games in the playoffs. If a 4th option role player is gonna give me 4 amazing games, 1 adequate one, and 2 duds, on pretty damn good efficiency. You take it, that is good for a 4ht option player. Stop denying the math.

And you'll find many more where regular season match ups DO.NOT.MATTER.

For instance we beat GS in the regular season 3-1, but then lost to them. Miami Heat(the heatles) lost to the Brooklyn Nets 4 times in the regular season and then got their ass beat by the heat in the playoffs.

Vegas predicted Denver was gonna take them to game 7 really? Utah was pretty much favored by Vegas every game after the second one. Many people thought OKC would beat us without Westbrook. Thunder arent some bad team. And they could very well beat Utah, Denver or Portland. Please stop denying facts when they are given.

 

Because narratives matter and if we lost to OKC (which ended up being a coin flip) then Harden's legacy would have taken a major hit. It doesn't matter what advanced statistic say.

No stats all stars are good for super role players but not superstars. What Leonard does in the playoffs is on a completely different level.