Lol two guys who clog the paint and can't shoot a lick were never gonna win a ring. Howard and Asik got dominated by Lamarcus. Did you expect Harden to guard Lamarcus?
@pgabriel u sound delusional as has been said, the Rockets and Blazers both had identical 54-28 records...seeding doesn’t mean 1 team was clearly better than the other...the Rockets got the 4th seed and the Blazers got the 5th despite identical records because of how the league’s seeding rules are the Rockets would’ve lost in the 2nd round at best that year...I know there were some delusional fans that were convinced we would’ve beaten San Antonio because we played them very well during the regular season, but that is just more delusional thinking
Identical records, but typically the team with HCA would be favored. Especially if that team also has the best player (maybe the best two players) in the series.
Asik isn't looking to score. They didn't get in each other's way and they played big. The Rockets had Harden and Howard and Blazers had Aldridge and Lillard. Lillard and Aldridge are that much better than Howard and Harden?
Even if we win that series we are beating the Spurs? We are beating Lebron big 3? Highly doubtful. Players get hot and can win a series. Lamarcus just couldn't miss for a few games it hard to beat that. Few teams woulda beat the Blazers they way he was shooting.
the teams on paper were still evenly matched...Aldridge was the best player in that series, we had no one who could stop him, and he played out of his mind if Harden played better that series, maybe we beat them in 6, or if Lillard misses that game winner, maybe we beat them in a game 7, but that team was not a contender and not capable of winning the title that year McHale as coach, dumb team that turned the ball over a lot, and Harden was not a legit superstar until the following season...they were very good, but certainly not a contender
Or maybe had Jeremy Lin not f***ing gift wrapped ...ok nevermind I can’t go down that road again. Takes me to a dark place.
Save it for the d&d. I'm not whining about ****. I said they could have won a championship that year.. San Antonio had the best record at 62 wins and Thunder second at 59 wins. Based on Howard and Asik they could compete with Duncan Don't waste my time havingme correct you saying what I said
The 4th seed isn't always favored over the 5th seed, but the Rockets were -220 favorites to win that series. They were clearly expected to beat the Blazers.
Sure but in this case this matchup was essentially a tossup much like 4/5 matchups are. This isn't even about that. I clearly said the best case scenario was Hou was going to escaping the 1st round and not getting swept in the next by the spurs. They didn't even make it past the 1st round and it only took 6 games. so best case scenario didn't happen. being a -200 favorite in the nba playoffs isn't much at all. Especially when after game 1, the series immediately shifted to even money
-200 in the nba playoffs is nothing, especially when after just 1 game the series shifted to even money. that's not a huge favorite. it means its essentially a toss up
The Nets have better collateral players Harris, TLC and Shamet Are better than anyone not name Ego, Wood or Wall Not as good defensively as Tucker. Rocket River
There is Iverson stans outside of Philly? My guy was Francis when he was a Rocket. He wasn't the same after that. Facts are facts, though. Nothing wrong with Harden's game, per se. He's just a little slow, floppy, and crossover game isn't as good as Iverson's. Is Harden the most efficient of the two??? Stats says so....but has Harden taken a team to the Finals? No! So stats don't tell everything. Just the probable outcome. Back in Iverson's day nobody was worried about stats or even efficiency so to try and hold that against a player or team that wasn't thinking in today's terms is quite silly. The results are what's important. See the example of missing 27 3's. What stat predicted that? Like Chuck said " I don't give out lifetime achievements" lol
Adam Silver rubbing his hands together people say super teams are bad for the league, but I feel like ratings always spike when there’s a Big 3 in existence or there’s a team that’s dominating the league...from the MJ Bulls, to the Kobe-Shaq Lakers, to the Big 3 in Miami, to the GS teams, and now the Nets are a ratings magnet...casual fan interest is what drives the league
Sure is. You obviously aren’t a regular at gambling. Nobody who is a everyday gambler considers -200 a big favorite, especially after one game it completely shifts to literally even money. Don’t call ignorance in a space you obviously aren’t apart of. That’s ignorance towards you actually
What does any of that have to do with his playing style? All of that can be explained by his usage rate going down.
