[RealGM.com] Cutting Up The Revisionist History Of The James Harden Trade

yeah you cant really argue it. i think westbrook is a great player. and would disagree when you say he plays a losing style, he is not marbury or francis. but he simply does not fit well with durant.

 

Honestly, you can't feel that bad for the Thunder. They still have Westbrook and Durant which still makes them contenders night in and night out. It all worked out for the best, Rockets got their man and Harden got the max contract he wanted. Win-win.

 

As much as I like Harden's offense, his much improved defense and the trade, WB is playing at even higher efficiency level this season while always being a better defender...

 

Still holding out for hope on Lamb, I see. There's a reason why OKC went out and got Waiters. Lamb is what he's going to be.

 

I'll pile on. While I agree with the points of the article, they seem to want to imply that trading him made sense or was inevitable, and that obviously isn't true. Even if they weren't willing to trade Westbrook, they should have maxed Harden out, showcased for a year, and flipped him a year later. They probably should have showcased him in the season before the trade. They were having a 60-win season; it wouldn't have been too disruptive to cut some minutes from some other guys to give Harden more burn during the regular season.

 

His stats from his last season with OKC were better than Parsons—from the bench.

 

That was a garbage article. OKC had Harden spending time on LeBron because they didn't want Durant on him. That's a coaching issue. Giving an old Fisher more time over a guy with better PG skills and the ability to shoot off the ball is a coaching issue. Not knowing that a player has MVP type talent when you have the chance to see him everyday for 3 years is a GM issue.

Summary, here are our excuses for ****ing up. Every team in the league would love the "problem" of making Durant, Westbrook and Harden work, especially when they like each other and one is FINE coming off the bench. To quote The Wire, "that sound like one of them good problems".

 

LOL at the writer and OKC saying they lost the finals because of harden

They actually got the the finals because of harden

 

Only so far though. WB lacks intelligence and discipline. Guy plays like a reckless idiot pretty often. I have a lot of OKC friends who have stated they wished in hindsight that they dumped WB for players and kept Harden instead.

 

I can accept the argument that they needed to deal Harden or Westbrook at some point. But there was no reason to trade Harden as early as they did; that's what the big mistake on OKC's part was.

When you have that much talent you ride it out until you just can't afford to ride it out anymore. If my recollection is right, they could have kept Harden that year, extended him at max money the next year, and then trade him if you want to avoid the luxury tax. Right? If so, that's what they should have done. (Or, they could have just amnestied Perk and extended Harden.)

 

Not just giving him more minutes. They should have started him. I am not comparing Harden to Lin. But during the Lin-Bev debate, a lot of people said that coming off the bench was not a demotion, it's just about "fit." I argued that it was a demotion at least psychologically in everyone's mind. I think it is true with our PF situation now. Motiejunas, Smith, Jones, whoever comes off the bench will be seen as being demoted, by the players themselves and by the public.

They could definitely have gotten more in return trading Harden if he was a starter. Harden would never become the player he is if he was kept as a 6th man.

 

I have said it before and I will say it again until the guy proves me wrong:

Any team which relies heavily on Russell Westbrook will never win a championship.

 

You just compared them psychologically. Stop making not starting as an excuse for Lin sucking or for not reaching his full potential

Harden dmo smith jones are not like mental midget Lin

Harden took playing off the bench like man, just like Manu Jamal dmo smith and jones

 

You're not talking about Harden, are you?
In his last season with OKC, he averaged nearly 17 a game with incredible efficiency. He had a 40 point game and reached the 30 point mark several times. As the article states, he was often THE guy with the ball in the fourth quarter. I think you're forgetting how good Harden truly was with that team.

 

I apologize for bringing Lin into this discussion. I did nothing to defend him being benched or sucking. I don't know why you get so riled up.

The point was about trade value of Harden. Do you agree or not agree that OKC could have gotten more if Harden was a starter?

Oh, and DMo did play much better after he became the starter.

 

Well said.

 

He wouldn't be seen as a superstar if he stayed in OKC. If you look at his %, Harden's percentage was higher in OKC than he in Houston the first time, however he had the luxury of more shots, he only had 11 shots per game in OKC and had 16 and probably could have gotten more if he wanted to.

A good example of this is Pippen, everyone calls him Boy Wonder to MJ's Batman and the ultimate sidekick, but if Pippen had gone to another NBA team there's a high chance he and MJ would've been seen as the ultimate rivals, and yet because he's always playing off of MJ people don't think of him when they think of the very best wing players during the 80's. Another example of this is Manu Ginobili, people call him a star but who really considers him a superstar? No one, right? However Ginobili's stats and efficiency are actually on par with Kobe, it's just that Kobe takes more attempts.

Just look at the Wizards who took Beal over Harden, even after posting efficiency numbers off the charts they still thought Beal was gonna be better than Harden. So saying OKC would've had another superstar is wrong, Harden only became a superstar AFTER he left OKC. How would he be a superstar if he only gets 11 shots a game? He'd have to average 90% to get to that 20 pt mark. And from OKC's perspective, paying the max to a bench guy just isn't feasible. Of course they could've just traded Perkins and WB for Dwight and formed a real superteam, but they can't see the future.

 

The difference in the Reggie Jackson situation is that nobody believes he's gonna be some superstar. He's a really good player but you can't really compare him with Harden. He could definitely be a starting point guard in the league that's for sure, but he's nowhere near superstar status. I guess for some players it is about trying to be the main guy and showing what you got.

 

Ginobilli is the most underrated player in the NBA history.

 

keep in mind people were predicting harden to average 21-23 ppg.