16 replies to this topic

[Red94]

New post: Some thoughts on the Harden piñata
By: Rahat Huq

Richard Li wrote on Saturday that when James Harden is on the floor, the Rockets pass less, move less, and play slower.  In contrast with the Spurs and Warriors, "[i]s there any player who is [better] because he is on the Rockets?" Li inquires.  I've written about this matter throughout the year now, once we reached the point of existential reflection.  Li is right entirely: no one on the team is better by virtue of being on the team, and the team itself, and its structure, is an anachronistic relic from a previous era.  But what really is the solution?  I've argued recently that being second or third best, or even just good enough, is a practical approach.  We have evidence, in the form of last season, that a James Harden led team can make the Final Four.  Building upon that formula might have higher odds to success than tearing it all down in pursuit of the ideal.  Much of the Spurs' and Warriors' success can be linked to the unselfish tendencies of basketball's current revolution, yes.  But there are otherwise inimitable factors at play.  For one, Tim Duncan's 20-year presence serves as the infrastructure which allows the Spurs to implement whatever team culture they choose.  And Steph Curry is the greatest shooter in basketball history, creating space with his mere presence alone.  James Harden is deeply flawed, yes.  But if they traded him off for players more in line with the tendencies of today, where would it get them?  They couldn't dictate with an iron fist like Poppovich, because they have no set culture.  And they'd be at a talent deficit because it's improbable they'd get back a player even as good as Harden for quite some time.  So does a team with altruistic role players have a higher ceiling than one with Harden?  While Li's point is completely valid, I pick the latter, with hope of maturation.  As I've said, the goal right now for the Rockets organization is to simply try to be good again, not to be the best.  It's defeatist perhaps, but it is more practical than an idealistic paradigm shift.

[AustinDTH]

Being good (enough) can, many times, lead pirates to stealing the booty.

 

'95 proved that even the defending champs don't have to be "The Best" to win the crown; sometimes it's about timing of the team "gel".

 

Last year's #2 seed was as much providence and serendipity as righteous reward or effort proportionally validated (Harden's Herculean canon notwithstanding).

I don't believe that's defeatist.  I think it's the closest simulation that Fabrication can provide, foundationally speaking, of the "otherwise inimitable factors at play".

 

Analytics are not alchemy.  This is not solely hypothesis.  Data-driven management is sound and forward-thinking, across industrial divides.  To build around production, even if allegedly in the face of chemistry, has merit.  Surely leadership is more curative, in any instance, than esoteric bonding; though the latter may certainly make the lack of the former SEEM less impactful, whether in reality or only perception (see this year's Lakers on the Kobe Farewell Trail).

Either way, Harden is generational talent and not a player franchises let get away (unless poached ).

Attached Files

•  rockets247_2014-12-05_06-53-43.jpg   109.25KB   0 downloads

[thejohnnygold]

Being good (enough) can, many times, lead pirates to stealing the booty.

 

'95 proved that even the defending champs don't have to be "The Best" to win the crown; sometimes it's about timing of the team "gel".

 

Last year's #2 seed was as much providence and serendipity as righteous reward or effort proportionally validated (Harden's Herculean canon notwithstanding).

I don't believe that's defeatist.  I think it's the closest simulation that Fabrication can provide, foundationally speaking, of the "otherwise inimitable factors at play".

 

Analytics are not alchemy.  This is not solely hypothesis.  Data-driven management is sound and forward-thinking, across industrial divides.  To build around production, even if allegedly in the face of chemistry, has merit.  Surely leadership is more curative, in any instance, than esoteric bonding; though the latter may certainly make the lack of the former SEEM less impactful, whether in reality or only perception (see this year's Lakers on the Kobe Farewell Trail).

Either way, Harden is generational talent and not a player franchises let get away (unless poached ).

 

 

On a serious note, I agree with some of what you say.  I'm all for analytics, but I do not think Morey has arrived at a finished product--not by a long shot.  Look at dating websites.  They use data driven metrics to produce "quality" matches.  Unfortunately, they simply can't account for that "spark" which makes the whole thing worthwhile.  That component is more crucial than numbers, data, metrics, and anything else you want to include.

 

I can understand how one would look at the idea of team chemistry as esoteric--in a way, it is.  To paraphrase Justice Stewart--I can't define it, but I know it when I see it.  I think I would prefer we give the esoteric equal (if not greater) footing in our roster building.

 

I've also been thinking a bit about the draft and build strategy (Boston, Philly, Orlando, Milwaukee, Minnesota...)  It seems fairly universal that players harbor a special place in their hearts for the team that drafts them.  Much like a first kiss, first girlfriend, and other firsts   there is a unique connection that can never be broken.  When team building, that kind of esoteric thing can become huge--especially if you are drafting well (exhibit A: Golden State).

 

I sometimes try to put myself in the shoes and minds (as best I can) of our guys.  I ask, "what are they playing for?"  These things matter.  I don't have any real answers, but I can say I don't often feel like these Rockets are the pinnacle of love, honor, and nobility.  Last season, we often saw that passion on display.  I don't know where it went nor how to resurrect it, but I think it is difficult to argue against the reality that it makes a huge difference.

 

I also agree with your final thought on Harden.  He is the kind of player franchises seldom let get away.  His effort in the recent Pellies game was enough for me.  If he played like that every game I'd be willing to live and die with him.  I'd take the bad shots.  The turnovers.  All of it.  I can't take those things along with (what I perceive as) entitled, lazy indifference.  As much as I have harped on him, I'd love to see him turn it around and be the guy we watched on Wednesday.  I will gladly eat my words to see him become the kind of player so many believe he is.

[Bigtkirk]

The argument that the Rockets should trade their best player (Harden) because of the team's failure this season reminds me of the similar argument that former Rockets GM Steve Patterson and others made in the early 1990's that the Rockets should trade Hakeem Olajuwon.

 

Harden is not perfect, but he is far from the biggest problem with this Rockets team. It is rare for an NBA team to get better by trading one of the top 15 players in the league. 

[thejohnnygold]

The argument that the Rockets should trade their best player (Harden) because of the team's failure this season reminds me of the similar argument that former Rockets GM Steve Patterson and others made in the early 1990's that the Rockets should trade Hakeem Olajuwon.

 

Harden is not perfect, but he is far from the biggest problem with this Rockets team. It is rare for an NBA team to get better by trading one of the top 15 players in the league. 

 

This keeps getting repeated.  It's easy to do.  The consistent thing I see in these "you're crazy to trade a top-level NBA talent" posts is that they all turn a blind eye to, well....everything that doesn't pertain to James Harden being an elite NBA scorer.

 

Ignoring the fact that this alleged "top-15 player" is a turnover machine (leads the league 3 of the last 4 years), very questionable defender, and very, very questionable leader makes it easy to see him as a must-keep player.  On the other hand, when factoring in those qualities I don't see how anyone can maintain their stance.

 

Olajuwon comparisons?  I don't see them.  Hakeem was busy leading the league in blocks, rebounds, and defensive rating (5 years in a row) during that stretch.  Oh, and he was playing 40 mpg all while being the anchor of the team on both ends of the floor.

 

Actually...ok, let's compare Hakeem and James.  Hakeem did all of that and didn't complain.  James did half of that and did complain.  There's your "star", everybody.  

 

I also take issue with the notion that a Harden trade should automatically (and immediately) make the team better.  That's over-simplifying things.  It misses the point of trading him almost entirely.

 

Really, this comes down to the differences in how one ranks an NBA player.  If scoring and individual performances are all that matter then Harden is an elite player, a true star, and a must keep.  If not...saying he is "flawed" doesn't really do it justice.

 

As I've said before, Morey isn't trading him so everyone can take solace that I've got no sway with the GM  .  Time will tell us who and what James Harden is (as an NBA talent).

[Bigtkirk]

Your argument is a straw man.

 

No one suggested that Harden is as good as Olajuwon was.

 

Yes, Harden is a turnover machine, but how much of that is a product of the decline in production of many of his teammates this season?

 

Harden has 10.7 WP this season, which is tied for 9th in the league. His WP48 is .295, which is 17th in the league among players who have played more than 1500 minutes.

 

And your reliance on the subjective reasoning that Harden is "very, very questionable leader" sounds similar to the "Hakeem is selfish" silliness that was trotted out by those who wanted to trade him in his prime.

 

That "questionable" leader happens to lead the league in minutes played so far this season. Think that might have an impact on his effort defensively? Or his turnover rate?

 

The bottom line is that Harden's weaknesses (no one disputes that he has some) are nowhere near the Rockets' main problem. Thus, focusing on those, rather than the more glaring problems, is fiddling while Rome burns.

 

A much more productive inquiry is to explore why every Rockets player -- except for Capela and arguably Beverley -- has experienced a decline in production this season? And why have players such as Ariza, Jones, and Lawson declined dramatically from career norms?

 

Figuring that out will do much more for improving the Rockets than trading Harden.

[thejohnnygold]

Your argument is a straw man.

 

No one suggested that Harden is as good as Olajuwon was.

 

Yes, Harden is a turnover machine, but how much of that is a product of the decline in production of many of his teammates this season?

 

Harden has 10.7 WP this season, which is tied for 9th in the league. His WP48 is .295, which is 17th in the league among players who have played more than 1500 minutes.

 

And your reliance on the subjective reasoning that Harden is "very, very questionable leader" sounds similar to the "Hakeem is selfish" silliness that was trotted out by those who wanted to trade him in his prime.

 

That "questionable" leader happens to lead the league in minutes played so far this season. Think that might have an impact on his effort defensively? Or his turnover rate?

 

The bottom line is that Harden's weaknesses (no one disputes that he has some) are nowhere near the Rockets' main problem. Thus, focusing on those, rather than the more glaring problems, is fiddling while Rome burns.

 

A much more productive inquiry is to explore why every Rockets player -- except for Capela and arguably Beverley -- has experienced a decline in production this season? And why have players such as Ariza, Jones, and Lawson declined dramatically from career norms?

 

Figuring that out will do much more for improving the Rockets than trading Harden.

 

I assume you have been reading along with us all season.  I have gone into this ad nauseam.  I place Harden squarely at the center of all of your questions.

 

I defy anyone to re-watch the first half of last night's Bull's game and tell me that James Harden isn't a complete zero on defense.  He is not even trying.  You can see it on play after play after play after play and in any scenario you can imagine: one one one, screens, fast break, etc.

 

I have said before, playing with a guy like that is demoralizing and if you want to wonder why guys aren't "living up" to their billing that is where I would start.  Why give 100% when your "leader" can't be bothered to do so?  If it is the heavy minutes he plays then why does it show all game long?  Surely, he doesn't start the game tired...right?

 

As for the Olajuwon stuff--you brought it to the table, not me.  I could care less about comparing them because there is no comparison.  You want to compare the fan base and, not-so-indirectly, assert that I will be as wrong as those guys were back then?  Fine.  I'd love to be wrong, but I think this is apples and oranges.

 

James Harden, statistically, is a product of his usage rate.  I have said before that plenty of players would produce like him given a +30 usg rate and free reign to do as they please.

 

I also do not lay all of the blame at Harden's feet.  I believe we need to start at the coach--specifically, the offensive system we employ.  My distaste for Harden is due to his attitude and effort--not his offensive ability.  Harden's turnovers have next to nothing to do with the decline of his team mates--I'd be curious to hear how that works.

 

I stand by my assertion that Harden is a questionable leader.  I watched it last night.  I've watched it for years.  How much more do I need to see?  Answer: none.

 

Sorry for the randomness (bouncing from point to point).  I do not believe that Harden's minutes played (and subsequent exhaustion) are a valid reason for anything--especially turnovers or defensive effort.  I simply cannot fathom how anyone can defend James Harden when it comes to his defensive effort.  It's a crime against basketball.  It's a crime against us fans.  

 

Given that I place Harden at the root of most of our problems, trading him is very much a good plan to fixing them and improving our team.  Not immediately (since so many seem to think that is the implication).  However, it will be much sooner than people think possible.

 

I mean, what is it everyone is clinging to so tightly?  That's a serious question.  From what I've read, the general consensus answer seems to be "not being in the lottery".  That's it.  Oh, and the hope that Harden changes.  Until everyone (GM, coach, team mate, and fans) stops enabling him James Harden will continue to be exactly what he is.  I continue to be in awe that more people aren't seeing the writing on the wall.

[Richard Li]

For the record, I don't advocate for trading Harden per se. As I said in my last piece, I don't necessarily have a problem with Harden as an individual. What I don't like is his brand of basketball and what it represents. That is, it's individual-centered superstar basketball. The talk about "building around" Harden is, I think, symptomatic of the problem. It places an individual at the middle and works outward from the individual. Over the past 3 years, the consensus ideal pieces to place around Harden are basically players who play defense, finish (either 3s or around the rim), and otherwise get out of the way. That recipe can get a team reasonably far with the right luck (Dwight made the finals with basically that recipe in Orlando), but it isn't enough in the 2016 NBA. The other 4 guys need to, you know, do stuff.

The key question is is who is motivating this philosophy? Is it the GM, coach, or player? It's not évident to me who it is, and it could be any of those three. But whoever is driving the team in this direction either needs to change his mind or leave.

Edited by Richard Li, 06 March 2016 - 09:00 PM.

[isaacjunk]

For the record, I don't advocate for trading Harden per se. As I said in my last piece, I don't necessarily have a problem with Harden as an individual. What I don't like is his brand of basketball and what it represents. That is, it's individual-centered superstar basketball. The talk about "building around" Harden is, I think, symptomatic of the problem. It places an individual at the middle and works outward from the individual. Over the past 3 years, the consensus ideal pieces to place around Harden are basically players who play defense, finish (either 3s or around the rim), and otherwise get out of the way. That recipe can get a team reasonably far with the right luck (Dwight made the finals with basically that recipe in Orlando), but it isn't enough in the 2016 NBA. The other 4 guys need to, you know, do stuff.

The key question is is who is motivating this philosophy? Is it the GM, coach, or player? It's not évident to me who it is, and it could be any of those three. But whoever is driving the team in this direction either needs to change his mind or leave.

Not sure Morey himself has a 'build around 1 superstar' philosophy, although he has at least in the past mentioned 3 superstars as the blueprint ( may have changed his mind since ).  My guess it's more the fact that superstars are scarce, and the one(s) you end up with kind of dictate your philosophy...if we'd lucked into Steph Curry we wouldn't having this discussion...

 

Now, what may be blameable is Morey's obsession with chasing stars at the expense of building a complete basketball team, system/coach fit included.  It's almost like he thought that getting 3 stars alone would allow everything to fall in place.   3s and dunks do not a system make.  And this can perhaps be traced to the overreliance on analytics...I don't think analytics is yet advanced enough to quantify team chemistry / X's and O's gameplans vs. simply looking at who is good in isolation and pick 3 stars accordingly...

 

interestingly you see the downsides of moneyball playing out in multiple industries, where there's been a move to quantify employee performance, but in many domains, there isn't yet a great way to do so and in the short-term the cure may be worse than the disease

Edited by isaacjunk, 06 March 2016 - 11:46 PM.

[thejohnnygold]

For the record, I don't advocate for trading Harden per se. As I said in my last piece, I don't necessarily have a problem with Harden as an individual. What I don't like is his brand of basketball and what it represents. That is, it's individual-centered superstar basketball. The talk about "building around" Harden is, I think, symptomatic of the problem. It places an individual at the middle and works outward from the individual. Over the past 3 years, the consensus ideal pieces to place around Harden are basically players who play defense, finish (either 3s or around the rim), and otherwise get out of the way. That recipe can get a team reasonably far with the right luck (Dwight made the finals with basically that recipe in Orlando), but it isn't enough in the 2016 NBA. The other 4 guys need to, you know, do stuff.

The key question is is who is motivating this philosophy? Is it the GM, coach, or player? It's not évident to me who it is, and it could be any of those three. But whoever is driving the team in this direction either needs to change his mind or leave.

 

I agree with this--and well said, Richard.

 

I am pretty much all alone on the "trade Harden" island.  I don't mind.  Performances like last night vs. Toronto can be very persuasive and lead people to regard him as they do--a superstar.

 

Yet, I've got this nifty little video below that, in my opinion, captures the essence of Harden (minus the usual turnovers).  What you will see is an offensive maestro on one end and a lethargic nothing on the other end.  Watch closely and note the number of times it is Harden's man who scores or creates the score for another after blowing by Harden and causing the defense to rotate.  I'm not really sure we can call what James does "defense".  It looks like what it apparently is: rest.

 

Watch how hard D-Mo (bad back and all) runs down the court to defend a fast break and then realize you won't see Harden exert that much energy on defense the entire game.  Not even close.  Enjoy 

 

[slick shoes]

Yet, I've got this nifty little video below that, in my opinion, captures the essence of Harden (minus the usual turnovers).  What you will see is an offensive maestro on one end and a lethargic nothing on the other end.  Watch closely and note the number of times it is Harden's man who scores or creates the score for another after blowing by Harden and causing the defense to rotate.  I'm not really sure we can call what James does "defense".  It looks like what it apparently is: rest.

 

Watch how hard D-Mo (bad back and all) runs down the court to defend a fast break and then realize you won't see Harden exert that much energy on defense the entire game.  Not even close.  Enjoy 

 

 

I had a couple more casual Rockets fans over last night to watch the game and stressed these very points to them. They recoiled when I even mentioned the thought of sending Harden to another team, when I just cannot enjoy this brand of basketball. It's selfish and boring to watch, not to mention endless disappointing. Ideally, everyone wakes up tomorrow with the mindset that we had in the Clippers series last year and we win out and everyone gets along and it's all great. Realistically, we struggle through the remainder of the season and barely miss the playoffs by a game or two and we begin again where we did before the 2014-2015 season. One and a half stars and no supporting cast. 

[slick shoes]

Even ESPN is getting in on this

 

http://espn.go.com/v...d=espn:14921784

Edited by slick shoes, 07 March 2016 - 08:14 PM.

[thejohnnygold]

Even ESPN is getting in on this

 

http://espn.go.com/v...d=espn:14921784

 

What I find most worrisome is you can see (almost) all of those plays from that ESPN compilation that spans multiple seasons repeated in the video I just posted from a single Raptors game.

 

I keep hearing the same thing about teams hiding their "bad" defenders in an attempt to excuse (enable) James Harden.  There is a huge difference here.  James Harden isn't a bad defender--he's an unwilling defender.  There is good strategy in limiting a star player's exposure to picking up fouls, over-exertion, and even extra injury risk.  That's not what we're dealing with here--not by a long shot.

 

The problem with this is no team can win playing 4 on 5 on defense.  We can win with a bad defender.  We can't win with a guy who won't even try.  Egads!  Kids learn this early, early in life!  You have to at least try!!!  Now, we're supposed to find a coach, or another star, who can come in and convince a grown man that he has to stop pouting and try!?!?!

 

I don't think I'm asking too much.  James could be the worst defender in the league, but I'd be ok as long as he tried.  It's the principle of the matter.  I believe if Harden laid it all on the line the rest of the team would follow suit.  Instead, we end up with lethargy, apathy, and discord.

 

These aren't the thoughts and words of a malcontent who is projecting animosity over a poor season onto a contrived scapegoat.  It's just observation.  There isn't enough homer-ism in the world not to see it.

[Davealicious]

I don't see us trading him, if only for the fact that I don't see Morey perceiving anything that anyone would offer to be a good value for Harden, especially seeing his defensive regression this season.  I'd imagine that if ESPN is pointing out and making fun of the lack of defense, how would that be affecting his trade value?  At this point, I'd almost wonder what the demand would be for a prolific scorer that's a sieve on defense.  

 

I think it's just been a big let-down coming of the magical season we had last year, and seeing what he's capable of, but then seeing nothing resembling that from last year.  Unfortunately, unfulfilled potential is the norm rather than the exception for most draft picks.  Don't get me wrong, I think Harden is great, but I wouldn't call him elite, at least not this season.  

[thenit]

@JG

I wholeheartedly agree, when you watch the full game highlight and just zone in of Harden's action is just kills your faith and hopes of him turning it around. When we are kind of against the wall to get into the playoffs, he doesn't even try. Look at the energy he has at the end of the game on O. but he doesn't have the energy on the first defensive play in the game. There is no way we are going to win a championship with Harden here. 

 

I am all in for trading Harden with no reservation. If we want a team that makes the playoffs every year but won't sniff on the championship we should keep Harden. But we won't win anything with him. He isn't even trying.

 

JG is also right that its impossible to play 4 on 5 defence and Harden is usually guarding the weakest wing player on the opposing team ( usually the spot up shooter ) so its even worst that he can't even stay close to the shooter who is anchored in the corner. Its also a domino effect that other players have to rotate to overhelp and everyone loses their position as well that it doesn't inspire his team mates. I just think the other players who has been here for a few years are losing faith in our goals due to the lack of leadership from our star.

[thejohnnygold]

@JG

I wholeheartedly agree, when you watch the full game highlight and just zone in of Harden's action is just kills your faith and hopes of him turning it around. When we are kind of against the wall to get into the playoffs, he doesn't even try. Look at the energy he has at the end of the game on O. but he doesn't have the energy on the first defensive play in the game. There is no way we are going to win a championship with Harden here. 

 

I am all in for trading Harden with no reservation. If we want a team that makes the playoffs every year but won't sniff on the championship we should keep Harden. But we won't win anything with him. He isn't even trying.

 

JG is also right that its impossible to play 4 on 5 defence and Harden is usually guarding the weakest wing player on the opposing team ( usually the spot up shooter ) so its even worst that he can't even stay close to the shooter who is anchored in the corner. Its also a domino effect that other players have to rotate to overhelp and everyone loses their position as well that it doesn't inspire his team mates. I just think the other players who has been here for a few years are losing faith in our goals due to the lack of leadership from our star.

 

Yup.  That's it.  I'm not happy about it.  I thought we had found a true star.  I'm ready to take my chances in the lottery/free agency versus a decade of hoping James feels like trying.

[thenit]

The scariest part is that there is no accountability. JB keeps saying its the joke of the moment and that we know the truth. They just turn the blind eye, while James keeps saying he doesn't watch vines that it doesn't show the whole picture. All they have to do is to watch the Raps full game highlight. Its been years now and Harden has never uttered the words, I need to be better and lead the team defensively. Its always " I felt I needed to take the ball and win the game for us " something in that manner talking about his Off which never been a problem.

 

So the latest qoute by Harden is " I have played some really good defense lately " in what earth did that happen ? 

In a pararell universe, its F******** mindboggling. I am done with this guy.

Edited by thenit, 09 March 2016 - 07:49 PM.