James Harden finished second in the 2015 MVP voting. Harden is a very good player but not quite as good as his press clippings. Let’s take a look at both sides of the issue.
Harden is the darling of the analytics crowd. Houston General Manager Daryl Morey is one of the most outspoken advocates of “advanced basketball statistics,” numbers that are supposed to provide more insight into a player’s value than those found in the traditional box score.
Morey has built the Rockets around the idea that the best shots in basketball are layups, free throws and three pointers. The Rockets abhor other shots and take as few of them as possible.
Mathematically, this makes a lot of sense. Most NBA players are very good at converting layups and free throws and a player only has to shoot .333 from three point range to be as efficient as a player who shoots .500 from two point range.
From a practical standpoint, there are at least three possible problems with this approach. Three point shooting can be highly variable, so even a great shooter could go 6-9 on three pointers one night and 2-9 the next night, which works out to a great shooting percentage from that distance but could result in a 1-1 team record for those games.
Also, scoring in the paint without a post up game may not always be possible.
Finally, the ability to get to the free throw line can depend on how the game is called.
A player who has no post up skills or midrange game can be guarded such that his driving lanes are curtailed and most of his three pointers are contested. LeBron James did not win a championship until he developed those two aspects of his game.
Harden plays the Morey way, getting most of his points off of free throws and three pointers. He led the league in Win Shares, an “advanced basketball statistic” that is supposedly more accurate and objective than traditional box score numbers and/or the eye test.
However, if you are going to buy the premise that the Win Shares leader is the NBA’s best player then you are also cosigning the notion that DeAndre Jordan is the fifth best player in the NBA, Pau Gasol, Kyrie Irving and LeBron James are in a dead heat for 9th-11th, Tyson Chandler is just behind that trio and Rudy Gobert is the 15th best player in the NBA.
Or, you can concede that there may be some issues with Win Shares. What you cannot do is use Win Shares to pump up Harden but then disregard everything else that Win Shares says.
The other side of the argument is that there is more to evaluating a player’s value than just aggregating his offensive output in an “advanced” way. “Advanced basketball statistics,” even by the admission of fervent but objective advocates of their value, are at best imprecise at measuring a player’s individual defensive contributions.
Last season, Harden was horrible defensively. This season, by some accounts he is adequate and by other accounts he is still subpar.
He is well below average defensively. I would not trust him to be willing or able to take on tough defensive assignments on a consistent basis and even when he checks lesser threats he is far too often distracted and out of position.
How many great players have multiple, lengthy YouTube videos dedicated to their terrible defense?
When I watch Harden, I see a player who is very talented and who puts up big numbers but who needs to have a more dominant all-around player around him to lift his team to a championship level.
I see Carmelo Anthony, Gilbert Arenas or Stephon Marbury, not LeBron James, Kobe Bryant or Tim Duncan (the players who have led teams to multiple championships in the past decade).
Since Harden arrived in Houston, the Rockets have accumulated two first round losses followed by a Western Conference Finals appearance that has been fueled in no small part by Dwight Howard and the play of Houston’s complementary players.
Harden has stuffed the box score, yet Houston has been outscored overall when he is on the court during Houston’s 13 playoff games so far.
The Rockets have outscored their opponents when Howard is on the court and the same is also true for Trevor Ariza and Josh Smith.
Harden has had some great moments during the 2015 playoffs but he was also a spectator during Houston’s key fourth quarter runs versus the Mavericks in game two and versus the Clippers in game six.
He is a very good player and yet one gets the feeling that the sum of his contributions can be replaced, individually or collectively, by other players precisely because that is what has happened so far during the 2015 playoffs when Harden is not in the game.
express34texas
Guest
A few other things. My biggest problem with your Harden hate is the inconsistencies, not necessarily your conclusions. And especially for someone who realizes Abbott and many others just pile the hate on Kobe and certain others, it's weird you're doing the same to Harden. Listening to other players talk about Harden, they realize how good he is, too. Usually the guys you're playing against are the best people to realize how good their peers are. If you want to say James and Curry have been better in the playoffs, fine. If you want to say Griffin was as well, ok, maybe. Though, where was he in the 4th quarter meltdown in game 6 vs HOU? He and Paul were getting dominated primarily by HOU's bench. Harden wasn't in and Howard wasn't doing much either. At times, HOU's cast was very good, but they were also awful other times. Regardless, Griffin/Paul shouldn't have forfeited that huge lead. Other than that, Harden's been the best playoff performer. I know you want to discredit Harden every chance you get, but bottom line is that OKC has yet to make the finals without him, HOU was one step away from the finals this year, and HOU was barely worse without Howard. HOU would've been a #8 seed at best without Harden this year, and would've exited in the 1st round. Howard wasn't an AS this year and hurt his team several times with childish plays. He also thinks he's a champion for some reason. Howard is still a solid player, and he's hardly a reliable player for several reasons. And if SA has 2 players better than Harden with a great cast and an all-time great coach, then why did they lose to LAC? It doesn't add up. Harden had 2 stinkers in the WCF, but he also had 3 great games. You discredited his first 2 games in the WCF when you said his first 3 games were horrible initially, though since backtracked just a bit. I mean, if you can't see or credit him when he plays great, then you'll never see it unfortunately. Only his all-time great game 4 got any recognition. I'll say it again, HOU was 34-6 when Harden goes for 30+, and 31-28 when he doesn't. This is the same thing you applied to Kobe, saying LAL needs him to score for them to be successful. Those are pretty glaring records, showing that HOU is certainly a lot better when Harden scores, much like LAL with Kobe
express34texas
Guest
I take exception to players who are underappreciated and underrated so much, which is probably partially why I like Kobe and Westbrook. "Mind boggling?" Really? When someone is off in leftfield on an issue, then yes, the opposition seems completely in rightfield on the same issue, to counteract. Which is why you're probably thinking I'm making out Harden to be the GOAT, which I've said several times he's not an all-time great, and will likely never be. I use most of your points, which I tend agree with, about how to rate the great players. If you notice, I didn't use one point or even 2 points. I'm using many points. Harden fits your mold. You've been on this Harden denigration wagon for quite some time now, and it's really annoying, even if true, which it isn't. You said DAL would beat HOU easily, and the opposite happened, and that LAC would beat HOU as well. You've now repeatedly dismissed HOU's dismantling of DAL, making excuses to downplay Harden's play. And downplaying Harden's overall greatness in the 2nd round, just because of one quarter. You've downplayed HOU's WCF bid by saying they're not contenders now. I don't consider only 1 team a contender, but I guess that's what you think now. I bet if SA lost in the WCF, you'd think they were contenders. Actually, you still probably do even with them losing in the 1st round. I mean, really, you think honestly think HOU is better without Harden? That's just a completely ridiculous statement, as is saying OKC is better without Harden. Harden had a great postseason. There's no denying that, unless you're David. The media has never pumped someone up from borderline AS status to legit MVP candidate, at least from my knowledge. And I haven't heard anything from 'real' nba people differing from Harden being an MVP candidate this season. I've repeatedly said this. HOU remained an elite without Howard. If Kobe or James were on HOU in replace of Harden, you'd be using this argument for them. I can guarantee that. And a lot of your criticism deals with the ugly game of flailing of Harden, which should have nothing to do with player analysis, along with Youtube, huh? And you're calling me out on bias? Weird. What agenda/bias does JVG or Doug Collins, etc. have for Harden? How can everyone be so clueless about Harden? He's first-team all-nba and led his team deep in the playoffs. Those are my and yours 'usually' main criteria for elite players. Almost everything has changed regarding Harden with you.
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
There's a big difference between playing badly and quitting. There's some 'reality' for you, Tokesta.
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
Rave, I wasn't being petulant. At the time, I was just keen to go watch the game! A quick glance at David's long reply showed me nothing new to the debate, and things I had already attempted to refute or had already disagreed with, so I didn't read the reply in detail, and wanted to say so, so as to not appear like I ignored anything. I don't think that's sticking my head in the sand. I think it's actually agreeing to disagree, which I've already stated to do elsewhere here, as it seems to be where David and I will remain on this particular subject.
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
Thanks for the input Tokesta.
Tokesta
Guest
Its probably hard to suppress frustration 100% when your logical and factual arguments and supporting material are being reduced to being a broken record, thus leading to some snark. And I don't even like harden. In all honesty I don't see the whole arrogance thing. We seem to disagree on the definition
The Unnatural
Guest
And I've said multiple times that I didn't think Harden should have won MVP, nor do I think he's better than Durant and Westbrook and I said if his claim was that Harden needs to be more consistent, I wouldn't dispute it. So what's your point? I enjoy a good debate and have no issues with that. What I don't like is arrogance shown towards readers, other writers on this site and anyone who disagrees with his opinion. It's fairly simple, and it's something I've seen for years. Now, I'm choosing to no longer follow such a writer. It's one thing to disagree and tell me that I'm wrong, it's another to belittle multiple people. Fairly simple, pal. Two people can disagree without snark. If that is putting my head in the sand to you, so be it. Especially when one is part of a readership that gives you an audience to write to. This is my last comment in regard to this, though.
Tokesta
Guest
Your sensitivity keeps you from objectively reading and understanding the points being presented to you. You're a typical example of someone having their say and then burying their head in sand. Nothing david said was incorrect. Don't get butt hurt because someone else points out the fallacious nature of your statements. Snarky? What are you 12? A compelling case has been built and you dismiss it as arrogance. Cmon son. He said harden is a good player..just overrated. Did this playoff series not show that? If it didn't for you then you're not reality based but emotionally based. You claiming to not be a harden fan doesn't add amy validity to your claims.
The Unnatural
Guest
You can't even get through your first sentence withouy snark. That's all I read, so I won't be addressing the rest of your post. I'm the third person in this thread to call you out about your arrogant, condescending tone. And it's a trend I've seen from your blog. There's a point when maybe people aren't complaining, and you're an arrogant person with an over-inflated opinion of himself and his NBA knowledge.
David Friedman
Expert
The Unnatural: I am sorry that you are so distressed by my fact-based responses to your criticisms. I respond civilly and in depth to anyone who comments on my work here or at 20 Second Timeout. I support my opinions with facts and logic. I may be wrong (and I have been wrong at times, like everyone else) but I am not deliberately leaving out information or distorting facts. Saying that I am adds nothing to the discussion and is a personal attack. As I indicated, it is difficult to carry on a conversation with someone who does not even have the basic facts straight. You cited a wrong number in terms of Harden's games with a negative plus/minus, I corrected you and you went right back to the wrong number and used that wrong number of games as the major basis for your point in that comment. Anyone can make an honest factual mistake but when someone keeps getting the facts wrong after being corrected then what is the point of continuing that conversation? It seems like you cannot even take five minutes off from your years of incessant Harden advocacy to acknowledge how horribly Harden played and how the way that Harden played horribly corresponds exactly with what I have been predicting and saying. Do you really think that Harden's performance in the WCF--combined with his performance in the 2012 Finals and his performances in Houston's first round losses--refute my notion that he is not good enough to be the best player on a championship team? Even if I am ultimately proven wrong, how can you say that my prediction/analysis is biased? Based on what Harden has done, what I am saying is quite reasonable. I don't think that Houston beating a feuding Dallas team and narrowly squeaking by the Clippers (with Harden on the bench in the fourth quarter of the sixth game with the Rockets facing elimination) refutes what I have written or outweighs Harden's evident and ongoing skill set weaknesses. It is too bad that you do not feel comfortable discussing this issue in a fact based way and instead resort to incorrectly citing facts.
The Unnatural
Guest
So because I miscounted that discounts my entire point? LOL Your arrogance is so over the top it's unbelievable. How about this? Consider yourself down one reader. Your arrogant tone has been a drawback of what is more times than not solid NBA analysis. But after years of seeing the smug manner (a smugness I've admittedly returned myself after years of reading you and months of being on the receiving end of for a few months) in which you consistently respond to readers and seeing it myself when I finally began responding, I'd be better served not giving you anymore hits. This is just basketball talk. Not measuring IQs. Good day and I hope the higher ups at The Roar see this post as well.
David Friedman
Expert
Ryan: I have said for three years that Harden is a very good player but that it is unlikely that he is good enough to lead a team to a championship because of his poor defense, his inability to consistently shoot a good percentage from the field against elite competition in the later rounds of the playoffs (if he can even get that far; he has only done so in one of three years in Houston) and his, at times, sloppy ballhandling. In other words, objectively speaking as a basketball analyst, I pretty much nailed it.
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
That last sentence is hilarious . . . in a completely unfunny way. Actually, I'm not a Harden fan whatsoever. And I have criticised him on numerous occasions. Plus, I absolutely hate the Rockets. I am, however, a fan of basketball in general, and objective analysis of a player's worth.
David Friedman
Expert
Express34Texas: Your comment is rather "mind boggling" considering that Harden is coming off of a 2-11 shooting performance with a playoff record 13 turnovers. Considering that two of my main critiques of Harden as an alleged franchise player is that in the later rounds of the playoffs he would shoot poorly and turn the ball over one might think that before launching into a diatribe that misrepresents what I have written in the past you would at least acknowledge that I pretty much nailed Harden's weaknesses. Maybe Harden will improve, maybe a lot of things will happen but right now Harden sure does not look like a guy who can lead a team to a championship. Playing high minutes, scoring a lot of points and the other things that you mentioned do not prove that a guy is a franchise player. Franchise players typically do those things but there are examples of players who do some of those things who are not franchise players. As for the 25-5-5 point that you keep hammering home, I am glad that my article made such an impression on you. I just wish that you had read it more carefully. I stated in the article that all of the players who had put together such seasons had made the All-Star team at least four times and that many of them were MVP caliber players. I did not say that every player who put together a 25-5-5 season was an MVP caliber player and I certainly did not say that every player who would do so in the future is an MVP caliber player. During Alex English's 25-5-5 season he did not make the All-NBA Team nor did he receive any MVP votes. Stephon Marbury had more 20-8 seasons in a row than anyone other than the Big O and that stat tells us nothing about Marbury's true value. You were so anxious for Harden to have a 25-5-5 season that you actually rounded up his numbers one year just to say that this "proved" Harden's value. Now that Harden has actually done it you act like this is some indictment of my player evaluations. Harden is a very good player but he has offensive limitations and he is bad on defense. He can get away with that during the regular season but he will continually be exposed in the playoffs. He had horrible games in every round of this year's playoffs and he was horrible in exactly the ways that I predicted he would be. Plus/minus is useful in context. During the 2015 playoffs, the Rockets consistently did better with Harden on the bench than they did with him in the game. The eye test shows this (game two versus Dallas, game six versus LAC, etc.) and the plus/minus confirms what any unbiased observer can see. Even before Harden played a game for Houston, I compared him to Ginobili, who made two All-Star teams and two All-NBA Third Teams. You are intentionally exaggerating and distorting what I have written with your faulty references to my 25-5-5 article and by saying that I called Harden barely All-Star caliber. For someone who is not a Harden fan, you sure get fired up about defending him. Would you be so quick to defend any other NBA player who shot 2-11 with 13 turnovers in an elimination game? You sound like Harden's biggest fan in the world, other than maybe Ryan.
express34texas
Guest
Not really. Reality showed that Harden played great this season, and had either the best or 2nd best regular season performance. He kept his team an elite team while Howard was out. In the playoffs, Harden averaged 27/6/7/2 on .620 TS%, slightly better than his regular season averages. He only had 2 games under 20 pts., and had 2 games over 40 pts. He did have a few stinkers, though. I've never called or implied he's an all-time great. But, if he continues at his current pace for several more years though, he's headed for the HOF. He ran into all-time great team in GS. I think the % is around 70-80% of the time that a team wins at least 67 wins in the regular season, they go onto the title. GS is absolutely stacked. Their 11th man, Ezeli, was dominating Howard at times in game 5. Curry played better overall than Harden; however, if Harden's cast was as good as Curry's, I'd think Harden's team would've won the series. Not sure how Harden quit. Playing poorly isn't necessarily quitting. I've also seen James clearly quit on his team, even when they were the huge favorites multiple times, so might want to rethink that statement.
Tokesta
Guest
Haha you're glad GS won huh? Because reality is showing that all your arguments are moot? Houston lost because despite Howards (sometimes immature) efforts, harden couldn't do anything against a smart zone/help defense schematic. Face it. This entire loss should be placed on hardens shoulders, just like it should have been when the thunder lost in the finals. MVP caliber players don't do what harden just did: he quit halfway through the third quarter. This is what's real..unless reality doesn't affect your opinion..which I'm starting to think applies to ryan and expresstexas. Comprehension>you
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
David, Harden's stat line today was atrocious. I have no defense for it . . . but nor have I've ever tried to defend the indefensible either. Harden's shooting percentage aside, in terms of his turnovers, I saw the graphic that listed the players with the most turnovers in an elimination game. Moses Malone and Kevin Garnett were on the list - two MVPs - along with Penny Hardaway. Not bad company, for mine. Harden is hardly the first MVP-calibre player to put up a stinker in his last game of the season. To your comment " . . . even though he played well in game two versus Golden State, he did not want the ball at the end to take the last shot." I'm sorry, that is just plain inaccurate. In fact, it's wrong. Watch the footage. Yes, Harden gave up the ball when he probably shouldn't have (especially to Howard at the top of the key), but he immediately went to get it back. That hardly classifies as 'not wanting the ball'. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mcj2nYE5go Anyways, I think we should probably wrap this up. I'm no Harden fan, nor a Houston fan. I have emotional attachment to him whatsoever. I've criticised him many times before, particularly for his lack of focus on D. However, I think Harden is extremely valuable to the Rockets - and one of the most valuable players in the league. You disagree. It's that back and white. Sometimes in debates you don't come to middle ground. It seems we can't, and that's fine. Time to both move along and enjoy the Finals.
David Friedman
Expert
The Raven: You nailed it with this remark: "Part of being a valuable championship-level player is consistency, and this is yet another example of an epic Harden flameout in the playoffs. The game 6 performance will count as evidence that Harden can’t be even the second-best player on a championship team." I actually think that Harden could be the second best player on a championship team but you are right that his inability to be consistent at the elite level is a major reason to not rank him quite as highly as some people do. That is one of the major points that I have been trying to get across but I feel like a few people are not paying attention to what I am actually writing and are instead just reacting emotionally. Thank you for taking the time to read the article and for offering your perspective.
express34texas
Guest
I can't believe how David can't see how he's contradicting himself and holding Harden to a different standard. It's mind boggling. Time to summarize. Here's many of the things that he's said pertain to elite players: high minutes, high scoring, all-around player, 25/5/5, AS, 1st team all-nba, leading team to high regular season wins, leading team deep into the playoffs, titles, probably missing something other stuff, but these are the main areas. Everything here applies to Harden, except no titles yet and some shoddy defense in his first 2 years in HOU, though he's a high steals guy and a much better defender than he gives him credit for. Harden finished 8th in assists(2nd for non-PGs), 3rd in rebounds for guards, 2nd in scoring, 5th in steals, 2nd in mpg, and 1st in total minutes for the season. I know you realize the importance of minutes and scoring, which are actually great indicators of a player's prowess. Harden is at the very top for each, and it's not like his team is terrible, and he's getting extra stat padding. Harden has averaged 26/5/6/2 on TS% over .600 over his 3 years in HOU. Nobody who supposedly has so many holes in his game and isn't very that good can have that type of production and do it so efficiently. Nobody is saying Harden is better than James, Kobe, or Durant. However, Kobe/Durant were hurt this year. James missed time this year, and his star-studded CLE team performed worse than HOU and in a worse conf. Naturally, any logical person can see Harden deserved more MVP consideration than James and Kobe/Durant this year. I'd still take James though for the playoffs. Other than Curry and probably James, and possibly Griffin, nobody played better than Harden in the playoffs this year. I've never heard you use +/- as a definitive argument for/against a player until now with Harden. You've used it very sparingly to provide insight in the past, that's it. Almost every time I see someone comment about it which you don't like the implications, you disregard it right away. This is highly contradictory. HOU is -42 overall and Harden is at -16. So, HOU actually does better with Harden than without him. It's a strange occurrence for a team this far in the playoffs to be negative in +/-. If you think this proves Harden is hurting his team or not that good, then you must believe Kobe was a detriment to his team in the 2008 finals since he had a negative +/-. You can't have it both ways. For the record, I agree with your overall 'previous' premise of +/- that it's a highly volatile stat that is hard to prove anything really. There's so many variables involved. Team +/- is valuable, but individual +/- isn't nearly as much. HOU had the 3rd best record in the league this year, and played like a top 2-3 team in the playoffs, without 2 starters. If that doesn't speak 'contender,' then what does? They lost to the best team in the nba so far this season. I don't even like Harden, as is the same with the commenters taking issue with you pertaining to him. He isn't a loved player, but it's obvious that he's a great player currently. And I'm not happy that you're making me at least slightly root for him, since I don't want to, especially with boneheard Howard on his team. Howard's an idiot. He could've been suspended for a flagrant 2 earlier in the series and now would've been suspended for technical fouls if the series continued after tonight. The media is sometimes wrong. I've seen them villify Kobe and now Westbrook to a lesser extent concerning postseason awards. However, I've never seen them elevate a player more than a few spots though, and that includes Nash. Nash didn't deserve any MVPs, but he probably was at least a top 5-6 player the years he won. It's not like Nash was only the 20th best player when you won his MVPs, like you think Harden is now. However, I mentioned 'real' nba experts; the coaches, past coaches, GMs, past players, etc. None of them agree with you either. When Kobe was getting disrespected, there were still a lot of media who disagreed with this, and almost all the 'real' experts disagreed with this, which is completely different than almost everyone everywhere disagreeing with you about Harden. How is that possible? How can JVG, Doug Collins, Mark Jackson, and on and on know what they're talking about with pretty much everything else, except they're all clueless about Harden? I haven't heard anyone say Harden wasn't at least a top 5 player this year at worst. Please, give me some examples of coaches or GMs or someone thinking Harden is barely AS caliber. Maybe I'm wrong and everyone else is, too. It's possible. How does Harden lead HOU to a 27-14 without Howard which is an elite pace still if he's only top 20? I repeat, an awful Detroit team dumped Josh Smith for nothing and ate his huge salary. And then they immediately get a lot better. You're vastly overrating Josh Smith. He along with Howard can't hit a FT to save their lives and cost HOU a lot of wins. Harden, Howard, and Curry all played subpar in game 5. Harden was the worst of the 3. However, according to you for +/-, Harden was only -4, while Howard was -7, so Harden clearly was better than Howard in game 5. I'm glad GS won the series. They have a better chance of winning the finals than HOU though I think either team would, and hopefully they do.
David Friedman
Expert
The Raven: I agree. I would like to stick to discussing the facts and how to interpret the facts but when facts are being misquoted it is difficult to have an intelligent discussion. The subject is actually a very interesting one to discuss, touching on analytics, player evaluation methods, the eye test, etc.