The Unnatural:

As I recall, you like Harden so much that you wanted me to credit him with 25-5-5 status before he ever achieved it. In any case, I never said that any one stat or category defines a player. I did note that most of the players who achieved 25-5-5 multiple times put together great overall resumes. Maybe Harden will do the same. Why do we have to rush to credit him with things that he has not done?

I used plus/minus in many of my articles about Team USA’s performances in FIBA play. I think that plus/minus is useful if the sample size is large OR if you actually watch the games and analyze why the numbers came out the way that they did. Regarding Harden, his plus/minus in the playoffs is negative because he was on the court when Houston was being outscored early in games but he sat out during big comebacks. I don’t think that this is coincidental. I think that his impact has always been less than his individual numbers suggest.

What do you think is the difference for Houston in this year’s playoffs? They were first round fodder for two years. Now they are in the WCF. Harden has had some great games and some horrible games. He has sat on the bench during big comebacks. Is he really the reason why Houston beat Dallas and LAC? Do you think that Howard having flashbacks to 2009, blocking shots and finishing lobs, has nothing to do with this? I think that Howard has been the difference.

Astro:

Harden played great in game four. That was probably the best game I have ever seen him play. I honestly did not think that he would have a playoff game like that.

On the other hand, Houston could have really used that in game three, when he stunk. If Houston had won two at home then this would be a three game series.

Most teams down 3-0 win game four so that they avoid being swept and then they go out in game five. This series will probably follow that same path.

Scoring 45 points when down 3-0 is something that a very good player can do. Doing that a little earlier in the series and not getting down 3-0 is something an MVP-caliber should do.

Express34Texas:

Melo has finished third and sixth in MVP voting.

I am not applying a double standard to Harden. I made two predictions when Harden left OKC:

1) OKC will be just as good without Harden.
2) Houston will not be a championship contender with Harden as the best player.

OKC improved in the first post-Harden year but then all of the injuries have made it impossible to fairly test my prediction. OKC did make it to the 2014 WCF, though, in spite of Westbrook recovering from two knee surgeries. How many people predicted that losing Harden would devastate OKC? That definitely did not happen.

Regarding Houston, the Rockets lost in the first round twice with Houston, as I expected. This year, the Rockets got past a feuding Dallas team, were outplayed most of the way by LAC but pulled off a great comeback and they are now down 3-1 to Golden State. If you think that this refutes what I predicted, that is fine. I am not yet willing to put Harden with LeBron, Kobe, Duncan, etc. I don’t see Harden as a “foundational” player. I see him as a very good player.

Ryan:
“Horribly” was a poor word choice on my part. Harden played very well in games one and two and very badly in game three. I should have said that he did not display the consistency one would like to see from an MVP-caliber player. “Horribly” only applies to game three, not the first three games overall.

1. We will have to agree to disagree. I made two predictions when Harden left OKC: I predicted that OKC would not be worse without him and that Houston would not be a championship contender if Harden was the team’s best player. OKC improved their record in the first year after Harden left, but subsequently OKC has been decimated by injuries. Even with the injuries, though, OKC has as many Western Conference Finals appearances in the past three years as Harden’s Rockets.

2. I don’t think you understand what I mean by a skill set evaluation. I mean a report like the kind that a scout would write, focused not on stats but on skills. For instance, Player A scores well driving to the left but if you crowd him and force him right he shoots a much lower percentage. I don’t think that Harden’s skills have improved that much in the past three years, though I think he improved a bit in this most recent season. What has changed is the amount of time he handles the ball. In other words, if he played for OKC he still would be the third option behind a healthy Durant and Westbrook.

3. Again, you misunderstood what I wrote. Saying that Harden has a good WS number without pointing out that this metric produces strange results is what I meant by “isolation.” Why is Harden’s WS good? What does this number mean? The fact that he is also rated highly by other metrics does not strengthen WS if WS is inherently flawed.

4. Again, I did not say “remove his games.” I cited points that Harden scored when the outcome was decided. I referenced 19 points scored when the outcome was decided. Divide 19 by 7 and that means Harden padded his scoring average in that series by nearly 3 ppg.

5. One, they did not all vote for Harden as MVP. Two, yes, sometimes a large number of media members make mistakes. Just because a lot of people believe something does not mean it is true.

6. You have not criticized anything that Harden does. All you do is offer excuses for him. I have said, for three years running, that Harden is a very good player. I just don’t think that he is as good as Morey or some media members say. You defend Harden like you are getting a portion of his contract.

7. What’s your point here?

8. When an MVP candidate actually is playing, his teammates expect him to play well. If a player is out of action, roles change and other players can adjust. That should be obvious. I am not “overly” relying on one game. You just choose to selectively read what I have written about Harden. You also interpret what has happened differently than I do, which is fine, but interpretations are not the same thing as facts.

It is a fact that Harden has been a non-factor in several fourth quarter comebacks and it is a fact that Houston has been outscored during the playoffs with Harden on the court. You can interpret those facts however you want but you cannot pretend that those facts do not exist. I am also pretty sure that if those same facts applied to a player who you do not like as much as you like Harden then you would interpret those facts differently.

9. I did not say that the Rockets are better off without Harden. I said that they have performed better with him not on the court, which tends to suggest that he is overrated.

10. Yes, in my opinion the Rockets had a slim to none chance of winning the title this year and, yes, teams down 3-0 in an NBA playoff series have never come back. I don’t expect Houston to be the first.

The bottom line is, this year Harden has been a little better than I expected when he left OKC but, even at that, the result is ultimately going to be the same as I predicted: the Rockets will not win the championship and they will (likely) be severely outclassed by Golden State (series will probably end 4-1).

Thank you!

Express34Texas:

I don’t completely disregard plus/minus. I used it extensively in my reports about Team USA and I placed it in proper context by describing exactly how/why Team USA performed better/worse with certain combinations of players.

Why is it “absurd” to question the value of a player who plays big minutes, puts up big individual stats and yet his team does worse during the playoffs when he is on the court, particularly when that player has been benched (or ineffective) in several fourth quarters?

Instead of insulting me or questioning my objectivity or citing to authority by quoting other people’s opinions, just offer a rational explanation for how Harden can be so valuable if his team actually does better without him? My theory is that Harden is a very good player whose numbers are bolstered by his team’s style of play but that his weaknesses get exposed in the playoffs. Howard’s presence basically covered for him in the first two rounds this year but nothing can cover for Harden against Golden State.

How big of a travesty would it have been if your beloved so-called experts had voted Harden ahead of Curry in the MVP race?

When OKC let Harden go I said that OKC would not miss him. OKC’s record improved the year after Harden left, even though OKC had already been so good that it was difficult to post a better record. I also said that Harden would struggle to shoot .450 from the field in the playoffs as a first option and that his teams would lose in the first or second round. They lost in the first round two years in a row. This year, Howard carried them past the Clippers but they are down 3-0 in the Western Conference Finals. I offered predictions and my reasons for my predictions and my predictions have pretty much come true.

Ryan:
This is a strange debate to have after James Harden played horribly as his team fell into a 3-0 hole in the Western Conference Finals. My stated belief that Harden is not good enough to be the best player on a championship contender is hardly refuted by recent events. That said, I will nevertheless offer my take on the points that you mentioned.

1. Evidence that Harden is not as valuable as some people say:

1) Rockets have been outscored during the 2015 playoffs with Harden on the court.
2) OKC improved their winning percentage the year after replacing Harden with Kevin Martin.
3) Rockets did not advance past the first round in Harden’s first two years in Houston. Rockets only advanced past first round this year with Howard playing dominant role on defense and even supplying key fourth quarter offense.

2. It is obvious that Harden has a bigger role. I asked you what, from a skill set standpoint, you think that he does better. You admitted that he is less efficient now. We agree about that. Otherwise, you did not answer my question.

3. You used Win Shares in isolation. You gave no explanation why this stat tells us anything that is relevant. I think the fact that it clearly misevaluates several players is good reason to not take it very seriously. Gobert is a good defensive player but he is not the 15th best player in the NBA.

4. I quoted my own article because you did not understand my point. My point is that Harden’s coach kept him in blowout losses so that Harden could put up meaningless numbers in garbage time. Harden’s per game numbers in the playoffs are boosted by stats he put up in blowout losses that were out of reach. That, combined with the fact that he had little impact in multiple fourth quarter comebacks, is evidence weighing against your estimation of Harden’s value. I don’t care about Harden making threes when his team is down 20 points. I do care about Harden being on the bench when critical playoff games are being decided by fourth quarter comebacks.

5. Sure, the media always gets everything right in all fields of endeavor (sarcasm). Do I even have to answer that one?

6. So, what you are saying is that when Harden sits on the bench in comebacks it proves his value and also that when he plays poorly and the Rockets lose it proves his value. Basically, no matter what happens we must accept that Harden is valuable because, well, you said so.
Sorry, it does not work that way.

7. It would be more accurate to say that Howard needs help. He is the guy who has led a team to the Finals before, not Harden. Harden was the third best player on an NBA Finalist and he played badly in his one Finals appearance.

8. I did not ask you to provide examples of teams surviving when an MVP candidate missed an entire game. A team can adjust if it knows in advance that a player is going to be out but it is hard to adjust to a supposedly great player playing like garbage for the first three quarters when his team is depending on him. That is what Harden did in game six versus the Clippers. Houston won despite him. Harden did the same thing in game three versus Golden State and Houston got blown out. Harden has had at least one garbage game in every series. That is not MVP caliber play.

The question is why does this happen and the answer is that his skill set may enable him to put up numbers during the regular season in a given system but that does not mean he is really the best player (or second best player) in the league.

9. Since the Rockets have done better throughout the playoffs with Harden off of the court then on the court, your question can be answered by simply looking at Harden’s backups on the Houston roster. Obviously, they can come in and duplicate Harden’s impact (if not his individual stats).

10. The Rockets needed a historic comeback—with Harden safely on the bench, where he could do no damage—in order to reach the Western Conference Finals. They are now down 3-0 in the Western Conference Finals. There is essentially zero chance that they will win the championship this season. You may only now be realizing that they have zero chance but I realized this before the playoffs started. A team that has zero chance of winning a championship is not a championship contender.

11/12. I give Harden credit for being a good, All-Star caliber player. He is not on the level of LeBron James or Kevin Durant or Kobe Bryant. He is not even on the level of Stephen Curry or Russell Westbrook. Harden’s game is too quirky and too one dimensional (no defense; scores best in a particular system) to lead a team to a championship.

Just the fact that a player is the highest paid player and that a team is built around him does not make him a franchise player. Juwan Howard was once Washington’s highest paid player. Another Washington player, Gilbert Arenas, was also a highest paid player around whom the team was built.

Also, contrary to what you wrote, the ball is not always in Harden’s hands at the end of games. In the playoffs, Harden is often on the bench at the end of games or his team is so far behind it does not make a difference. How many times in Harden’s playoff career has he actually come through with the ball in his hands at the end of games?

Ryan:

My point is based on a lot more than just one stat. Reread the article and reread my previous pieces that have discussed Harden. Also, you did not answer my question about what specific areas you think that Harden has improved.

Win Shares is a great stat, as I mentioned in the article (sarcasm). According to Win Shares, LeBron was barely a top 10 player during the regular season and Rudy Gobert should have made the All-NBA Third Team. You cannot use Win Shares to support Harden’s MVP candidacy unless you are also co-signing that nonsense.

Regarding stat padding, I provided two specific examples in my recap of the series at 20 Second Timeout (http://20secondtimeout.blogspot.com/2015/05/second-round-recapconference-finals_18.html) : “In game three, the Clippers blew out the Rockets 124-99 as Harden padded his box score totals (he scored nine of his 25 points in the fourth quarter when Houston never cut the deficit to less than 20 points). In game three, the Clippers routed the Rockets 128-95. This time, Harden padded his numbers in the third quarter, scoring 10 points while the Clippers expanded their lead from 60-54 to 103-79.” I also mentioned the games in which Harden played well, so read the article before jumping to the conclusion that my writing is based on not liking certain players. I am analyzing objectively.

Thankfully, the media members did not mess up to the point of actually naming Harden MVP but the ones who pushed Harden to second were wrong. All of Harden’s weaknesses were on display not just in the games I cited in my article but also in Golden State’s game three blowout win. Harden was a non-factor (3-16 field goal shooting), Curry was the best player on the court by a country mile and the ESPN announcers stated clearly that the only Rocket who played hard was Howard.

Without Howard’s contributions, the Rockets would likely have lost in the first round, as they did the past two years.

Find me a playoff game in which a supposed MVP candidate sat out the whole fourth quarter after playing like garbage in the first three quarters and his team rallied from 19 points down with 14 minutes to go. In the 1992 Finals game that you mentioned, Jordan sat five minutes out of 48 and he led both teams in scoring. Your analogy is flawed beyond belief and credibility.

The excuses the Harden cult make for this guy are just unbelievable.

Look, Harden is a good player but when you pump him up as an MVP candidate you just put pressure on him to do things he cannot do and you end up looking silly.

The Rockets were fortunate to make it this far, they did better with Harden out of the game than with Harden in the game throughout the playoffs and now they are being thoroughly outclassed.

Your concluding remarks have it backward. Howard is the one who needs help and Harden is not giving it. That is why he has sat out the fourth quarter when Houston needed to make runs against Dallas and the Clippers and that is why Houston got blown out last night with Howard gamely playing on one leg while Harden looked awful.

Houston won a lot of regular season games based on a quirky style and a better than advertised supporting cast. The system is geared toward making a dominant ballhandler look good, just like D’Antoni’s system inflates a point guard’s numbers. D’Antoni helped Nash become an MVP and he even helped Raymond Felton look good, at least for a little while.

There are many guards in the NBA who could do what Harden did during the regular season in this system.

Harden is doing exactly what I predicted he would do in the postseason when he arrived in Houston three years ago: score a lot of points but shoot less than .450 from the field and not be able to lift a team into championship contention. What happened that I did not predict is that Houston acquired Howard and that Howard revitalized himself. I also did not foresee that Houston would bring in Josh Smith.

The Rockets go as far in the playoffs as Howard can take them, period. Without Howard, they are first round fodder and will remain so (unless they find/develop a player as good as Howard).

Harden is a good player but not a face of the franchise player. I went through this same kind of thing when I wrote about Carmelo Anthony and Gilbert Arenas a few years back. Their fans did not like what I wrote but I was right. The great thing about the NBA is that seven game series speak the truth a lot louder than “advanced stats.”

It will be entertaining to hear all of the excuses for Harden’s play, though.

Joe:

At a minimum, I would take (in no particular order and assuming that each player is healthy) LeBron James, Kevin Durant, Stephen Curry, Russell Westbrook, Blake Griffin, Anthony Davis, Tim Duncan, Marc Gasol, LaMarcus Aldridge, Chris Paul, John Wall and Kawhi Leonard over Harden. Even as an older player, Duncan is still a more effective two-way player than Harden.

If Dwight Howard and Derrick Rose can get/stay healthy I would take them over Harden as well.

Anthony’s Nuggets took the eventual champion Lakers to six games in the 2009 Western Conference Finals. Harden has not yet bettered that as a first option. Arenas and Marbury put up big scoring and assist numbers without paying much attention to defense, much like Harden does now. Take away Howard (and Harden’s one Finals run as a third option) and Harden would not have had any more playoff success than those guys did.

Ryan:

You are confusing causation and correlation. Nothing you wrote proves that Harden playing well caused the Rockets to win. In fact, the numbers prove that during the playoffs the Rockets actually have done better with Harden off of the court. In the first year without Harden, the Thunder also did better without him than they did in his last year with the team and that is particularly telling since it is difficult for a championship-caliber team to improve its winning percentage. If Westbrook had not gotten hurt the Thunder could very well have won a championship one year after letting Harden go. Harden was hardly indispensable to the Thunder.

You are arguing against things that I never asserted (your comment about Harden’s assists on three point shots). Harden padded his individual stats against the Clippers in Houston’s blowout losses when he scored a bunch of points in the second half when Houston was never within 20 points of the lead. That is padding stats and those numbers are meaningless.

Go back and look up the Chicago-Portland game you referenced. Jordan played 43 minutes and he scored a game-high 33 points.The Bulls made a fourth quarter run with Pippen and four reserves but Jordan and Pippen closed out the game together. Harden played like garbage for three quarters and then sat out the fourth quarter while his teammates saved the day. If you want to talk about “complete and utter nonsense,” comparing Harden versus the Clippers with Jordan versus the Blazers qualifies. That was also the second of Jordan’s six titles. Harden has one Finals appearance as a third option and he played terribly in the Finals.

Harden’s Rockets lost in the first round twice with no Howard/injury-limited Howard. Howard returned at the end of the 2015 season looking at least somewhat like his old self and, what do you know, the Rockets actually got out of the first round.

The assist statistic is subjective but Marbury averaged 7.7 apg, Arenas 5.3 apg and Harden 4.4 apg. Unless you can make a compelling case regarding Harden’s skills as a passer, the numbers don’t support you at all. I don’t think that any of those guys are winning passers; some guys only like to make passes that lead to shots, even if there are other passes available that compromise the defense. The Spurs don’t care who gets the assist; they just move the ball around to create the best shot for the team. Marbury was notorious for holding on to the ball until he could spoon feed someone to shoot the ball, whether or not that was the best shot the team could get on that possession. Arenas was similar. Harden is better than those guys but he is closer to them than he is to LeBron James, Kobe Bryant and other great players who won multiple titles.

Clark:

In an earlier era, a player like Harden who tried to fool the refs by flopping and not even trying to score would have been dealt with harshly by opposing players. One time, a player (I think that it was Mike Riordan but I am not sure and it does not really matter) flopped and drew a foul on Dave Cowens, who was not pleased. The next time, Cowens just knocked Riordan over and after he drew the whistle, Cowens yelled, “That’s a (bleeping) foul.” Good scorers used to draw fouls by being crafty and getting defenders off balance; Harden just flails his arms and expects to be bailed out, which I guess has turned out to be a reasonable strategy (until it does not work at some point in the playoffs, which has happened every year of his career at some point in the postseason).

Astro:

Broadly speaking, there are two kinds of good perimeter defenders: those who can “lock down” a tough matchup without much help and those who are good help defenders because they wreak havoc all over the court. Some defenders are good at both skills (think Scottie Pippen and Kobe Bryant). Harden is obviously not a lock down defender; he never guards the other team’s top perimeter threat unless there has been a switch or he is caught in transition. Harden is assigned to a non-threat but he tends to ball watch and get beaten back door. Sure, Harden gets some steals but basketball needs a “caught stealing” stat like baseball has; Harden’s steals come at the expense of giving up a lot of easy scoring opportunities. Good defenders get steals without compromising the team defense.

The YouTube videos are just one piece of evidence that show how he typically plays defense. I have not seen any evidence that he has improved very much. Harden has poor positioning, he “dies” on screens rather than fight through them and he often just stands in one spot throughout a defensive possession. There were a couple funny sequences during last night’s game, both around the 4 or 5 minute mark of the second quarter. During one possession, he seemed glued to the floor for an entire defensive possession and eventually got beat by a back door cut. On another, he failed to follow his man through the lane but Golden State missed the shot and the defensive rebound literally dropped right into his hands without him even jumping. I guess that rebound is yet another sign of his ongoing greatness. The reality is that a player who plays heavy minutes is going to accumulate stats unless he is a total stiff but that does not mean that other players could not fill his role. If Harden were doing indispensable things, then the Rockets would be much worse when he is not in the game.

Pete:

You ignored what I wrote about Win Shares. Do you buy the premise that LeBron is barely a top 10 player and that Gobert should have made the All-NBA Third Team? The same “advanced” numbers that put Harden number one over the course of the 2015 season also say some pretty strange things about other players.

Of course, plus/minus must be used judiciously but the point here is that the eye test confirms that during the playoffs Harden has been far from indispensable. When Houston made big fourth quarter runs against Dallas and the Clippers, he was on the bench.

After Harden arrived in Houston, he led the Rockets to two first round losses. This year they are in the Conference Finals. What is the difference? Has Harden improved that much? No. Howard has been healthy and dominant. Howard is playing almost as well as he did when he led Orlando to the Finals. Howard, not Harden, has been the best player on a team that reached the Finals. Without Howard, the Rockets would have exited in the first (or, at most, the second) round again this year.

I don’t think that you even understand what I am “trying to discredit” in this or other articles. I said that Memphis is not a championship contender because the Grizzlies cannot make an outside shot. If you watched their series against Golden State then you know that the series was decided because Golden State could pack the paint and ignore Memphis’ non-shooters, just like I predicted.

As for Harden, he is obviously a very good player. I just don’t think that he is quite as good as some people say. He is a poor defensive player and his offensive numbers are padded by the system in which he plays. There are several other guards in the NBA who could put up similar numbers if placed in that system alongside those players.

Astro:

Don’t just look at names or ages. Look at how the individual players have actually performed and the contributions that they have made. Also, don’t leave out Josh Smith, who has had a huge impact. The Rockets have an excellent supporting cast around Howard and Harden. If I have underestimated anything about the Rockets, it is not Harden but rather how well Howard would play in the playoffs and how well that supporting cast would continue to play.

Ryan:

Playoff performance is important because that is where one can assess just how “valuable” a player really is. It is one thing to amass numbers during the regular season and quite another to do so in seven game series against playoff teams. Harden is a very good player who has not performed great overall in the playoffs during his career.

Your recitation of Harden’s game by game plus/minus numbers hardly shows that Harden is “indispensable.” If Harden is so great, why have the Rockets been outscored overall when he is in the game? That is not true of Howard, Ariza or Smith. Harden is very good at padding his individual numbers (which he did in the course of some of Houston’s blowout losses) but much of the “value” he is adding can apparently be replaced just fine by other players, since the Rockets are outscoring their playoff opponents with him on the bench.

Game six was very interesting. With their playoff fate on the line, the Rockets benched Harden and came back from a 19 point deficit in 14 minutes on the road. The Harden cult sees this as proof of his greatness because he accepted being benched but what would you and most other people say if the Lakers had done so well with Kobe on the bench or if the Heat or Cavs did that with LeBron on the bench? Harden is apparently so great that just by waving a towel on the bench he changes the outcome of games.

Harden has played with better teammates than Arenas or Marbury. I am not convinced that his skill set is better.

What specific skill set has Harden improved since leaving OKC? His numbers have increased because he has the ball in his hands much more but what does he actually do better?

Ryan:

As I mentioned in my response to Astro, Harden is far from indispensable to Houston’s success. Houston has actually been outscored overall during the playoffs when he has been on the court–and that is not just a stat that has been influenced by small sample size or an anomalous blowout, because we have seen that when Houston desperately needed to make late game runs (fourth quarter of game two versus Dallas, fourth quarter of game six versus L.A.) Harden has been on the bench.

Yes, the Rockets have done plenty of winning but the question this article addresses is how much Harden had to do with that success.

We have seen many NBA players who put up great individual statistics that did not translate into much winning. Harden is in that mold but he is fortunate this season that he has a reasonably healthy Dwight Howard (though we will see how Howard’s knee is now after getting hurt in game one versus Golden State) and a very good supporting cast.

Harden was the third best player on a team that lost in the NBA Finals. Has he really improved so much since that time that he is now capable of being the best player on a championship team? I don’t buy that idea at all.

Astro:

Even the most ardent advocates of “advanced basketball statistics” admit that the individual defensive statistics are not especially accurate. If you look back to previous seasons, Carlos Boozer–whose defense is so poor that he was often benched in the fourth quarter when he played for the Bulls–ranked highly on defense according to some “advanced” statistics.

The YouTube videos provide a small sampling of what those who regularly watch Harden know, namely that he is often out of position, that he gets steals by taking poor risks and that he is a subpar defensive player.

Astro:

Rockets have a negative plus/minus when Harden is on the court during the playoffs this year. Not only that but during two of the Rockets’ crucial fourth quarter runs (game two versus Dallas, game six versus L.A.) Harden sat on the bench while Howard and others led the way.

Harden has value but he is far from indispensable to Houston’s success.

Trey:

I think the exact same thing about the Grizzlies that I did when I wrote this article: their poor perimeter shooting will doom them to an early playoff exit and they are not a legitimate championship contender as currently constructed. I hope that you did not lose too much money betting on “Memphis vs. Errrbody.” The only “err” here is your analysis.

Tristan:

Starting Thompson at power forward and keeping LeBron at small forward worked pretty well in game two.

Tristan:

In most cases, my inclination would be to make one change to the starting lineup instead of two but, as I indicated in the article, it is tempting to just go small with LeBron at power forward. Presumably, Blatt knows his roster and knows which guys are best suited to various roles, which matchups are favorable, etc.

Tristan:

I should have clarified in the article that I meant start Thompson to keep the rest of the starters in their normal roles and then go small later in the game. If LeBron starts at power forward then at least one other player has to switch positions or be moved off of the bench (to play small forward, where LeBron normally starts).

Express34texas:

In the article, I mentioned game three and Harden’s playoff career-high 42 points on 15-24 field goal shooting. The article is up to date for all games played in the various series at the time I finished writing the article.

I don’t understand what is wrong with pointing out that the Rockets built their lead early in game one with Howard dominating and that the teams essentially traded baskets the rest of the way, with Howard not being in the game for most of that time, nor do I understand what is wrong with pointing out that the Rockets sealed the deal in game two with Howard dominating in the fourth quarter (and Harden sitting on the bench while Smith tossed lob after lob to Howard).

Even in game three when Harden played very well individually, the Rockets were actually outscored when Harden was in the game but they outscored the Mavericks by 16 when Howard played.

The NBA leaders in true shooting percentage since 2008 include Amare Stoudemire, Nene (twice), Tyson Chandler (three times) and Kyle Korver (the past two seasons). Are any of those guys franchise players? Are any of those guys even close to being the best all-around offensive player in the league? Korver is a three point specialist, while the other guys mainly scored in the paint off of feeds from other players. Prime Stoudemire is the only one from that group who could really create his own shot.

True shooting percentage is a useful stat in context but it is not some be all, end all guide to basketball analysis.

Harden shot less than .350 from the field in the first two games of the series but the Rockets won largely because of Howard’s dominance at both ends of the court. I seriously doubt that a team can win a championship with its top scorer shooting less than .350 from the field, regardless of how high his true shooting percentage is. Harden’s FG% picked up in the next three games (with two of those three games happening after I wrote this article) and if Howard continues to dominate then Harden and the rest of the Rockets will benefit.

Astro:

I think that playoff experience matters. It is unusual for a team to emerge out of nowhere (in terms of playoff experience) and win a title. Portland did it in 1977 but the Trailblazers finally had a healthy Bill Walton and he put together a great all-around season. Most championship teams have at least one deep playoff run together before winning a title. I don’t count Golden State out just for that reason but lack of playoff experience is a challenge that the Warriors will have to overcome.

Express34Texas:

You understand the point I made in my article and that I expanded upon here in the comments section. Game fives at home in a tied series are huge and they are games that great players can/should lead their teams to victory. As you note, game five of the 2010 Finals was actually played in Boston due to the 2-3-2 format, so in 15 opportunities Magic/Jordan/Kobe never lost a game five at home in a 2-2 series.

You are also right on target about LeBron’s Finals resume. No one is “blaming” LeBron for making it to the Finals five times but LeBron was outplayed by role players in two Finals losses (and he did not distinguish himself in 2007, either).

In a 2010 article (http://20secondtimeout.blogspot.com/2010/05/kobe-bryant-adds-to-his-glittering.html) I mentioned several of Bryant’s playoff accomplishments, including the one you pointed out regarding setting the NBA record by scoring at least 30 points in eight straight road closeout games.

Bryant’s playoff resume is not just a little better than LeBron’s; it is much better in terms of length, total accomplishment, individual accomplishment (numerous significant records, including the 30 point games in road closeouts) and team success (five championships).