Poll question: Is James Harden a top 5 player?

Poll result (57 votes) yes (6 votes) Vote no (38 votes) Vote I'm Asian (13 votes) Vote

Harden is a G


top 5 in the NBA? Who knows...but ever since he buried Spurs in the WCF, I been saying he is a G. My favorite player in the league.

>

do or die

....

but I truly look forward to see how this agenda and its warring factions will blossom and bloom over the course of the season. Mainly because I didn't think I'd care too deeply about either Harden or the Rockets this season.

and the Rockets are looking like a playoff team for sure. i have a feeling they're at very least going to feast on the mid to lower level teams this season if they can keep this up.

Problems for bad defensive teams...and it's much more reliable than relying on jumpshots

lets not forget his disappearing act in the playoffs.

-------------------------
“The other dude after me didn’t help my case. It was just like…crazy nigga factory going on.”
Dre makes no apologies for his own eccentricities. “I was young, and searching, trying to find myself,” he says. “Never did.”-- Andre B

OKC may end up regretting this after all like Skip was saying

They couldn't afford to give him a max deal, and they got a lot in return. Of course it would have been great to keep him. I'm a thunder fan, and I'm happy for dude, hope he balls out. If he is capable of being a top 5 scorer he was going to get frustrated sooner than later on the thunder, just because he never would have been the man there. I think he can excel as a first option, he didn't get into the paint and to the line at will all season just because Durant and Westbrook were on the floor.

.

With multiple sources sources who writes a piece on how harden dominated team USA practices this summer in the coming days

***************
I've traveled far and wide through many different times...

we'll get one where the lede is about harden watching the heat celebrate, knowing that his poor performance had cost the thunder dearly. IT WAS ONLY THEN THAT HE UNDERSTOOD WHAT IT TOOK 2 B A CHAMPION

A

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--james-harden-seizing-opportunity-to-lead-rockets-04461209.html

James Harden seizing opportunity to lead Rockets
4 hours ago

Email

HOUSTON – As the charter flight carried James Harden and three players out of Oklahoma City, out of championship contention, there resonated no nostalgia within him. No hesitation. No regret. For all the insistence that Harden had been devastated over the deal to the Houston Rockets, Cole Aldrich witnessed something else on the private jet whisking them into a Texas sky: a stony, steely resolve.

Before that jet ever touched down in Houston, Harden made a vow to Aldrich: "We're going to change this city."

James Harden, right, has brought a relentless presence to Houston. (AP)Harden's time with the Thunder conditioned him to say "we" in the presence of his teammates, but Aldrich and everyone else knows the truth: Harden, most of all, is going to transform the Rockets. His team, his time.

Out of the smoky introductions on Saturday night, out of general manager Daryl Morey's wildest star-chasing dreams, Harden marched into the Toyota Center with a compilation of credibility to proclaim ownership of the campaign season's most worn-out term: change.

From doubts over his worthiness of a five-year, $80 million maximum contract to his legitimacy as a franchise star, Harden delivered a sledgehammer of 37 and 45 points in consecutive Rockets' victories over Detroit and Atlanta.

"He's come in with a chip on his shoulder, and it's been incredible for us," one Rockets official said.



The franchise and Harden knew this was no fairytale, that his and the Rockets' sloppy, disjointed performance in a 95-85 overtime loss to the Portland Trail Blazers was inevitable, and part of the painful process of rebooting a team into playoff contention. For all his shooting struggles, he still had the ball in his hands, the clock ticking down on regulation and a chance to deliver on the drama. When Harden tried to make his move, Wesley Matthews slapped the ball away and soon overtime belonged to the Blazers.

When his first loss as the face of the franchise was over, the routine had changed for Harden. No more Kevin Durant. No more Russell Westbrook. Everyone had come to his locker, wondering where the magic had gone in his game on this night, the explosion to the rim, the legs to make a jumper. After a torrid start to Saturday night, Harden jammed an ankle, hobbled on his way to missing 16 of 24 shots, turned the ball over five times, and yet: No one cares and no one wants to hear it.

The franchise star just stands there, and says what Harden did: "I don't make excuses. I had opportunities to make plays and make shots, and I just didn't."

To Harden, the Rockets looked "clueless" on offense, and the solution was simple: They need practice time together, need to learn each other. Left behind in Oklahoma City had been remarkable talent and chemistry. The process of bringing that culture to Houston started where Morey and coach Kevin McHale believed it would: behind the scenes, where no one else was watching Harden.

When Harden walked into practice for the first time a week earlier, he introduced himself to teammates with a strong dose of that daily Oklahoma City culture: Tuck in your shirts, fellas, and let's get to work. When Rockets assistant coach Kelvin Sampson went over the Portland scouting report before Saturday's game in the locker room, there suddenly rose a most patient arm into the air.

"Uh, yes, James?" Sampson asked, part-startled and part-moved.

Harden had an idea about a wrinkle on one of the plays and wanted to share it with the coach, but was hesitant to speak out. So he raised his hand and waited for the coach to call on him. Sampson had to laugh, and make no mistake: Sampson incorporated the idea into the game plan.



"That's what we learned to do in Oklahoma City, and that's what we'll know to do here with such a young team," Aldrich said. "James led us in Oklahoma City, too. You'd be out of position, and he'd be vocal to get you in the right spot. He was there early working and he stayed late working. That's what guys will see here too."

When Houston's management took Harden to dinner on his first night as a Rocket, that was the biggest message they wanted to impart: Be a leader, but be yourself. So far, so good. Yet the test doesn't come with the whirlwind opening week of historic scoring debuts and long, loud standing ovations.

So far, so good, yes. And so far, no adversity. No long losing streaks. No trip back to Oklahoma City to get buried under the avalanche of Durant and Westbrook baskets. Nevertheless, Harden delivered a message to the Rockets on the floor and off it: In good times and bad, follow me. That's the foundation for a franchise player. That's the start.

After icing that tender ankle, James Harden was the final Rocket to leave the locker room. Out the door he walked with a slow limp, a deliberate, stilted gait. He wore his Rockets sweatsuit and had a backpack snugly wrapped around him. The starry opening act had ended, and now the grind had begun. He limped along, one step at a time, and this is how a basketball star begins to change a city.

James Harden has his franchise now, a young, impressionable roster looking for him to lead the way. So yes, tuck in your shirts, fellas, and get to work.

Related NBA video from Yahoo! Sports

just like last year.

He's not going to average 30+ over the course of the whole year.

But hell yeah, he's been impressive so far in H-town.

He'll come back down to earth soon enough, but it looks like he's going to have a hell of a season.

rodrigue beabouis dropped 40 in a game too..

and don't forget what happened last finals. He was beyond awful, a top 5 player doesn't do that.

but if he keeps it up and does something big in playoffs then we can talk.

Nothing to sneeze at...he's playing efficient, and they are winning.

The talk in the Heat postgame locker room? That would have been LeBron James marveling at James Harden's stats, reading them aloud to Wade.
Heat beat writer ira winder an tweet

kyrie sucked tho, so i don't feel like staying up to gloat.

but, yeah...he stunk in the NCAAs, when y'all said he was too unathletic to dominate the L.

and hendo the second best SG from the class.

flight was great! denzel had them sistas squirming in they seats when he was caressin dat ivory skin and findin peace in those beautiful eyes....Mmmmmmmmmmmhuh!

and ASU

Jeff Pendergraph was probably the second best option

Yes Nigga I am gloating for today.

He scored those 40+ damn near effortlessly. Didnt really help that the Hawks were giving him layup drills but yeah.....I doubt he keeps dropping 35+, but something's definitely different

>something's definitely
>different

http://jlbsports.tv/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/146235791_extra_large.jpeg

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- 5....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dlgiritpmfo

=======================================
Occupy Big Government..

Fannie, Freddie dole out big bonuses
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/67292.html

http://youtube.com/watch?v=WC99ji34hNg

Courtesy of clutchfans

i imagine clutchfans is creaming in their shorts right now i havent been over there in a minute lemme check em out


do or die

I'm surprised you aren't more excited about Lin getting 10 rebounds.

which means he's the 2nd best player in the nba

2 good games is normally enough to get at least 75% of okp to overreact
bwhahahaha
looks like the majority of the board is going actually let this develop for once
kind of surprised
rockets finally play a solid team tonight
if harden drops 35+ you jumping on the bandwagon?

harden's numbers from last year make it clear that, as far as efficiency goes, he was the best offensive SG in basketball (along with manu). the question was if increased usage as a first option would change his ridiculous effectiveness. thus far, the opposite has seemed true.

when you watch him play, it's totally different from guys like AI or westbrook or kobe, who often score/scored on shots with a high degree of difficulty. harden takes layups, open threes and FTs. when he gets by the first defender, harden refuses to take that 14-footer like so many scorers do. he looks to get closer to the basket or passes out to the perimeter.

watching him play is seeing a personification of everything that shot-charts tell us about how an offensive player is supposed to behave. it's weird and futuristic, even though his game is almost old-mannish. unless he stops being able to make threes or get to the foul line, he's going to continue to put up great numbers (if not 39 a game).

the good thing about morey is that he's keenly aware of what makes harden so spectacular on offense, and will put him in situations to succeed more frequently than OKC ever did.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tcDXJfAFVw

If you try and look t this objectively it's pretty crazy to see where harden gets his hits.
After seeing this chart I was worried about his midrange,
But a) he doesn't need a midrange cause he gets to the hoop so well.
And b) his midrange when he ha to use it in two games this year looks fine.

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/41491/title-tk-the-james-harden-kevin-martin-shot-chart-comparison

harden's refusal to take those shots is what makes him so more effective than wing scorers like kobe, melo, etc. it's not coincidence that harden and manu share a common distain for midrange jumpers.

http://vorped.com/bball/index.php/player/shotchart/1133-Manu-Ginobili/season/2011-2012-REG

being able to make midrange jumpers is kind of an irrelevant skill. sure, it's nice to have in a pinch, but terrible as a go-to strategy. you don't get to the foul line, you don't get as many offensive rebounds and it's a lower-percentage two-point shot.

most players don't share that combination of skills though.

you could reveal the effectiveness of this strategy to evan turner, and he still wouldn't be able to do either.

(with Anythony Parker pre-Europe), Shawn Bradley.

Even before we were born they took Bad News Barnes who snubbed them for the ABA.

so are you telling me dude makes nothing but 3's & layups?

& the data suggests that 3s are actually a higher % shot then the mid range J?

i just find that hard to believe


do or die

>
>& the data suggests that 3s are actually a higher % shot then
>the mid range J?

Dude is basically the anti-Kobe when it comes to shot selection.

>so are you telling me dude makes nothing but 3's & layups?

basically, yes.

>& the data suggests that 3s are actually a higher % shot then
>the mid range J?

not a higher percentage of shots made, but rather a higher percentage of points per shot attempt which makes it more effective.

that's why the knicks are better off with carmelo taking threes instead of those ridiculous 17-footers. similar modest percentage, but higher reward.

I think it also shows that Harden doesnt settle for the midrange. If you watch the NBA, lots of "stars" midrange game consist of holding/stopping the ball and making tough shots with defenders in their face. Hardens shot chart shows that he doesnt do that. He's much more likely to go to the hole and take a higher % shot.

Aside from the 3's being better value and points per shot--lots of 3's are also "less defended" than backing down a guy and shooting a fallaway/fadeaway.

3's are many times taken after ball swings that leave the shooter generally more open. Even a guarded 3, where you pull up and you're on balance over a defender is probably a higher %age shot than a off balance 17 footer.

>that's why the knicks are better off with carmelo taking
>threes instead of those ridiculous 17-footers. similar modest
>percentage, but higher reward.

contested jumpers are silly no matter who takes them, but you have to believe that josh smith has been told 58294525 times by every coach he's every played for that he's hurting the team by taking them. how does that continue to happen?

>watching him play is seeing a personification of everything
>that shot-charts tell us about how an offensive player is
>supposed to behave. it's weird and futuristic, even though his
>game is almost old-mannish.

http://fs01.androidpit.info/ass/x35/6046035-1340343349410.jpg

+

http://www.countthebasket.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/efg.png

=

http://cdnl.complex.com/m.php/CHANNEL_IMAGES/SPORTS/2012/10/harden_zsgfh.jpg

http://www.nationofblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/traded-james-harden-costume-430x343.jpeg

On this board.

lol....

A bad finals against the heat lol. Then all of a sudden he sucked. He s doing exactly what I would expect him to, just better obviously.

But being the number 1 option and a pg that looks for him, harden should be 25, 5 and 5.

is this like ACTUALLY an agenda?

on some real shit unless its concerning some hoes i really dont interact w/ cats online like that so i havent really been paying attn to yall w/ this agenda shit but are cats REALLY making a production abt james motherfucking harden?

LOL

anything that airs out the bullshit anti htown bias but SHEESH


do or die

Are people really using stats to say that a mid-range jumper isn't a quality shot? People would really rather have players shoot 3's and try to penetrate and that's it?

I'm just trying to clarify, because if so, that is ridiculous.

and you're wrong again. let's move on.

You're arguing that a mid-range game is useless and trying to use stats to back your argument. You're sounding like you've never played basketball

If all you can do is slash and shoot 3's, you become MUCH EASIER to defend. Even Lebron with how special he is physically had to develop some sort of mid range game.

If that's all it took, then Jordan would NEVER win a ring. Him developing his mid-range game is what made him as unstoppable as he is. It wasn't him shooting a lot of 3's. It was because you had to respect the jumper, which combined with his quickness made him the nightmare that he was

It's what makes Carmelo Anthony a nightmare to guard. It's what got Dwyane Wade a title. It's one of the reasons why Durant is so impossible to defend. Grant Hill was a GREAT player, and he barely ever shot 3's. It was because of his mid-range game combined with his ability to slash.

It's the biggest difference between CP3/D.Williams and Rondo. If Rondo had a mid-range game he'd be the best PG in the league...because he doesn't it's way easier to defend him (and this is coming from a Rondo hater)

Going to Harden, the reason he's balling like he did was
A. He wasn't the focal point of the offense, so the defense had to play him one on one instead of doubling him like they would have to do to Durant and occasionally Westbrook
B. He's catching teams off-guard early in the season.

You honestly think him being the #1 option that teams are gonna let him get to the rim that easily? He's gonna have to break down the defense and hit some step back jumpers, and HAVE a mid-range game because he's not gonna get THAT many 3's, and he's not gonna get to the rim easy when teams catch on (which they will)

To say that a mid-range game isn't needed when Michael Jordan is the easiest evidence to disprove that point is crazy. Even on a basic level, ask anyone at the park, or anyone that's played ball...the cats with the mid-range game and the quick first step beat the slashers and 3 point shooters every time.

i don't feel like reiterating all the facts listed out above in this thread, but here's the general idea: being able to make midrange jumpers is a good thing, but taking them is a bad thing.

look at melo's shots from last season. click on the pts/shot tab.

http://vorped.com/bball/index.php/player/shotchart/919-Carmelo-Anthony/season/2011-2012-REG

carm's pts/shot are much better around the basket and behind the 3pt line than they are in midrange zones. his problem is that he takes far way too many shots from areas where he's less effective. that's dumb basketball. every contested mid-range jumper that an offense takes is a victory for the defense, no matter who takes it. it's math.

>carm's pts/shot are much better around the basket and behind
>the 3pt line than they are in midrange zones.

One players habits...does not make a theory correct

>his problem is
>that he takes far way too many shots from areas where he's
>less effective.

Well duh!?! Let's see, if you shoot more from where you hit less, that would make you less effective...BY GEORGE HE'S ON TO SOMETHING!!!

>that's dumb basketball.

Ya don't say?

>every contested
>mid-range jumper that an offense takes is a victory for the
>defense, no matter who takes it. it's math.

^^^Fucking stupid. Every contested 3pt shot is less effective than every contested mid-range shot. And the closer you get to the rim, contested or not, the percentages go UP.

It's funny you didn't pull up a chart for someone like Tony Parker who EATS at the midrange game...a mix of 15-17ft jumpers and penetration...RARELY taking a 3pt shot. And he's had a much better career than 'dumb shooting' Melo because he's effective at SHOOTING WHERE HE'S GOOD AT SHOOTING.

Some of you dudes need to put the TI-82 down and go pick up a fucking ball.

What's next? Half court shots are better than 10footers because teams will let you fling them uncontested?

STFU

you think i don't play basketball? OKAY DUDE (as if that typical jock huffiness isn't stupid as a bag of dildos anyway).

you're not thinking of this in NBA terms. it's not just about pure FG%. three pointers count for three points, while two pointers only count for two. you can draw fouls and go to the line. offensive rebounds mean another possession.

because of the RULES OF THE NBA, a contested 18-footer is not better than a contested three-pointer (if we're going to say any contested shot is a good one, outside of being in the paint). for any player who can make those shots at a decent clip, the difference in FG% between the two doesn't make up for the fact that one of them is WORTH MORE. so that's why threes are better.

if you get to the basket, you can draw fouls, get a three-point play or get your own rebound at a much higher rate than if you took an 18-footer. so that's why shots around the basket are better.

these facts are why harden and manu, the two most efficient perimeter players in the NBA, almost never take midrange js. by the way, tony parker doesn't take threes, but has led the league in points in the paint before. here's his shots from last season.

http://vorped.com/bball/index.php/player/shotchart/1134-Tony-Parker/season/2011-2012-REG

if you click the pts/shot tab, you'll find, much to your dismay, that parker does not, in fact, crush kill and destroy from midrange. he's far better when in the lane and not particularly dominant in the midrange at all. he's actually about as good as chris bosh.

http://vorped.com/bball/index.php/player/shotchart/838-Chris-Bosh/season/2011-2012-REG

>you think i don't play basketball? OKAY DUDE (as if that
>typical jock huffiness isn't stupid as a bag of dildos
>anyway).
>
>you're not thinking of this in NBA terms. it's not just about
>pure FG%. three pointers count for three points, while two
>pointers only count for two. you can draw fouls and go to the
>line. offensive rebounds mean another possession.
It's basic. A 3 point shot is a longer distance, tougher shot to nail consistently. A 2 pointer is a shorter distance, easier shot. That's it. The % will drop on EITHER shot when the defense is on you, but to say a contested 3 is BETTER than a contested 2 is crazy.

>because of the RULES OF THE NBA, a contested 18-footer is not
>better than a contested three-pointer (if we're going to say
>any contested shot is a good one, outside of being in the
>paint). for any player who can make those shots at a decent
>clip, the difference in FG% between the two doesn't make up
>for the fact that one of them is WORTH MORE. so that's why
>threes are better.
A contested 3 pointer is probably the WORST shot you can take. The only shot you can take that is worse than that is a 2 pointer with a foot on the line. If you take a mid-range shot (12-17 ft.) even when contested, it's still a better shot. Ask ANY coach which shot they would rather take.

There's a LITANY of players that improved their mid-range or made a living off mid-range play. Richard Hamilton's mid range and his movement without the ball is stellar...are you gonna say those shots he takes throughout his career are BAD shots because he's not shooting three's? Kurt Thomas is the oldest dude in the NBA and he's still effective because he can hit a mid-range jumper.

>if you get to the basket, you can draw fouls, get a
>three-point play or get your own rebound at a much higher rate
>than if you took an 18-footer. so that's why shots around the
>basket are better.
It's easier to get to the basket if the defense has to respect the fact that you can hit a jumper from mid-range. They'll have to respect that, and you can draw all sorts of fouls, from reach-ins, to and one's from them hitting your hand/elbow/wrist on the follow through, to them having to respect you so much that it SETS up the drive. If you have handle, that's makes you even deadlier.

Even the best 3 point shooters shoot somewhere between 40-43% from 3, and those are usually snipers with WIDE open looks. I don't even think I can name a star player that could hit a decent % of CONTESTED 3 pointers

>these facts are why harden and manu, the two most efficient
>perimeter players in the NBA, almost never take midrange js.
>by the way, tony parker doesn't take threes, but has led the
>league in points in the paint before. here's his shots from
>last season.
The facts are that Harden and Manu are efficient because they usually aren't the focal point of the defense. ESPECIALLY with Harden, you would take your chances with him and guard him one-on-one than leave Kevin Durant. Manu has the luxury of playing with a HOF big man and a great scoring PG, so the defense can't double off him. He'll get to the paint because the defense has to stay home with other players.

If they were the #1 option on their respective teams, they would
A. Not nearly be as efficient
B. Wouldn't get to the basket nearly as easily

>http://vorped.com/bball/index.php/player/shotchart/1134-Tony-Parker/season/2011-2012-REG
>
>if you click the pts/shot tab, you'll find, much to your
>dismay, that parker does not, in fact, crush kill and destroy
>from midrange. he's far better when in the lane and not
>particularly dominant in the midrange at all. he's actually
>about as good as chris bosh.
>
>http://vorped.com/bball/index.php/player/shotchart/838-Chris-Bosh/season/2011-2012-REG
Nobody's saying that you don't want to ideally get to the rim. But you're arguing that because of statistics, the mid-range game is obsolete, and it's better for teams to have 3 pointers and slashers, and nobody that can hit a 15 footer. That's ridiculous

there are facts and percentages all over this post. re-read them if you want (i suspect you won't). but i'm not going to restate a bunch of obvious shit because you can't comprehend simple math.

for the record, sweet-shooting midrange master richard hamilton's career TS% is roughly .150 points lower than harden and manu's were last year.

Crunch them numbers, Urkel.

which is most ppl beef wit stats
you'd still take a less efficient kobe who can dictate the pace and flow of a game while shooting 40% then alot of the dudes these stats suggest are more offensively gifted than kobe

to dudes credit he did say there was a new stat coming out (lol) that basically evaluates this data using pluggable scenarios (wide open, guarded by a SF, double teamed etc)

Nobody is arguing that open midrange shots are less efficient than 3's. But if you watch the flow of an nba game, most midrange shots taken--especially by "stars" are high degree of difficulty, off balanced, well defended shots.


>i don't feel like reiterating all the facts listed out above
>in this thread, but here's the general idea: being able to
>make midrange jumpers is a good thing, but taking them is a
>bad thing.
>
>look at melo's shots from last season. click on the pts/shot
>tab.
>
>http://vorped.com/bball/index.php/player/shotchart/919-Carmelo-Anthony/season/2011-2012-REG
>
>carm's pts/shot are much better around the basket and behind
>the 3pt line than they are in midrange zones. his problem is
>that he takes far way too many shots from areas where he's
>less effective. that's dumb basketball. every contested
>mid-range jumper that an offense takes is a victory for the
>defense, no matter who takes it. it's math.
>
>

>Nobody is arguing that open midrange shots are less efficient
>than 3's. But if you watch the flow of an nba game, most
>midrange shots taken--especially by "stars" are high degree of
>difficulty, off balanced, well defended shots.

smart players take smart shots -- it's why Rajon Rondo can dominate games even though his jumper is broke. it's also why Kyle Korver or Jason Kapono can have lengthy careers despite sucking at every part of basketball besides catching and shooting 3s.

Kobe can take and make from anywhere at an unbelievable clip. doesn't mean he's immune to charges of shitty shot selection.

it's just silly to say "shot x is superior to shot y" without any other context. open shots within a player's skillset are better than contested shots that might not be. shoot, contested shots within a player's skillset might be better than open shots for others -- again, need context. trying to condense to simple shot types just doesn't explain enough about the game.

in 2012, NBA teams construct their defenses to take aways points in the paint and three-pointers. they want opponents to shoot mid-range jumpers.

another example, with joe johnson.

http://vorped.com/bball/index.php/player/shotchart/1086-Joe-Johnson/season/2011-2012-REG

he's far more lethal in the mid-range than parker or melo -- and STILL scores more points per attempt taking threes.

overall offensive conversion is much more compelling to me than conversion on specific types of shots.

if you can shoot a high 3FG%, then yeah, chuck it. I totally understand questioning the orthodoxy on what a good or bad shot is. but chopping up shot types as opposed to just overal FG% is way too reductive to me and overlooks some key fundamentals of the game imo.

http://hoopdata.com/shotstats.aspx

look at the fg%s by location.

at rim: 62%
3-9 feet: 38%
10-15 feet: 43%
16-23 feet: 38%
threes (weighted because they count for more points): 52%

obviously players have different skill sets, but these numbers irrefutably show that threes and shots at the rim are the best ones for an NBA team to take. this is why harden and manu are so good, and guys like kobe, melo and josh smith sabotage their value by insisting on taking low-reward shots.

look, people can believe whatever they want about MJ fade-aways and call it nerd-shit, but these are facts that every single NBA team knows and coaches in accordance to. the spurs led the league in offense last year because they made more threes and at a higher percentage than anyone else.

it could be possible to have a team make themselves an outlier on that shot chart by using drive + kick plays to create space for shooters in 18-20' range, but obviously no one is doing that because if you can create space for an open outside shot, obviously you create that space for a 3FGA.

so perhaps the 3FG% looks good there simply because a 3FGA is most often the result of a specific type of play designed to have a high % long range shot. it doesn't mean 3FGAs are, by definition, more valuable than midrange jumpshots. it just means if you have an open shot, take it, and a good offense will space the floor to maximize the opportunity to score 3 pts instead of 2 pts.

what you're talking about in critiquing Melo, Josh Smith, Kobe et. al. is simply shot selection. they're taking poor midrange jumpers. it doesn't mean a midrange jumper is valueless, or that a player should avoid it at all costs. and if you're a player like Melo that has to act as the initiator of all NYK offense, you HAVE to keep the defense on their toes by creating from a range of spaces, in order to keep them moving and attackable for you and your teammates.

so it doesn't surprise me one bit that 3FGAs have a higher value, on aggregate, than midrange jumpers. what surprises me is that you've taken this data and made a sweeping generalization from it that "all midrange game is bad."

bad shots that don't involve an entire team offense are bad, it doesn't matter what part of the floor they're coming from.

those are the numbers. when every single field goal attempt by every player on every team is taking into account, it's clear that shots at the rim are most effective, followed by three pointers. and it's not by a little bit, either.

if you want to pretend could be some "outlier" team that effectively takes tons of midrange jumpers, you're not dealing in reality. they're lower-percentage, two-point shots that seldomly result in three-point plays, foul shots or o-rebounds. want to see a team that shot tons of midrange jumpers? look at philly last year. they shot less threes and foul shots than almost anybody, while being one of the worst in the league at offensive rebounding (despite being good at defensive rebounding). hmm, i wonder why they brought in bynum and an entire convoy of gunners.

>it doesn't mean 3FGAs are, by
>definition, more valuable than midrange jumpshots.

YES, BY DEFINITION, THEY ARE. THEY ARE WORTH THREE POINTS.

i'm not saying that midrange jumpers are valueless. being able to make them insures that the defense has to react (instead of simply sagging off guys like evan turner or rondo). but i'm saying that any player or team who takes tons of them will not be efficient for an array of reasons. and that statement is backed up by numbers from every shot taken in the NBA last year.

>i'm not saying that midrange jumpers are valueless. being able
>to make them insures that the defense has to react (instead of
>simply sagging off guys like evan turner or rondo). but i'm
>saying that any player or team who takes tons of them will not
>be efficient for an array of reasons. and that statement is
>backed up by numbers from every shot taken in the NBA last
>year.

that makes perfect sense to me. but I would describe that problem as "shot selection" not "shooting midrange." if you're taking a ton of midrange, you're likely settling -- just shooting instead of exerting the energy to find a better shot. that's a decision making problem, not a problem with the shot imo, and if a team is shooting a ton of them, I'd say their offense isn't doing enough to get good looks. so anyway, I agree it's good that Harden shoots from the arc or from the key -- that's efficient. but I'd disagree with the idea that 3FGAs are inherently superior to midrange jumpers, never mind the percentage.

just like layups are clearly the ideal shot for every team, there can still be bad FGAs at the rim. it's decision making to me, not a simple percentage game.

and anecdotally -- I coulda told you that a guy like Channing Frye had 3-point range when he was in Portland. I saw him make those shots in warmups and I knew he'd have it in his bag if he wanted to use it. but I *knew* Nate McMillan would kill any PF that took a 3-point shot, and I always thought that was stupid (cuz I'd wager right now that Aldridge could be a 40%+ 3-point shooter from the corner if the Blazers had sets for him there). so PHX picks him up and finds value in a relatively low-value NBA player by using him to stretch opposing Cs -- GOOD! it was Nate McMillan's fault that Channing wasn't finding his calling as a player in the 1st place and dumb dogma like that needs to be taken to task in the NBA.

BUT

saying 3FGAs are always better than midrange is just as crazy.

http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/2012/10/17/central-winger-finding-context-shines-light-crosses

this article attempts to create a graphic for where the pass comes from preceding a successful cross (if you're soccer illiterate, just think of it the same as a made field goal). what it finds is that there is clearly a difference based on where the pass that precedes the cross comes from, and that the chart can change shape very dramatically based on individual teams' style of play.

that's the sort of thing I want from advanced basketball analytics. miss/make lacks context to be truly insightful to me. we need to know HOW those attempts are being created to have a useful comparison point.

players shoot better when they don't dribble the basketball. it makes total sense, as movement implies the presence of a defender, but it's cool that numbers back it up.

as opposed to "taking midrange jumpers." because a guy like JR Smith I'm pretty certain takes plenty more 3FGs than 2FGs, but he isn't efficient when he's pounding and hoisting, whereas a guy like Lamarcus Aldridge uses his midrange from the triple threat stance to keep defense's honest and I don't think it's terrible when he picks + pops even if it's only a 50% shot or so.

and I'd be surprised if you did analysis of where midrange jumpers are taken in the shot clock, if there isn't a preponderance of them late in the shot clock as teams hoist because their offensive set is broken.

which is where I might say killing a guy like Melo for hoisting might be unfair when that's his responsibility in the NYK offense, but then again I also watch Melo enough to know he has specious shot selection at times, so if the shoe fits...

but anyway that's the sort of context that I think is lost in pure make/miss efficiency comparisons and where I think the blanket "3FGs are a superior shot" statement is misleading.

but generally if you're uncontested you could drive. and generally people taking mid-ranged shots are guarded.

so, it should be a rare occurrence.

if you're taking a high percentage of mid-range shots you're not positioning yourself well in your offense.

I bet the number of players who make 2+ mid-range shots per game shooting at 44% or more is a group in the entire league that I could count on my hands.

Michael Jordan scored the majority of his points off of mid-range jumpers and he is by far the most efficient perimeter player of all-time.

WE'RE GOING TO START ACCUSING PEOPLE OF NOT PLAYING BASKETBALL WHEN TALKING ABOUT THE NBA? IS THIS OCCURRING ON OKAYPLAYER.COM

sheesh, what a desperate loser.

pick an example besides MJ, because there aren't any spacial stats we can look at. anyway, his career best TS% was 50 points lower than what harden and manu put up last year. so your blabber about him being "by far the most efficient perimeter player of all-time" is totally pointless.

>pick an example besides MJ, because there aren't any spacial
>stats we can look at. anyway, his career best TS% was 50
>points lower than what harden and manu put up last year. so
>your blabber about him being "by far the most efficient
>perimeter player of all-time" is totally pointless.

By the way, its not just MJ, Lebron had been a more efficient player in Miami because he takes fewer 3's than he did in Cleveland, Wade won his first title primarily takeing mid-range jumpers, Dirk became more lethal player and finally won a title when he started taking less threes started taking more mid-range shots, Kobe is far more efficent when he is taking mid-range jumpers than when he's taking 3's. I guess to think guys like KG and Duncan should step out to the 3 point line too, huh?

you have no idea what the actual numbers are.

much was made of how lebron took less threes last season. and it was true -- he took one less per 36 minutes than the previous year and two less than he usually averaged in cleveland. this is where your knowledge of facts ends.

from an efficiency standpoint, lebron should have been shooting more threes, not less. in 2010-2011, his points per shot attempt from the left side of the three point circle were equivalent to his points per shot attempt at the rim. these were his most effective spots for scoring, and where he was dominant.

look. click the pts/shots tab.

http://vorped.com/bball/index.php/player/shotchart/837-LeBron-James/season/2010-2011-REG

in 2012, he did indeed proportionally take a few more midrange jumpers--but was actually slightly worse from most areas than in the prior year. the areas where he improved most were finishing right around the rim and slightly along the baseline.

http://vorped.com/bball/index.php/player/shotchart/837-LeBron-James/season/2011-2012-REG

so while lebron's field goal percentage might have benefited from taking less threes, his true shooting percentage was just about the same as it had been for the previous three years.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jamesle01.html

to sum things up:

lebron did not get better at scoring midrange shots last season.
lebron did not improve by taking less threes.
lebron was equally good as he had been for threes years in a row, just in a slightly different way. in fact, his offensive rating was lower last season than when he was in cleveland.

by the way, those patterns held for the playoffs, too. he was more efficient shooting threes from the left side than he was in any midrange area. but he absolutely destroyed people be getting into the paint at will -- in fact, he averaged twice as many points-per-attempt in the paint as from the midrange.

http://vorped.com/bball/index.php/player/shotchart/837-LeBron-James/season/2011-2012-POST

i hope you appreciate me going through all this trouble to prove you wrong.

game? Do you realize that defenses don't just stand back and allow to survey the floor and shoot from the most optimal spot on the floor?

If you really want to nerd out with the shit what is the difference on percentages between spot up 3's and 3's off the dribble?

Shots at the rim and spot up 3's may have a higher percentage because they usually involve being set up by at least on other player. But there are times in an actual basketball game where a player can't wait to be "set-up" and has to make a play on their own. All the people I listed in my post above may not have great "metrics" by your standards but they all have CHAMPIONSHIPS and that is what it's all about.

>Do you realize that defenses don't just stand back and allow to survey the floor and shoot from the most optimal spot on the floor?

>pick an example besides MJ, because there aren't any spacial
>stats we can look at. anyway, his career best TS% was 50
>points lower than what harden and manu put up last year. so
>your blabber about him being "by far the most efficient
>perimeter player of all-time" is totally pointless.
You are honestly trying to make an argument for James Harden and Manu Ginobili over Michael Jordan...wow

>
>>pick an example besides MJ, because there aren't any spacial
>>stats we can look at. anyway, his career best TS% was 50
>>points lower than what harden and manu put up last year. so
>>your blabber about him being "by far the most efficient
>>perimeter player of all-time" is totally pointless.
>You are honestly trying to make an argument for James Harden
>and Manu Ginobili over Michael Jordan...wow

Jordan is a god who never missed a single mid range jumper in his entire career.

You realize if he played today he would average 48,8 and 12 a night right?

I love OKP.

that just doesnt seem like a very thought out statement. most prolific? yes. most efficient? no.

i dunno how mchale got this job. dude isnt a good coach

his sub game sucks. his time mgmt does too.

he refuses to even TRY our rooks out, even a little

shits nuts


do or die

And does the argument against a mid range game still exist?

if he didn't get to the line he'd be fucking horrible this year
guinness based his whole argument off numbers from what was essentially a contract yr on a finals team
just dumb

dude is second in the NBA in scoring.
he's leading the NBA in made FTs.
his TS% is solid, even though he's been missing threes far beneath his career percentage.
cry about it.

k

please link me to one thing i've ever written praising harden as a defender.

lol @ the counter being "when did i ever mention defense"

It's a lot easier when you're the #3 option with Durant and Russy
KMart shooting 50% from the field AND from 3
Harden's also got 5 to's per game too

He'll get better, but that top 5 ish is nuts right now

left the game at halftime with some kind of cold
russy need to stop bullshitting and bypass this nigga already

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JX33tc3rCqg

between this and the "deron better" travesty, SPM and the Truth should reevaluate speaking about basketball in public.

about to lose dat Lin agenda too, which will be lulz

*knows why you're so predictable and pressed*

There's a reason 3-point specialists are sometimes multiple per roster and yet there are no "mid-range specialists." Mid-range game is overrated as sin-- a good asset for a player, but not to be relied on.

that was just the truth trying to troll. my non-bold claim was that he was the best offensive SG in the NBA last year (which he was).

edit: and i said "morey got his top 20 player" in the post about the trade. which is also obvious by now, even to idiots.

they super-duper wrong and crying about it.

harden has been below avg. from 3 this yr and has basically been living off getting to the line, but thanks though i'm sure he appreciates any help he gets on the subject

you didn't think a top five scorer in the league deserved a max deal. LOL forever.

why would i give a fuck if a mediocre team no one cares about gave him a max deal?
they have linsanity and a "top 5 offensive" weapon and can still barely fill the lower seats
probably will give josh smith close to the max too this offseason, enjoy

i'm glad you're getting into stuff like TS and usage though. it's interesting shit to take into account, right?

i don't think there's much chance the rox are interested in smith and his comical 47% TS. unless they've got some way to stop him from taking stupid midrange jumpers.

>There's a reason 3-point specialists are sometimes multiple
>per roster and yet there are no "mid-range specialists."
>Mid-range game is overrated as sin-- a good asset for a
>player, but not to be relied on.
Yet the best Duke player in the last 20 years relied solely on his mid-range game

Since Grant Hill could shoot from anywhere, including 3, including driving to the rim.

A specialist implies they do nothing but shoot from there.

Grant Hill scored over twenty points per game.

The top player in the league at mid-range game (presumably Dirk) makes MAYBE 4-5 long mid-range buckets per game. Maybe. I'm being generous. And he has maybe the best mid-range game of the last decade, maybe more.

So if Grant Hill relied solely on his mid-range game, that means he made double the baskets from that area as the best mid-range player of this decade.

In the ACTUAL world, Hill's ability to shoot from anywhere made him a threat, forcing players to defend him everywhere, so yes, it was an asset. But he was *far* from a mid-range specialist.

Besides, bringing up Hill as an example is silly, as he's a rare Hall of Fame level talent. The best mid-range players in the game today are all HOFers (Kobe, Dirk, Nash, CP3). That doesn't make the mid-range jumper a better shot choice than a 3. That just makes those players exceptionally special.

.

i like felton too, but jeez

*keeps westbrook*
*trades harden for a couple picks, a year of k-mart and jeremy lamb*
*high-fives sam presti*

Thunder very well might win a title this year
Morey might be picking the 14th pick again then signing josh smith
:)
but a one dimensional guard put up points tonight
YAYE!!
big picture, smh

what do you think harden's value is now? YOU KNOW, FOR A 23-YEAR OLD ALL-STAR WHO'S CURRENTLY THE THIRD BEST SCORER IN THE NBA BEHIND DURANT AND LEBRON?

it's not two first rounders, one year of kevin martin and jeremy lamb, that's for fucking sure.

way to go, Sammy.

The deal breaker was that Harden was asking for the max and considering the new CBA a small market team like OKC can't afford to max out 3 players. Basically, Harden is at his best when he has the ball in his hands and with Russy/KD that wasn't happening as much for him to be worth a max. On the other-hand, Ibaka has shown he can play off of KD/Russy and comes in cheaper.......considering Perk is their next best big, you can't turn it down.

If they aren't going to use Harden to his full potential, what's the point of paying him max money? It's like buying a sports car just so you can drive it around your neighborhood and hit up the gas station on the way back.

their rival team jettisoning a 23-year-old elite scorer so their franchise could keep Kendrick Perkins and not pay a luxury tax when they were in the midst of being a perennial title contender.

Oh and uh, Harden is still better than Ibaka. By like, a whole lot.

Something tells me an actual fan of the team might feel a bit differently about these developments.

But yeah if I rooted for the Spurs I'd be pretty happy OKC ownership got conveniently poor when it was time to pay a guy who was the biggest reason my team lost in last year's Conference Finals.

dudes are like WELL THEY HAD TO TRADE HIM TO KEEP IBAKA AND WESTBROOK as if that's not a massive blunder to start with. then presti gave up a 23-year old superstar who he could have contractually held onto for five more years for a couple picks, a one-year rental of an inferior player and a rookie currently in the d-league.

they didn't have to trade harden.
they could have kept all four and paid lux tax.
they could have amnestied perkins to make more room.
they could have traded ibaka or westbrook.
they could have resigned harden to an extension, and then figured out who to trade after this season.

what you don't do is trade james harden, ever.

But the fact that these dudes continue to trot out these weak-ass justifications in the face of the steadily overflowing slopstream of damning evidence is nearly as befuddling as it is amusing.

It's obvious they are a better team now and in the future with Harden. That was obvious at the time of the trade and is only further evident now.

There is no way they can afford 4 max contracts when they are playing in Oklahoma which was why I made this post: http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=8&topic_id=1988827&mesg_id=1988827&listing_type=search

ATTN Bomb: The reason OKC beat the Spurs in the WCF had a lot to do w/ Ibaka killing it from the perimeter along w/ Thabo putting the chains on Top5 than Harden jacking up shots like JR. So, I would have been happier if Ibaka bolted and they kept Harden, that just means less touches for KD & less PT for for Thabo, not to mention Russy pouting.

these numbers didn't formulate in a vacuum
there's this thing called circumstance that surrounds them
and harden wouldn't even be starting right now on the thunder
and to his credit he was fine with that
but why u weirdos ignore that fact & continue to act like harden would even have the opportunity to contribute on the same level is beyond me
the thunder are better than they were last yr, would they be even better with harden....who knows. no way to quantify that
what i do know is it's no way they would have been able to justify trading him at the deadline and so they would have lost a ton of leverage in any offseason deal
they acted proactively getting a placeholder for this years title run and pieces for the future in exchange for a player they were going to dump regardless (they wanted ibeka and russy over harden GET OVER IT)
masterful capology under a draconian CBA imo
the reality is the team is good as fuck and looks like it will be for the foreseeable future
they made the trade and moved the fuck on, running around rationalizing with silly ass hypotheticals isn't going to cure ur hurt feelings
fucking babies

You know they have to win the Larry O', er.....championship to be better right?

you were absurdly wrong about harden's ability.
the thunder were wrong to trade him.
let's move on.

games in Houston, I never said he was or he wasnt, obviously from the poll results a lot of people didn't at the time. Its still debatable.

At age 23.

I was one of the people preaching hesitation after his Finals performance... and I'm not sure why. Obviously he was awful, and with even slightly better play they had a very real chance to win... but he was a 22-year-old on a big stage. We've seen great players wilt when younger in the playoffs before. Patience with him would've been a wiser move for OKC (and wiser for me than posting anti-Harden rhetoric).

Morey chilegrapesed the Finals performance, gave him the money, and won big. Martin is good but is not and will not be Harden. Lamb can be good in the future but is far from Harden. No one OKC can take with the Rockets' pick will be a "best at their position in the league" player. Which Harden is.

I'm not saying they will get Dwight... but players worth a max deal absolutely should be looking at the Rockets, as their backcourt is an average 23.5 years old, and they will only get better.

That doesn't mean he's Top 5... but Top 5 on offense? Yeah, that's not a hard argument to make.

I didn't think he shrunk b/c of the big stage, but he just had an off series against the best team in the League. It happens. It shouldn't have been on anyone's radar in consideration of keeping/trading him. He had 80 other games that year where he proved his worth.

it still kills me how young dude is

and he still has alot of areas where he can improve

mostly on defense and on offense he should be in the post, some

I will say I can't stand watching dude play though

all that floppin, neck snappin, swinging arms through defenders', etc...

and can we talk about the dribbling into people

why is that not a foul

I understand the defender may be moving

but if somebody just gets up a head of steam

and dribble right into you

I don't understand why that's not an offensive foul

eh...

he's good for HOU

they have something to build around

but he needs to improve before I care!

I can already list 5 off the top of my head that's better than Harden
Lebron
Kobe
Durant
Carmelo
Wade

And I didn't even throw in CP3

A lot of people said harden wasn't worth a max deal plus cap hit for okc tho

he's better than kobe and melo though.

>he's better than kobe and melo though.

PLEASE ARCHIVE!

i mean the rockets really overachieved and took the thunder to 6 games.

harden can only get better and the rockets got something there and if they can land dwight howard then they could be in the top 4 easily out west.

Beard is on par w/ the likes of Ty Lawson at this point & that's not an insult.

and that was before ppl knew how good PG, curry and ant davis were
harden putting up mitch richmond numbers is cool and all but he gotta work on that other side of the floor

harden does his thing though

.

Crazy that it would come to fruition in this playoff series like it did.

Curry
Kawhi
Bron
KD
Russ
Blake
PG
Jimmy
AD
Boogie

>Curry
>Kawhi
>Bron
>KD
>Russ
>Blake
>PG
>Jimmy
>AD
>Boogie

Can you believe in Harden?

>Can you believe in Harden?


Harden was THISCLOSE from winning the MVP.....Without D'antoni....