Author Topic: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden  (Read 13287 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #90 on: February 13, 2016, 10:26:39 AM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11192
  • Tommy Points: 858
From Wikipedia:

Quote
Basketball[edit]

In basketball, the term "swingman" (aka "guard-forward") denotes a player who can play both the shooting guard (2) and small forward (3) positions, and, in essence swing between the positions.[1] Most swingmen range from 6' 4" (1.93 m) to 6' 9" (2.06 m) in height. The term was first applied to John Havlicek. Examples of current swingmen include: Paul Pierce, Jimmy Butler, Andrew Wiggins, Gordon Hayward, Nicolas Batum, Vince Carter, Andre Iguodala, Danny Green, Kyle Korver, Justise Winslow, Mike Miller, Terrence Ross, Joe Johnson, Nick Young, Tyreke Evans, Lance Stephenson, Evan Turner, C.J. Miles, Thabo Sefolosha, Arron Afflalo, Corey Brewer, and Tony Allen. Examples of retired NBA swingmen include Scottie Pippen, George Gervin, Clyde Drexler, Tracy McGrady, and Rick Barry.

[Note the omission of any reference to Harden]

From a website called "Sporting Charts":

Quote

Swingman
What is Swingman?

A term describing a player who can be used effectively as either a shooting guard or a small forward. This position is also commonly referred to as "guard/forward".

From Dictionary Reference dot com:

Quote
noun, plural swingmen. Basketball. 
1.
a player who can play either of two positions, usually guard and forward.

I actually think Harden is a SG, period.  I guess he could play SF in a smaller line-up but to me that is out of position.  Marcus Smart has played some at SF but that doesn't make him a "swingman".  I don't really think Harden can play PG either as he can't cover the opposing PG.  I think Harden is a SG and a pretty good one at that.

As SG though, Harden is versatile enough to give you some flexibility as to who you play at PG or SF along with him.  Because he will handle the ball and "play-make", someone like Smart or Bradley can be a very good PG pairing.  Also, because he will be the primary scorer at SG, a guy like Crowder who is more of a defender than a scorer, can work well with Harden.

I think Harden would be great on the Celtics.  I don't expect Houston will trade him but if he was available, I take him over Carmelo, Love, Lopez, Howard, or Horford of the players that have been discussed as potentially available in trades.


Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #91 on: February 13, 2016, 11:33:56 AM »

Offline mgent

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7567
  • Tommy Points: 1962
The amount of time Smart spends at SF is absolutely insignificant compared to the amount of time Harden spends there.

And remember, most of the time Smart is guarding a SF, he's not actually the SF in the lineup.

I'm not sure how a guy like Harden can have the wingspan of an average SF, weight of the average SF, rebounds better than the average SF, spends his time trying to score in the paint like a forward, and spends substantial time actually playing the SF in games, yet people are reluctant to call him a guard-forward, or a swingman?  Why?  Just because he starts the game at SG?

The main problem here is that the definition of SF is starting to change, because teams are increasingly playing 3 guard lineups (Kobe mostly plays SF from a lineup perspective at this point).




For the record, that was the list I was referring to when I asked which of those players (outside of maybe Iggy) could realistically play 1, 2, or 3 full time.

If Tony Allen is considered a swingman or guard-forward and he's 1 inch shorter and 11 pounds lighter than Harden, how is Harden solely a SG and not a swingman/guard-forward?
Philly:

Anderson Varejao    Tiago Splitter    Matt Bonner
David West    Kenyon Martin    Brad Miller
Andre Iguodala    Josh Childress    Marquis Daniels
Dwyane Wade    Leandro Barbosa
Kirk Hinrich    Toney Douglas   + the legendary Kevin McHale

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #92 on: February 13, 2016, 11:36:18 AM »

Offline aingeforthree

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2013
  • Tommy Points: 134
Too lazy to read this whole thread, so if this has been mentioned, apologies.

Was just watching Early Edition  on CSNNE. They were kicking around a trade idea from ESPN.

Boston gets Harden

Rox get IT, LEE, 2016,Brooklyn 2016.

Ryan said he thought it would take 2 Brooklyn's.

Thoughts?
We don't need Harden. We need a real center who can rebound and fill up the paint. I'd take Monroe over both Howard and Horford. And I want no part of Cousins.

We don't need mvp type players ? This is crazy. Why couldn't you land Harden & a Center if that's what your needs are ?

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #93 on: February 13, 2016, 11:40:22 AM »

Offline mgent

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7567
  • Tommy Points: 1962
I'm telling you guys it's 3 positions. But obviously the SF falls in the middle so a swingman is always SF capable. People confuse wing and swingman.

Sorry, wasn't aware you were the first person to invent the word.

You're correct that wing and swingman aren't the same thing, and people often confuse them, but they're not nearly as different as you seem to think they are.  Like we were saying, a swingman just stands on the wing.  Any SG or SF can be referred to as a wing.  A swingman is someone who can play both (a swingman is a wing but a wing isn't necessarily a swingman).
It's nothing to do with inventing. It's common mistake that I was pointing out. Never had a problem with people using Swingman for Harden only that it's not meant for a SG/SF. SG/SF is a wing. Swing man just means three position capable level player.

It's a mistake from your perspective, but from another's perspective, you might be the one who's mistaken.

Not sure why your opinion trumps everyone else's opinion who has commented in this thread.
Philly:

Anderson Varejao    Tiago Splitter    Matt Bonner
David West    Kenyon Martin    Brad Miller
Andre Iguodala    Josh Childress    Marquis Daniels
Dwyane Wade    Leandro Barbosa
Kirk Hinrich    Toney Douglas   + the legendary Kevin McHale

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #94 on: February 13, 2016, 11:41:32 AM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
The amount of time Smart spends at SF is absolutely insignificant compared to the amount of time Harden spends there.

And remember, most of the time Smart is guarding a SF, he's not actually the SF in the lineup.

I'm not sure how a guy like Harden can have the wingspan of an average SF, weight of the average SF, rebounds better than the average SF, spends his time trying to score in the paint like a forward, and spends substantial time actually playing the SF in games, yet people are reluctant to call him a guard-forward, or a swingman?  Why?  Just because he starts the game at SG?

The main problem here is that the definition of SF is starting to change, because teams are increasingly playing 3 guard lineups (Kobe mostly plays SF from a lineup perspective at this point).




For the record, that was the list I was referring to when I asked which of those players (outside of maybe Iggy) could realistically play the 1 full time.

If Tony Allen is considered a swingman or guard-forward and he's 1 inch shorter and 11 pounds lighter than Harden, how is Harden solely a SG and not a swingman/guard-forward?
I think it's because people are judging style of play and role in the offense. Harden is ball dominant so he is always looked at as a SG. If he was actually more off the ball and on the wing then people would be more inclined to accept him as a guy who plays some SF. Measurements aren't what defines you its your game.

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #95 on: February 13, 2016, 11:47:02 AM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
I'm telling you guys it's 3 positions. But obviously the SF falls in the middle so a swingman is always SF capable. People confuse wing and swingman.

Sorry, wasn't aware you were the first person to invent the word.

You're correct that wing and swingman aren't the same thing, and people often confuse them, but they're not nearly as different as you seem to think they are.  Like we were saying, a swingman just stands on the wing.  Any SG or SF can be referred to as a wing.  A swingman is someone who can play both (a swingman is a wing but a wing isn't necessarily a swingman).
It's nothing to do with inventing. It's common mistake that I was pointing out. Never had a problem with people using Swingman for Harden only that it's not meant for a SG/SF. SG/SF is a wing. Swing man just means three position capable level player.

It's a mistake from your perspective, but from another's perspective, you might be the one who's mistaken.

Not sure why your opinion trumps everyone else's opinion who has commented in this thread.
It's not just my opinion it's old school before the Internet told us what writers collectively believed (and mind you could be still wrong). On the street and even ask NBA players (tweet them). Swingman plays more than 2 positions it is the big thing about being a swingman to be able to be a factor in so many roles you can't be defined. It is not simply a SG/SF capable player.

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #96 on: February 13, 2016, 12:19:43 PM »

Offline mgent

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7567
  • Tommy Points: 1962
The amount of time Smart spends at SF is absolutely insignificant compared to the amount of time Harden spends there.

And remember, most of the time Smart is guarding a SF, he's not actually the SF in the lineup.

I'm not sure how a guy like Harden can have the wingspan of an average SF, weight of the average SF, rebounds better than the average SF, spends his time trying to score in the paint like a forward, and spends substantial time actually playing the SF in games, yet people are reluctant to call him a guard-forward, or a swingman?  Why?  Just because he starts the game at SG?

The main problem here is that the definition of SF is starting to change, because teams are increasingly playing 3 guard lineups (Kobe mostly plays SF from a lineup perspective at this point).




For the record, that was the list I was referring to when I asked which of those players (outside of maybe Iggy) could realistically play the 1 full time.

If Tony Allen is considered a swingman or guard-forward and he's 1 inch shorter and 11 pounds lighter than Harden, how is Harden solely a SG and not a swingman/guard-forward?
I think it's because people are judging style of play and role in the offense. Harden is ball dominant so he is always looked at as a SG. If he was actually more off the ball and on the wing then people would be more inclined to accept him as a guy who plays some SF. Measurements aren't what defines you its your game.

No, by the traditional definition Harden and LeBron would be PGs because they are the floor generals and are the players who initiate the offense.  However, they're bigger/longer/stronger than PGs, they rebound better than PGs, they are in the paint more than average PGs, and they're never the shortest player on the court, so that's why I (and some other people) refer to them as "point forwards."

We're coming up with new terms like point forwards, because the "traditional" definitions of positions, when basketball was invented a century ago, are outdated.  Positions have evolved due to different rules and different skill sets being desirable, the game is constantly changing through the eras.

Thus why a genius like Stevens doesn't look at traditional positions.

You're better off just calling the positions 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.  Positions are better defined by your size relative to other players at this point (though it usually ends up being some arbitrary combination of your size and skills).

Your guards no longer have to be your main ball-handlers, and the bigs no longer have to be your main rebounders.

You can debate and have your personal opinion about what position a player is, but at the end of the day, what physically makes a player a SG, or a SF, or a SG/SF, is whether the coach puts him into the game at one, the other, or both.  Isn't that more important than the "ideals" of what the position is supposed to be, or am I sounding like Aristotle?

Anybody can be "considered" capable of playing a certain position, but unless a coach actually puts you there and you're actually playing it....
Philly:

Anderson Varejao    Tiago Splitter    Matt Bonner
David West    Kenyon Martin    Brad Miller
Andre Iguodala    Josh Childress    Marquis Daniels
Dwyane Wade    Leandro Barbosa
Kirk Hinrich    Toney Douglas   + the legendary Kevin McHale

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #97 on: February 13, 2016, 12:27:14 PM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
The amount of time Smart spends at SF is absolutely insignificant compared to the amount of time Harden spends there.

And remember, most of the time Smart is guarding a SF, he's not actually the SF in the lineup.

I'm not sure how a guy like Harden can have the wingspan of an average SF, weight of the average SF, rebounds better than the average SF, spends his time trying to score in the paint like a forward, and spends substantial time actually playing the SF in games, yet people are reluctant to call him a guard-forward, or a swingman?  Why?  Just because he starts the game at SG?

The main problem here is that the definition of SF is starting to change, because teams are increasingly playing 3 guard lineups (Kobe mostly plays SF from a lineup perspective at this point).




For the record, that was the list I was referring to when I asked which of those players (outside of maybe Iggy) could realistically play the 1 full time.

If Tony Allen is considered a swingman or guard-forward and he's 1 inch shorter and 11 pounds lighter than Harden, how is Harden solely a SG and not a swingman/guard-forward?
I think it's because people are judging style of play and role in the offense. Harden is ball dominant so he is always looked at as a SG. If he was actually more off the ball and on the wing then people would be more inclined to accept him as a guy who plays some SF. Measurements aren't what defines you its your game.

No, by the traditional definition Harden and LeBron would be PGs because they are the floor generals and are the players who initiate the offense.  However, they're bigger/longer/stronger than PGs, they rebound better than PGs, they are in the paint more than average PGs, and they're never the shortest player on the court, so that's why I (and some other people) refer to them as "point forwards."

We're coming up with new terms like point forwards, because the "traditional" definitions of positions, when basketball was invented a century ago, are outdated.  Positions have evolved due to different rules and different skill sets being desirable, the game is constantly changing through the eras.

Thus why a genius like Stevens doesn't look at traditional positions.

You're better off just calling the positions 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.  Positions are better defined by your size relative to other players at this point (though it usually ends up being some arbitrary combination of your size and skills).

Your guards no longer have to be your main ball-handlers, and the bigs no longer have to be your main rebounders.

You can debate and have your personal opinion about what position a player is, but at the end of the day, what physically makes a player a SG, or a SF, or a SG/SF, is whether the coach puts him into the game at one, the other, or both.  Isn't that more important than the "ideals" of what the position is supposed to be, or am I sounding like Aristotle?

Anybody can be "considered" capable of playing a certain position, but unless a coach actually puts you there and you're actually playing it....
Interesting way to look at it. The 1-5 would probably be accurate height and match up way to approach game substitutions. In that case yeah you can put harden at the 3 or even 4 if another team was small enough at their 4. Hell we put Smart at the 3 but he isn't a SF is a perfect example.

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #98 on: February 13, 2016, 12:33:01 PM »

Offline mgent

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7567
  • Tommy Points: 1962
I'm telling you guys it's 3 positions. But obviously the SF falls in the middle so a swingman is always SF capable. People confuse wing and swingman.

Sorry, wasn't aware you were the first person to invent the word.

You're correct that wing and swingman aren't the same thing, and people often confuse them, but they're not nearly as different as you seem to think they are.  Like we were saying, a swingman just stands on the wing.  Any SG or SF can be referred to as a wing.  A swingman is someone who can play both (a swingman is a wing but a wing isn't necessarily a swingman).
It's nothing to do with inventing. It's common mistake that I was pointing out. Never had a problem with people using Swingman for Harden only that it's not meant for a SG/SF. SG/SF is a wing. Swing man just means three position capable level player.

It's a mistake from your perspective, but from another's perspective, you might be the one who's mistaken.

Not sure why your opinion trumps everyone else's opinion who has commented in this thread.
It's not just my opinion it's old school before the Internet told us what writers collectively believed (and mind you could be still wrong). On the street and even ask NBA players (tweet them). Swingman plays more than 2 positions it is the big thing about being a swingman to be able to be a factor in so many roles you can't be defined. It is not simply a SG/SF capable player.

You're drifting further and further into a philosophical debate (beliefs and reality).

You're basically saying that your definition is, for whatever reason, the Truth, and what people "collectively believe" is not true.

I guess the reason is, "it's old school," so it's true?

It was old school to consider an African-American 3/5ths of a person, should we roll with that definition rather than what we now all collectively believe?
Philly:

Anderson Varejao    Tiago Splitter    Matt Bonner
David West    Kenyon Martin    Brad Miller
Andre Iguodala    Josh Childress    Marquis Daniels
Dwyane Wade    Leandro Barbosa
Kirk Hinrich    Toney Douglas   + the legendary Kevin McHale

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #99 on: February 13, 2016, 12:49:02 PM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
I'm telling you guys it's 3 positions. But obviously the SF falls in the middle so a swingman is always SF capable. People confuse wing and swingman.

Sorry, wasn't aware you were the first person to invent the word.

You're correct that wing and swingman aren't the same thing, and people often confuse them, but they're not nearly as different as you seem to think they are.  Like we were saying, a swingman just stands on the wing.  Any SG or SF can be referred to as a wing.  A swingman is someone who can play both (a swingman is a wing but a wing isn't necessarily a swingman).
It's nothing to do with inventing. It's common mistake that I was pointing out. Never had a problem with people using Swingman for Harden only that it's not meant for a SG/SF. SG/SF is a wing. Swing man just means three position capable level player.

It's a mistake from your perspective, but from another's perspective, you might be the one who's mistaken.

Not sure why your opinion trumps everyone else's opinion who has commented in this thread.
It's not just my opinion it's old school before the Internet told us what writers collectively believed (and mind you could be still wrong). On the street and even ask NBA players (tweet them). Swingman plays more than 2 positions it is the big thing about being a swingman to be able to be a factor in so many roles you can't be defined. It is not simply a SG/SF capable player.

You're drifting further and further into a philosophical debate (beliefs and reality).

You're basically saying that your definition is, for whatever reason, the Truth, and what people "collectively believe" is not true.

I guess the reason is, "it's old school," so it's true?

It was old school to consider an African-American 3/5ths of a person, should we roll with that definition rather than what we now all collectively believe?
No this is the problem it's being look at as philosophy because the definition has changed over time by the confusion.

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #100 on: February 13, 2016, 01:34:02 PM »

Offline mgent

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7567
  • Tommy Points: 1962
[dang] kids!

Changing things that old people already perfected.
Philly:

Anderson Varejao    Tiago Splitter    Matt Bonner
David West    Kenyon Martin    Brad Miller
Andre Iguodala    Josh Childress    Marquis Daniels
Dwyane Wade    Leandro Barbosa
Kirk Hinrich    Toney Douglas   + the legendary Kevin McHale

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #101 on: February 13, 2016, 01:36:54 PM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
[dang] kids!

Changing things that old people already perfected.
It's true. Some words used today have very different uses

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #102 on: February 13, 2016, 04:55:34 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
It's nothing to do with inventing. It's common mistake that I was pointing out. Never had a problem with people using Swingman for Harden only that it's not meant for a SG/SF. SG/SF is a wing. Swing man just means three position capable level player.
Well, it's either that -- or you're wrong :P
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #103 on: February 13, 2016, 04:57:08 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
[dang] kids!

Changing things that old people already perfected.
Sure. Bring back caroms.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: Forget Horford or Howard...It's Harden
« Reply #104 on: February 13, 2016, 07:03:21 PM »

Offline Celtics18

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11688
  • Tommy Points: 1469
Other than the beard, I don't know what is not to like about Harden.  Seems like just what we need; anchor scorer who will demand defensive attention and open things up for other players.  26 years old, on a good contract.  I think we can make up for his defense assuming he plays with Smart, Crowder, Sullinger, and maybe Mickey or Zeller?

I am not holding my breath but boy, I would love this.


I've never been a fan.  I do like the beard though.

Poor defender, high usage, low efficiency.

For people who are down on Harden because of defense, who would you rather have as your primary offensive scoring star player?  LeBron?  OK, Carmelo?, Curry? Durant?, that is 4.  How about Chris Paul?  Harden is younger than all of these guys.  Would you rather have Leonard or Butler?  What about Westbrook?  It seems like a pretty short list of players that would potentially be better than Harden most or all of which we would never have a chance to get or don't play any better defense anyway.

I think if Houston or the league in general is down on Harden, let's get him.  No player is perfect.

Isaiah Thomas?

Wow.  Thomas is having a nice year but I can't imagine if there was an expansion draft and 30 GMs had the choice of Thomas or Harden that any would take Thomas.  I guess we see things quite differently.

I'm not suggesting that Isaiah Thomas has more objective value than James Harden.  Harden was the MVP runner-up last year and is (I believe) second in the league in scoring this year.

My point was more that we already have a top notch leading scorer/ballhandler in Isaiah.  To get Harden, we would most likely have to give up at least Thomas and additional significant assets (maybe this year's Brooklyn pick and more).

Considering the kind of on-court chemistry Isaiah has with the current team, his level of play, the assuredly very high cost to attain Harden (if he's even attainable at all), I'm not sure it would be worth it.

That's what I'm saying.

That is more clear and easier to agree with.  I think Thomas is a nice player but not the same caliber as Harden.  You seem to agree in general.  Where we differ I guess is that I would be very willing to give up IT in a Harden deal as I think having that MVP caliber player (at least one) is really what you need if you want a team to be really good.

Most people are critical of Harden due to perceived defensive weakness (not sure if that is your view as well).  But IT is not exactly a stopper himself.  I think IT plays serviceable defense and I think Harden would play serviceable defense for the Celtics.

I'm not saying I wouldn't trade Isaiah straight up for Harden.  I love our point guard, but you'd have to do that deal. 

I'm convinced though that getting James Harden (which in reality isn't happening anyway) would
cost at least Thomas and this year's Brooklyn pick.  Now we are talking about a price I'm not sure I'd love to see the Celtics pay for James Harden.
DKC Seventy-Sixers:

PG: G. Hill/D. Schroder
SG: C. Lee/B. Hield/T. Luwawu
SF:  Giannis/J. Lamb/M. Kuzminskas
PF:  E. Ilyasova/J. Jerebko/R. Christmas
C:    N. Vucevic/K. Olynyk/E. Davis/C. Jefferson