Dan said, "He's just a sixth man! That was a terrible contract extension by Houston. They're basketball stupid!"

Obviously what Dan said was stupid.

But do you think Harden can be the best player on a championship team?

I don't.

Yes.

Putting Harden on this current Bulls team even without Rose would probably make them the #1 seed in the East.

I am not saying he is a bad player, he is an EXCELLENT player. But I just think he needs to be the sidekick instead of the man. He is 2013 Scottie Pippen. Pippen couldn't win a title as the best player on a team and neither will Harden.

Harden is having a good year, but it didnt help that he was absolutely horrid in the Finals last year.

So was LeBron in 2011. I really think that most of the exposure Bernstein got to Harden was just the Finals, which explains why his opinion was so misinformed at the beginning of this season.

I am not saying he is a bad player, he is an EXCELLENT player. But I just think he needs to be the sidekick instead of the man. He is 2013 Scottie Pippen. Pippen couldn't win a title as the best player on a team and neither will Harden.

Im not defending Bernstein, Im just saying The Thunder had reason.

And not everyone gets a second and third shot at the finals. The fact that Harden was so bad does not bode well for him

He got shafted on the MVP and brought that 93-94 Bulls team to 55 wins and the Conference Finals where they were legitimately fucked by the refs. That team was bad and weren't even supposed to sniff the playoffs. Pippen brought them there and proved he was a legit star and a leader.

He would turn around and bring another bad bulls team to the playoffs the year after.

He got shafted on the MVP and brought that 93-94 Bulls team to 55 wins and the Conference Finals where they were legitimately fucked by the refs. That team was bad and weren't even supposed to sniff the playoffs. Pippen brought them there and proved he was a legit star and a leader.

He would turn around and bring another bad bulls team to the playoffs the year after.

Good points. I am sure Harden will have some excuses to roll out when he fails to take a team to a championship as well.

I dont blame the Thunder for trading him. It didn't hurt their team and it helped Harden greatly as an individual player.

What do you mean it doesn't bode well for Harden? You mean as a predictive factor? I dont think it has any meaning going forward. Tony Parker was so bad in the 2003 Finals that the Spurs spent the summer wining and dining Kidd and then four years later Parker was Finals MVP. I wouldn't read much into a 3rd year player getting shut down by the best defensive player in the league over a sample size of 5 games.

That's silly. If Jordan never retires and the Bulls win 8 straight titles, is Hakeem no longer an all time great because he never wins a title?

I dont think thats even close to true.

They werent going to be the best team in the NBA anymore, but they were still good. Certainly they were a top 8 team in the East

So you just completely dismiss that he was bad? I know its doesnt mean he'll be terrible forever, but its certainly not a good thing

No, it's true.

They weren't expected to make the playoffs. You cut Jordan out and the Bulls have Pippen as the #1 Stunner (Which he was) and a cast consisting of Steve Kerr, Pete Meyers, Beef Wenington, JoJo English, Corie Blount....

What does that have to do with Harden being able to take a team to a championship?

Well, my man, you think wrong!

BJ made the All-Star game, great, I'm sure his production really helped make up for the loss of Michael Jordan.

Your position seemed to equate anyone who doesnt take a team to a title as being not great. Im asking if you think that would've been true for Hakeem.

Or forget the hypothetical. Are players like Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, or Charles Barkley not all time great players?

My obvious point is that if Harden never wins a title because he never has a good enough supporting cast, but averages 27-5-5 over the next 8 years while making 8 all star games, he would still be a GREAT player, and would be good enough to be the #1 on a championship team, just like guys like West, Elgin, and Chuck were.

Will you at least admit that you're being sort of unfair to Pip? He had one year to prove it in his prime(two if you count 2000 as the very tail end of his prime. I dont).