Wizards turned down James Harden for Bradley Beal and Chris Singleton

[Kurosawa0]

You're a moron.

Does your face have eyes in it? Try using them.

Yes, because you can always tell how guards are going to turn out by the first few months of their rookie seasons.

[Whoah10115]

You don't trade a top 3 pick for the 6th man of the year. Especially not when that 6th man of the year is going to make $80 million and Beal is on a rookie deal.

It's probably the same reason Golden State didn't want to trade Klay Thompson for Harden either.

And just because Harden was on a team that went to the Finals, doesn't make him a winning player. We don't know that yet. His career status really isn't that much different than Josh Howard's after the 2006 Dallas run. Look how that turned out.

I'm sorry it's not even debatable. James Harden is a #3 pick and has shown nothing but maturity and unselfishness in being a 6th man, not to mention the way he plays.


If the Warriors actually failed to trade Thompson for Harden then the Warriors are also retarded. Thompson is better than Beal, I think, but Harden is a better player NOW than Thompson will ever be. Curry is no pure point and having a playmaker like Harden, who is also a great shooter? I can't imagine Golden State is stupid enough not to make that trade.


You know who was drafted behind Harden in 2009? Stephen Curry. And Stephen neither does nor should have the market value that Harden does. And he's a year older. You keep saying #3 pick in the draft and the fact is that Harden is the #3 pick in a beastly draft. And he's been the most impressive player in that draft so far.

[Kurosawa0]

I'm sorry it's not even debatable. James Harden is a #3 pick and has shown nothing but maturity and unselfishness in being a 6th man, not to mention the way he plays.


If the Warriors actually failed to trade Thompson for Harden then the Warriors are also retarded. Thompson is better than Beal, I think, but Harden is a better player NOW than Thompson will ever be. Curry is no pure point and having a playmaker like Harden, who is also a great shooter? I can't imagine Golden State is stupid enough not to make that trade.


You know who was drafted behind Harden in 2009? Stephen Curry. And Stephen neither does nor should have the market value that Harden does. And he's a year older. You keep saying #3 pick in the draft and the fact is that Harden is the #3 pick in a beastly draft. And he's been the most impressive player in that draft so far.

You're not getting it though. It's not about Harden being the better player. That's obvious. It's about trading for him and then paying him $80 million vs. a rookie deal. We don't know how good Thompson or Beal are going to be. Especially Beal. Harden is a good player, but I don't think he's a superstar. I'd rather pay a rookie who might be 80% of what Harden is for like 25% of the cost.

Besides, I really don't think Wall and Harden would be a great fit.

[bagelred]

And he's been the most impressive player in that draft so far.

coughcoughBlakeGriffincoughcough


But yeah.....agreed......

[Whoah10115]

You're not getting it though. It's not about Harden being the better player. That's obvious. It's about trading for him and then paying him $80 million vs. a rookie deal. We don't know how good Thompson or Beal are going to be. Especially Beal. Harden is a good player, but I don't think he's a superstar. I'd rather pay a rookie who might be 80% of what Harden is for like 25% of the cost.

Besides, I really don't think Wall and Harden would be a great fit.

But when is he going to be 80% of what Harden is? This year? If in year 3 Beal is 80% of the player that Harden was in year 3...he'd be getting paid what Harden got paid in year 3. Or is he going to be in year 2 80% of what Harden is now? I doubt you think that.


If we're going on a yearly basis, then OK. But Harden has moved on and is more than that. How long are the Wizards going to wait? 3 years? It's worth not paying Harden the money because in 3 years Beal will be 80% of what Harden is? And when Beal is finally 80% of what Harden is, you think he's still going to make 25% of his contract?

If he's 80% of what Harden is then he is going to make more than 80% of what Harden makes.

[Whoah10115]

coughcoughBlakeGriffincoughcough


But yeah.....agreed......

I know that...but Griffin has missed a season and Harden had a comparable year to him last year, in the regular season. Harden has been in the playoffs every year and was better in his second year playoff run than Griffin was last year. Not Griffin's fault, but Harden has done more so far.

[FireDavidKahn]

Put Beal on OKC and he does it on a 50 win team too. I'm not saying Beal will be as good as Harden, but it's not ridiculous for Washington to not have given up the 3rd pick in the draft for a more expensive player that plays the same position.

I wouldn't have done it either.

No Beal wouldn't be doing it because he would be benched and not playing.

[Kurosawa0]

But when is he going to be 80% of what Harden is? This year? If in year 3 Beal is 80% of the player that Harden was in year 3...he'd be getting paid what Harden got paid in year 3. Or is he going to be in year 2 80% of what Harden is now? I doubt you think that.


If we're going on a yearly basis, then OK. But Harden has moved on and is more than that. How long are the Wizards going to wait? 3 years? It's worth not paying Harden the money because in 3 years Beal will be 80% of what Harden is? And when Beal is finally 80% of what Harden is, you think he's still going to make 25% of his contract?

If he's 80% of what Harden is then he is going to make more than 80% of what Harden makes.

The Wizards don't have to make Beal a qualifying offer until 2016. I don't know how good Beal is going to be in 2013, let alone 2016. He could go either way, but you don't give him up right now. Especially when he hasn't even played with Wall.

If Beal sucks in a couple of years, then they'll have missed on a good trade. If he's getting you 18-20 points a game and shooting 40% from three, you'd rather pay him $6 million to do that than Harden $15 million to do what he does.

The thing is, you think about it, but in the end you don't do it. It's why OKC ended up with an expiring contract and Jeremy Lamb. Both Golden State and Washington probably thought about it, but decided that Harden isn't a home run vs. the potential of the guys they have.

It's funny, I remember having this same conversation about Andrew Bynum and Jason Kidd. You never know, but GMs almost always go with potential because if you're wrong on that side most times you're REALLY wrong.

[Kurosawa0]

No Beal wouldn't be doing it because he would be benched and not playing.

We're talking about the 2010 Thunder. Beal would've played for that team.