Dueling James Harden pieces

I know that others usually do something like this, but I saw one of these pieces today and wanted to hear what folks had to say. Grantland dropped a lengthy Harden piece today just a few days after the NYT had one of its own.

Grantland: http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7982195/the-many-faces-oklahoma-city-thunder-guard-james-harden

NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/27/sports/basketball/nba-playoffs-thunders-james-harden-stands-out-and-blends-in.html?_r=3&emc=eta1

Obviously the Grantland piece would have been cut down for a print outlet (and would have benefitted from it in places), but overall I think it is an interesting comparison of reporting and writing on a subject who is quite popular right now.

I enjoyed them both and have an opinion of which worked better for me, but I'm interested to see what people think. So as I believe Versatile usually says, who wrote it best and why?

 

The NY times piece was a bit more removed, and seemed to try to go with more flourish, the kind I'd expect from Grantland (Mentions of t-shirts and twitter followers). The Grantland piece is a bit more lush with adjectives and descriptions, and had a warmer, less clinical feel.

I ultimately preferred the Grantland piece, because it felt more all-encompassing, where as the other one felt a hint superficial. I should also note, I met Mr. Conn in passing a few years back, and chatted with him about the spot he found himself in in the world of journalism.

 

How can The Times run a piece that leads with the beard, yet not give us a good look at it.

Grantland's photo would have fit The Times better.