Depends what you mean by "young"? The Rockets have two vets over 25 that will have consistent rotational minutes (EG Tate). The rest are 22 and younger. THAT young of a team winning 35+ games? Yes that is very promising.
We aren’t sniffing the play in. No need for the hypotheticals. Green made a huge leap in season last year and we sucked. Green, Sengun and KPJ can all make another leap and it’s still likely to be offset by the infusion of even more youth we made this off-season.
You are still severely underestimating age and experience. All those guys can have promising seasons where as fans we can be like "they are on a good trajectory" and this team can still win only 25 games. That's what a lack of experience means in the NBA. You can't expect a team led by second year players to win in any meaningful way. There is a solid chance that the top 5 players on this team by the end of the season are going to be 22 and under. That's insane.
this is another thing that gets me with the tank fanatics…99% of them want to tank for just 1 guy: Wemby…no one else in the draft hardly ever gets mentioned to me, prioritizing winning would be using cap space to sign a bunch of vets and playing them the majority of minutes, and using up our trade assets to bolster the roster which isn’t what Stone has done…this hypothetical play-in berth this upcoming season would be solely on the backs of the young core of 1st and 2nd year players heavily progressing and overachieving which is nothing but a good thing in my eyes
lol ridiculous We have data showing the odds of getting a high level talent player based on position of the draft. "Having x jump by year 2 means you have a superstar!" - that is not quantitative, that is speculative nonsense.
I definitely don't think it's ridiculous. You are trying to make a point while removing all context which means you don't fully believe your point here. Let's phrase it this way. If this team by the halfway point with this current roster is looking like they might approach near .500 ball(very unlikely) and will not have a lottery pick are their pace of wins, are you going to consider sitting out our 20 year old crusty vets like Green and Sengun to help them not win as many games? If you have to rest 20 year olds to lose games in the NBA, you found your core. You are done tanking.
Okay. But you still can answer my question. If the Rockets by the mid point look to not be on trajectory to be bad enough to have a top 10 pick, do you want to sit out the players who are making us win too much which will be players like Sengun and Green who are 20.
What is speculative nonsense is the original foolishness u quoted me. Jalen Green, a #2 overall pick, making a huge jump in year 2 from the promising rookie year he just displayed to the point the Rockets are a play-in team means it’s likely he has superstar talent…I guess common sense isn’t so common
Again, no it doesn't. And even if it did, it would still be better to have a shot at an additional superstar to add to Green.
Again, yes it does. I can only laugh at those who think a young core progressing rapidly is a bad thing because they have tank dreams…so ridiculous
Okay so you would be more happy if they started winning enough games next season to not be a lottery team? Because I would assume you would chose the option that would make you more happy which would be rest the players that are making us miss out on a top pick and let the team tank.
We have immense draft capital and cap space moving forward. If this young core shows a lot of promise, top free agents will naturally be attracted to our situation or with our draft capital trade for a current superstar.
Are you suggesting the data from NBA players is less reliable on player future performance than data obtained on a prospect prior to the draft? From guys that actually quantify things, here are a couple of projections with confidence limits with one of what a 2nd year bump means and one of what being the No. 1 pick mean: Please note that to get a 10-14 jump in wins, it will take 2 players having 2nd year bumps over expectations for a bottom tier team to get to the play in. So essentially, would you rather have 2 guys in the bracket of expectations of the first chart or one of the bottom chart?
hype up the odds of drafting a player with superstar talent with a top pick while simultaneously discounting the odds that a player we drafted 2nd overall making a massive jump from a promising rookie year has superstar talent tank dreamer logic
It would be bad for a team that is not on contender trajectory to progress quickly and then top out on a treadmill. We have seen this mistake over and over again, with dumb owners wanting to be good to quickly, only to lock themselves into mediocrity.
