Here's hoping Green makes a leap. Stone/Rockets technically passed on 52, 39, and 36 52. Jarrett Allen 39. Scottie Barnes 36. Evan Mobley Jabari, hopefully, can also crack next year's list.
Is this where they think they’ll be ranked by the end of next season? I love Cade, but already at #35?
Keegan Murray is the 2nd highest ranked rookie on that list? (one of only 2 rookies on the list?) I really like the guy, and wish him all the best. But let's have a passing glance at how rookies on the Kings have performed over the years... seems ambitious to put him in there at all...
Green had a very bad stretch at the beginning. Mobley and Barnes were good at the outset. I think that's why they got way ahead of Green when they include full season data. But Green's curve rose much more rapidly than those two guys in the second half of the season. Not sure about Cade. He was injured early on and also got off not very impressive.
They were right to pass on Allen for the tank. And they didn’t pass on both on Mobley and Barnes, because they would have only been able to draft one of them, anyway. That list doesn’t make me question the decision the Rockets made. If Green is at #62 for a third year, doubt might start creeping in.
Jalen Green still has that “nothing more than a scorer” label CBS Sports top 100 ranking has Barnes 48, Cade 47, Mobley 40, and Green not even in the top 100 even the media plant Herb Jones makes the top 100
fwiw: Anthony Edwards was #52 last year, Top 25 somewhere, this year. I agree with others. 3 second year players in the 30s is sketchy. CBS has them in the 40s. Oh, and Wood was #60 last year, 90 this year.
If Green is 62 and Westbrook is 65, it would be fair to trade Green for Westbrook + a second round pick.
Context matters - Allen wasn’t needed for a tanking team and Barnes and Mobley would have had much worse seasons if the Rockets had drafted them. Perfect fits where they were drafted, but Mobley’s lack of offensive polish would have been exploited heavily if he had played here and same with Barnes. We needed a go to offensive guy to build around and both those teams already had a few guys who fit that mold. That’s why their efficiency was so much higher because they only had to be patient and find their spots while Green had to create shots for himself and others.
Meh its just ESPN Timsiders Pelton us with tangential factoids and Givonying us random opinions. I don't know how you even quantify 'predicted contributions" - it's not even a real metric. Like does a guy contribute by out playing his contract? By deferring to a young player? Ohm man.. I regret spending the last 14 hours thinking about this.
TBF, a less charitable read of this would be: ‘Green was unlucky, because when he played a lot they were the worst team ever and lost a ton of games. Then immediately after he got injured, they played way better without him a won bunch more games.’
Nah, that would just be a bad read. Green was unlucky in the early season because non-Green related variance that had nothing to do with Green, flipped when he was out resulting in the Streak. SoS, unguarded FG% - none of this has anything to do with Green. That obviously wasn't sustainable - which is why it ended in December in a 2-7 stretch before he came back. But it's a read that im very familiar with when the " Corey Brewer, bust, look at his PER it's the worst in history, blah blah" crew spent all of Dec and Jan making this read, only to look like idiots by February when things looked differently.
