Is he even Filipino though? I mean yes, he has some Filipino heritage but Green’s all American. Some of his crazy fans might be Filipino tho..I respect the dedication.
Seems like he strongly identifies with his Filipino side; both sides presumably (?). For sure he has billions of Filipino fans
Again I don’t think it’s an issue, just like how a lot of Asian-American Christians loved the heck out of Lin. They just need to try to remain objective in both praise and criticism and realize that most people are rooting for Green to succeed (so the Rockets can succeed) even if they don’t always say it. Again I think Green is great but it’s been a struggle so far this season. No shame in that, I think the kid will be much improved.
history says otherwise. There are no All-NBA type players drafted #1 or #2 who were not among top 3 in ROY, no "late bloomers". (apart from LMA) Many improve, but the stars shine early. All late bloomers (Giannis, Kawhi, Butler, etc.) are later picks.
Better game than last game for sure. Only -13 vs -35. Almost put up 20 but was at 12 pts for 3 quarters until game was out of reach in 4th and ended with 18. Did have 2 steals and 4 assists but also had 4 turnovers and was 0-4 from 3P.
I didn't watch every minute, but I didn't think he was anything special tonight. Christopher looked more impactful.
He had a good first half, picked his spots well and was efficient. He began the third quarter really well too, he scored a lucky chuck at the rim and the drew a foul. After that he got too cocky and pretty much missed every shot, while Ingram made every shot on the other end. He also had a really bad turnover which killed our momentum all together. Fourth quarter he got a few good drives but it was too little too late at that point. Again sometimes good sometimes really bad. Needs to be more in control like Christopher.
That's pretty darn interesting. I can see how later picks are more likely to struggle early on, thus creating a larger number of middling players, out of which, inevitably, some small percentage will become stars down the road. And there is likely to be a smaller number of similarly middling players, early on, among the top picks, obviously. But why wouldn't a similar percentage from amongst that smaller number of players also become stars eventually? (Does that question make any sense?) Trying to decide if draft position can really be considered a legitimate factor in whether a player carries the late bloomer gene or not. Or if it's just another example of the gods of randomness f'ing with us... Asking for a Filipino friend of mine... Could it be that filtering for all-NBA players who were picked 1 or 2, vs. All-NBA players who were picks 3-60, creates such different-sized sets of players that having only 1 late bloomer amongst the picks 1&2 group is actually not that out of line with what you might expect, statistically? So that draft position may not be as much of a factor after all... (?). CF statisticians and math translators? Nerds gotta nerd
I'd imagine he ain't in the top few hundred American basketball players. So he wants to be the best Filo basketball player. Thus why he represents it so hard. That Filo night was just pure cringe the other week with him and Clarkson.
I didn't say he hasn't been disappointing, but he's shown strides in many areas that you guys don't want to give him credit for. Unfortunately his jumpshot is just broken rn, and he's going to need an entire offseason to get back to and keep lhis form like it was when he first came back from injury. His flaws are apparent, but I really don't think he can't overcome them, and giving up this soon is wild
It's funny you say the bolded part, as if you know what you're talking about. When the actual fact of the matter is, when Jalen has done something worth positively commenting on, I have done so. It's not my fault he goes on 5 month sabbaticals in between these plays.
Undoubtedly, but that’s a slightly different question. I was responding to a post about the Star expectancy of a top pick, which I show is high but very tightly limited to "early risers". There’s no indication that top pick confers any higher Star expectancy among the ‘late bloomers’, none; but as you say sample size is insufficient to show that it has lower Star expectancy for these late bloomers. "late bloomer" is a crapshoot, and likely pick position doesn’t matter much for those. As has been discussed here, bringing up Kobe or LaVine rookie stats is a numbers-crime. There are thousands of players with bad rookie seasons, only few of them bloom to be Stars, and being a #2 pick gives you zero discernible indication that you’ll be one of them, zero.
