Jalen Green - next elite prospect

[CptCrunch]

Jalen Green will be a test-case for the G-League stats based analytics.

If he flourishes his rookie year, it's gonna impact positively reliability of the analytics models derived from G-League data.

We know what 'good' NCAA production looks like. We don't know what is 'good' for a 18-19 year old playing in the G-League.

[Big J]

Jalen Green will be a test-case for the G-League stats based analytics.

If he flourishes his rookie year, it's gonna impact positively reliability of the analytics models derived from G-League data.

We know what 'good' NCAA production looks like. We don't know what is 'good' for a 18-19 year old playing in the G-League.

Green can't really be measured by a bunch of numbers on a stat sheet, so I don't really think you could compare whatever he does to the next guy who comes into the G-League that has average athleticism. The eye test tells you he's going to be an absolute star. How many guys come into the league with MVP Derrick Rose level explosion?

[nolang1]

Not really. Are you worried about any of those things with Devon Booker? That's all bonus stuff, this dude is here to get you 25 a night. The rest will come but its almost bonus contribution.

I would be somewhat worried in the sense that it took a while for Booker's scoring to cancel out the other stuff, and Booker is/was a much better pure shooter. Same could be said about someone like LaVine.

Green is ahead of the developmental curve than both these guys

He's ahead elsewhere but worse as a shooter, which is what ultimately matters the most in terms of whether guys with that skillset look like stars or just one-dimensional gunners.

[peZt]

I would be somewhat worried in the sense that it took a while for Booker's scoring to cancel out the other stuff, and Booker is/was a much better pure shooter. Same could be said about someone like LaVine.

Green is ahead of the developmental curve than both these guys

He's ahead elsewhere but worse as a shooter, which is what ultimately matters the most in terms of whether guys with that skillset look like stars or just one-dimensional gunners.

Which is also the easiest skill to develop. Also it's not like he's an absolute non-shooter

Green is gonna be the best player of the draft class in year 3 max and it's gonna be obvious after the first 10 games

[Big J]

Green is ahead of the developmental curve than both these guys

He's ahead elsewhere but worse as a shooter, which is what ultimately matters the most in terms of whether guys with that skillset look like stars or just one-dimensional gunners.

Which is also the easiest skill to develop. Also it's not like he's an absolute non-shooter

Green is gonna be the best player of the draft class in year 3 max and it's gonna be obvious after the first 10 games

Yea, it's sad how petrified the media who do these mocks are of picking a guy who differs from consensus. If you took someone who had never watched basketball before and asked them who was better between Cade & Green it would be Green by a landslide. He absolutely destroys him with the eye test.

[K_chile22]

I would be somewhat worried in the sense that it took a while for Booker's scoring to cancel out the other stuff, and Booker is/was a much better pure shooter. Same could be said about someone like LaVine.

Green is ahead of the developmental curve than both these guys

He's ahead elsewhere but worse as a shooter, which is what ultimately matters the most in terms of whether guys with that skillset look like stars or just one-dimensional gunners.

Is he worse as a shooter than Lavine though? Lavine year at UCLA he hit 37.5%, and Green last year hit 36.5% from NBA three with a waaaay higher 3pt rate. LaVine's first year in the NBA he hit 34%. I expect Green to be better than that given he already was last year at the same distance

[The Moose]

This is a very in depth pdf from PD Web, but its worth a read

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WRyu8p_u4gQ48bh4zM-6ewz4CwcP8FdIqvIg0dx8Bzc/edit

His conclusion at the end is interesting

To me, Jalen Green is an off-guard. A classic 2 guard. A wing with scoring characteristics. Turbo-charged SGs. The sort of thing the NBA hasn’t been able to produce to the standard of other positions since the halcyon days of Dwyane Wade. It’s sort of a vestigial position, a remnant from an era where helpside didn’t legally exist and offenses were isolation powered machines. By stratifying players from position to playtype usage, there has been a loss of the concept of what a 2 guard does in a modern setting. The best players who fit within this archetype currently either are wings who haven’t summited the prerequisite skills to be able to run offense as a primary, “3&D” players or players better suited as perimeter play finishers next to a true primary. We have fallen so far from the Jordanaires, where if you were 6’6 and could shoot a contested middy, you were granted 12 18ft iso jab possessions a game by League fiat.

I guess if you wanted to bundle Zach and Ant and Jalen, it would be easy to interpret a 2 guard revival - presenting as a star level score first wing, who’s scoring usage may not change as a first, second or third leading decision maker within a team’s construction. They are all unique players, but this may be a signal towards a counter reformation to the heliocentric movement. What if the primary isn’t expected to be everything? What if heliocentrism is simply dislocation of the point guard responsibilities, and thus allows for lower usage wings to initiate offense but not use possessions? Is there room for a pass first, pass second game manager heliocentric wing? These questions matter because for every primary archetype spawns 4 slots in the lineup to be tinkered with, to create pareto usage optimizations. True 3&D really only happened in a lineup with Bron, who did all the dribbling and passing for the wings and really just needed shooters to fill in around him. Maybe heliocentrism hasn't gotten weird enough or the spectre of Bron hangs over the imaginations of decision makers in the way the mold of Jordan did in the NBA Bronze Age. Wouldn’t NBA decision makers force Boris Diaw into a primary role today, and wouldn’t it be glorious?

To ask a ZL or Antman or Jalen Green to be the alpha and omega of a team, to do the expected Heliocentric things, rather than building a better imagined system that allows their actual talents to be best optimized is kinda silly. Why not try and build a better paradigm around the talent at hand? Sure, Green is a fairly set idea, a scorer with burgeoning skills into other archetypes, but his role on a good team isn’t. Say another Point Diaw comes along, and is teamed up with Green in their early primes, and Green averages 28 ppg. Is Point Diaw meaningfully the primary, or the initiator, or the star? Of course not. We’ve just never had to ask those those of questions. And with this Mecha 2s, the type who may be best running jetsweeps off-ball, well, teams are going to have to ask if a star is better as a second side player, if they aren’t involved in the primary action, can a “primary” be involved in stampede actions, if the off-ball rim pressure/gravity is more meaningful than a mediocre crosscourt skip passing ability. To maximize Green is gonna require some rewriting of the modern team-building playbook - & that’s a good thing for everyone.

[Big J]

This is a very in depth pdf from PD Web, but its worth a read

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WRyu8p_u4gQ48bh4zM-6ewz4CwcP8FdIqvIg0dx8Bzc/edit

His conclusion at the end is interesting

To me, Jalen Green is an off-guard. A classic 2 guard. A wing with scoring characteristics. Turbo-charged SGs. The sort of thing the NBA hasn’t been able to produce to the standard of other positions since the halcyon days of Dwyane Wade. It’s sort of a vestigial position, a remnant from an era where helpside didn’t legally exist and offenses were isolation powered machines. By stratifying players from position to playtype usage, there has been a loss of the concept of what a 2 guard does in a modern setting. The best players who fit within this archetype currently either are wings who haven’t summited the prerequisite skills to be able to run offense as a primary, “3&D” players or players better suited as perimeter play finishers next to a true primary. We have fallen so far from the Jordanaires, where if you were 6’6 and could shoot a contested middy, you were granted 12 18ft iso jab possessions a game by League fiat.

I guess if you wanted to bundle Zach and Ant and Jalen, it would be easy to interpret a 2 guard revival - presenting as a star level score first wing, who’s scoring usage may not change as a first, second or third leading decision maker within a team’s construction. They are all unique players, but this may be a signal towards a counter reformation to the heliocentric movement. What if the primary isn’t expected to be everything? What if heliocentrism is simply dislocation of the point guard responsibilities, and thus allows for lower usage wings to initiate offense but not use possessions? Is there room for a pass first, pass second game manager heliocentric wing? These questions matter because for every primary archetype spawns 4 slots in the lineup to be tinkered with, to create pareto usage optimizations. True 3&D really only happened in a lineup with Bron, who did all the dribbling and passing for the wings and really just needed shooters to fill in around him. Maybe heliocentrism hasn't gotten weird enough or the spectre of Bron hangs over the imaginations of decision makers in the way the mold of Jordan did in the NBA Bronze Age. Wouldn’t NBA decision makers force Boris Diaw into a primary role today, and wouldn’t it be glorious?

To ask a ZL or Antman or Jalen Green to be the alpha and omega of a team, to do the expected Heliocentric things, rather than building a better imagined system that allows their actual talents to be best optimized is kinda silly. Why not try and build a better paradigm around the talent at hand? Sure, Green is a fairly set idea, a scorer with burgeoning skills into other archetypes, but his role on a good team isn’t. Say another Point Diaw comes along, and is teamed up with Green in their early primes, and Green averages 28 ppg. Is Point Diaw meaningfully the primary, or the initiator, or the star? Of course not. We’ve just never had to ask those those of questions. And with this Mecha 2s, the type who may be best running jetsweeps off-ball, well, teams are going to have to ask if a star is better as a second side player, if they aren’t involved in the primary action, can a “primary” be involved in stampede actions, if the off-ball rim pressure/gravity is more meaningful than a mediocre crosscourt skip passing ability. To maximize Green is gonna require some rewriting of the modern team-building playbook - & that’s a good thing for everyone.

Jesus that dude's writing is infuriating.

[CptCrunch]

This is a very in depth pdf from PD Web, but its worth a read

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WRyu8p_u4gQ48bh4zM-6ewz4CwcP8FdIqvIg0dx8Bzc/edit

His conclusion at the end is interesting

To me, Jalen Green is an off-guard. A classic 2 guard. A wing with scoring characteristics. Turbo-charged SGs. The sort of thing the NBA hasn’t been able to produce to the standard of other positions since the halcyon days of Dwyane Wade. It’s sort of a vestigial position, a remnant from an era where helpside didn’t legally exist and offenses were isolation powered machines. By stratifying players from position to playtype usage, there has been a loss of the concept of what a 2 guard does in a modern setting. The best players who fit within this archetype currently either are wings who haven’t summited the prerequisite skills to be able to run offense as a primary, “3&D” players or players better suited as perimeter play finishers next to a true primary. We have fallen so far from the Jordanaires, where if you were 6’6 and could shoot a contested middy, you were granted 12 18ft iso jab possessions a game by League fiat.

I guess if you wanted to bundle Zach and Ant and Jalen, it would be easy to interpret a 2 guard revival - presenting as a star level score first wing, who’s scoring usage may not change as a first, second or third leading decision maker within a team’s construction. They are all unique players, but this may be a signal towards a counter reformation to the heliocentric movement. What if the primary isn’t expected to be everything? What if heliocentrism is simply dislocation of the point guard responsibilities, and thus allows for lower usage wings to initiate offense but not use possessions? Is there room for a pass first, pass second game manager heliocentric wing? These questions matter because for every primary archetype spawns 4 slots in the lineup to be tinkered with, to create pareto usage optimizations. True 3&D really only happened in a lineup with Bron, who did all the dribbling and passing for the wings and really just needed shooters to fill in around him. Maybe heliocentrism hasn't gotten weird enough or the spectre of Bron hangs over the imaginations of decision makers in the way the mold of Jordan did in the NBA Bronze Age. Wouldn’t NBA decision makers force Boris Diaw into a primary role today, and wouldn’t it be glorious?

To ask a ZL or Antman or Jalen Green to be the alpha and omega of a team, to do the expected Heliocentric things, rather than building a better imagined system that allows their actual talents to be best optimized is kinda silly. Why not try and build a better paradigm around the talent at hand? Sure, Green is a fairly set idea, a scorer with burgeoning skills into other archetypes, but his role on a good team isn’t. Say another Point Diaw comes along, and is teamed up with Green in their early primes, and Green averages 28 ppg. Is Point Diaw meaningfully the primary, or the initiator, or the star? Of course not. We’ve just never had to ask those those of questions. And with this Mecha 2s, the type who may be best running jetsweeps off-ball, well, teams are going to have to ask if a star is better as a second side player, if they aren’t involved in the primary action, can a “primary” be involved in stampede actions, if the off-ball rim pressure/gravity is more meaningful than a mediocre crosscourt skip passing ability. To maximize Green is gonna require some rewriting of the modern team-building playbook - & that’s a good thing for everyone.

Does he have other 6000 word thesis for this draft?

edit: other seems to be locked behind Patreon

Kuminga: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Go9202poDhBLdvUVZenG2fVXJjA3ZVj8TridlYHT-8E/edit
Suggs: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1a0zFnrlE0BMXIiLey4LbfT9XndKXY1HYQWMMvfON5sU/edit
Roko Prkacin: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16hQHooGgljj3RoqLoVaNdVh2XefGCSuuyFDX5982lis/edit
Daishen Nix: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k_xcGYd4ZxbYdq9EkIrVB75E3WezngIXqyk8qktBjFQ/edit

Jesus that dude's writing is infuriating.

The writer is extremely pretentious in style, not in a good technical way.

[Phenomenonsense]

He's ahead elsewhere but worse as a shooter, which is what ultimately matters the most in terms of whether guys with that skillset look like stars or just one-dimensional gunners.

Which is also the easiest skill to develop. Also it's not like he's an absolute non-shooter

Green is gonna be the best player of the draft class in year 3 max and it's gonna be obvious after the first 10 games

Yea, it's sad how petrified the media who do these mocks are of picking a guy who differs from consensus. If you took someone who had never watched basketball before and asked them who was better between Cade & Green it would be Green by a landslide. He absolutely destroys him with the eye test.

I feel like your example says a lot about the eye test, but not in a good way lmao

[The Moose]

This is a very in depth pdf from PD Web, but its worth a read

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WRyu8p_u4gQ48bh4zM-6ewz4CwcP8FdIqvIg0dx8Bzc/edit

His conclusion at the end is interesting

To me, Jalen Green is an off-guard. A classic 2 guard. A wing with scoring characteristics. Turbo-charged SGs. The sort of thing the NBA hasn’t been able to produce to the standard of other positions since the halcyon days of Dwyane Wade. It’s sort of a vestigial position, a remnant from an era where helpside didn’t legally exist and offenses were isolation powered machines. By stratifying players from position to playtype usage, there has been a loss of the concept of what a 2 guard does in a modern setting. The best players who fit within this archetype currently either are wings who haven’t summited the prerequisite skills to be able to run offense as a primary, “3&D” players or players better suited as perimeter play finishers next to a true primary. We have fallen so far from the Jordanaires, where if you were 6’6 and could shoot a contested middy, you were granted 12 18ft iso jab possessions a game by League fiat.

I guess if you wanted to bundle Zach and Ant and Jalen, it would be easy to interpret a 2 guard revival - presenting as a star level score first wing, who’s scoring usage may not change as a first, second or third leading decision maker within a team’s construction. They are all unique players, but this may be a signal towards a counter reformation to the heliocentric movement. What if the primary isn’t expected to be everything? What if heliocentrism is simply dislocation of the point guard responsibilities, and thus allows for lower usage wings to initiate offense but not use possessions? Is there room for a pass first, pass second game manager heliocentric wing? These questions matter because for every primary archetype spawns 4 slots in the lineup to be tinkered with, to create pareto usage optimizations. True 3&D really only happened in a lineup with Bron, who did all the dribbling and passing for the wings and really just needed shooters to fill in around him. Maybe heliocentrism hasn't gotten weird enough or the spectre of Bron hangs over the imaginations of decision makers in the way the mold of Jordan did in the NBA Bronze Age. Wouldn’t NBA decision makers force Boris Diaw into a primary role today, and wouldn’t it be glorious?

To ask a ZL or Antman or Jalen Green to be the alpha and omega of a team, to do the expected Heliocentric things, rather than building a better imagined system that allows their actual talents to be best optimized is kinda silly. Why not try and build a better paradigm around the talent at hand? Sure, Green is a fairly set idea, a scorer with burgeoning skills into other archetypes, but his role on a good team isn’t. Say another Point Diaw comes along, and is teamed up with Green in their early primes, and Green averages 28 ppg. Is Point Diaw meaningfully the primary, or the initiator, or the star? Of course not. We’ve just never had to ask those those of questions. And with this Mecha 2s, the type who may be best running jetsweeps off-ball, well, teams are going to have to ask if a star is better as a second side player, if they aren’t involved in the primary action, can a “primary” be involved in stampede actions, if the off-ball rim pressure/gravity is more meaningful than a mediocre crosscourt skip passing ability. To maximize Green is gonna require some rewriting of the modern team-building playbook - & that’s a good thing for everyone.

Does he have other 6000 word thesis for this draft?

edit: other seems to be locked behind Patreon

Kuminga: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Go9202poDhBLdvUVZenG2fVXJjA3ZVj8TridlYHT-8E/edit
Suggs: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1a0zFnrlE0BMXIiLey4LbfT9XndKXY1HYQWMMvfON5sU/edit
Roko Prkacin: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16hQHooGgljj3RoqLoVaNdVh2XefGCSuuyFDX5982lis/edit
Daishen Nix: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k_xcGYd4ZxbYdq9EkIrVB75E3WezngIXqyk8qktBjFQ/edit

Jesus that dude's writing is infuriating.

The writer is extremely pretentious in style, not in a good technical way.

Watch on YouTube

he has a youtube/twitch channel too, his writing style can be a little off-putting with excessive jargon I agree

[clyde21]

This is a very in depth pdf from PD Web, but its worth a read

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WRyu8p_u4gQ48bh4zM-6ewz4CwcP8FdIqvIg0dx8Bzc/edit

His conclusion at the end is interesting

To me, Jalen Green is an off-guard. A classic 2 guard. A wing with scoring characteristics. Turbo-charged SGs. The sort of thing the NBA hasn’t been able to produce to the standard of other positions since the halcyon days of Dwyane Wade. It’s sort of a vestigial position, a remnant from an era where helpside didn’t legally exist and offenses were isolation powered machines. By stratifying players from position to playtype usage, there has been a loss of the concept of what a 2 guard does in a modern setting. The best players who fit within this archetype currently either are wings who haven’t summited the prerequisite skills to be able to run offense as a primary, “3&D” players or players better suited as perimeter play finishers next to a true primary. We have fallen so far from the Jordanaires, where if you were 6’6 and could shoot a contested middy, you were granted 12 18ft iso jab possessions a game by League fiat.

I guess if you wanted to bundle Zach and Ant and Jalen, it would be easy to interpret a 2 guard revival - presenting as a star level score first wing, who’s scoring usage may not change as a first, second or third leading decision maker within a team’s construction. They are all unique players, but this may be a signal towards a counter reformation to the heliocentric movement. What if the primary isn’t expected to be everything? What if heliocentrism is simply dislocation of the point guard responsibilities, and thus allows for lower usage wings to initiate offense but not use possessions? Is there room for a pass first, pass second game manager heliocentric wing? These questions matter because for every primary archetype spawns 4 slots in the lineup to be tinkered with, to create pareto usage optimizations. True 3&D really only happened in a lineup with Bron, who did all the dribbling and passing for the wings and really just needed shooters to fill in around him. Maybe heliocentrism hasn't gotten weird enough or the spectre of Bron hangs over the imaginations of decision makers in the way the mold of Jordan did in the NBA Bronze Age. Wouldn’t NBA decision makers force Boris Diaw into a primary role today, and wouldn’t it be glorious?

To ask a ZL or Antman or Jalen Green to be the alpha and omega of a team, to do the expected Heliocentric things, rather than building a better imagined system that allows their actual talents to be best optimized is kinda silly. Why not try and build a better paradigm around the talent at hand? Sure, Green is a fairly set idea, a scorer with burgeoning skills into other archetypes, but his role on a good team isn’t. Say another Point Diaw comes along, and is teamed up with Green in their early primes, and Green averages 28 ppg. Is Point Diaw meaningfully the primary, or the initiator, or the star? Of course not. We’ve just never had to ask those those of questions. And with this Mecha 2s, the type who may be best running jetsweeps off-ball, well, teams are going to have to ask if a star is better as a second side player, if they aren’t involved in the primary action, can a “primary” be involved in stampede actions, if the off-ball rim pressure/gravity is more meaningful than a mediocre crosscourt skip passing ability. To maximize Green is gonna require some rewriting of the modern team-building playbook - & that’s a good thing for everyone.

someone: hey, what do you think about Jalen Green

this clown: PaReTo UsAGe OpTiMizAtiOnS

yea ok buddy.

[The Moose]

The Pareto optimal situation in this framework is when a party cannot be made better off without making another worse off. When something is not optimal: it is possible to increase a unit’s welfare without harming another - provided that resources are being fully employed (read:constrained) and any change in allocation requires sacrifice in one way or another. Like, say, spending one’s time, production lines, or say, usage between players on a basketball court, something that must add up to 100% usage. The images for Pareto optimality is one of the goofiest collections of charts and viz tools I have seen, and I basically google strange ideas for half my rent at this point.

It reminded me of an old team usage chart. They aren’t value statements; no one is saying the Kevin Durant of figure C shouldn’t take all the shots, it’s just optimal in the OKC setup to have Perkins and Roberson to fill in bit parts around a usage monster. Where B is closer to a Pacers Dipo/Domas/Brogden usage troika - there is a clear hierarchy , but there is more support from the secondaries. The idea of “best” is a tricky statement with different connotations and considerations, because we are dealing with people & the development of their capabilities. Taking the example of a superstar-in-training player: is it optimal to give them that mega usage immediately, to have it slowly grow as the player’s skill warrants. Is it best to give them small minutes bursts of 40% usage? There are many (792!) unique allocations of 5 man usage lineups, best of luck picking the most optimal developmental one!

[BostonCouchGM]

This is a very in depth pdf from PD Web, but its worth a read

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WRyu8p_u4gQ48bh4zM-6ewz4CwcP8FdIqvIg0dx8Bzc/edit

His conclusion at the end is interesting

To me, Jalen Green is an off-guard. A classic 2 guard. A wing with scoring characteristics. Turbo-charged SGs. The sort of thing the NBA hasn’t been able to produce to the standard of other positions since the halcyon days of Dwyane Wade. It’s sort of a vestigial position, a remnant from an era where helpside didn’t legally exist and offenses were isolation powered machines. By stratifying players from position to playtype usage, there has been a loss of the concept of what a 2 guard does in a modern setting. The best players who fit within this archetype currently either are wings who haven’t summited the prerequisite skills to be able to run offense as a primary, “3&D” players or players better suited as perimeter play finishers next to a true primary. We have fallen so far from the Jordanaires, where if you were 6’6 and could shoot a contested middy, you were granted 12 18ft iso jab possessions a game by League fiat.

I guess if you wanted to bundle Zach and Ant and Jalen, it would be easy to interpret a 2 guard revival - presenting as a star level score first wing, who’s scoring usage may not change as a first, second or third leading decision maker within a team’s construction. They are all unique players, but this may be a signal towards a counter reformation to the heliocentric movement. What if the primary isn’t expected to be everything? What if heliocentrism is simply dislocation of the point guard responsibilities, and thus allows for lower usage wings to initiate offense but not use possessions? Is there room for a pass first, pass second game manager heliocentric wing? These questions matter because for every primary archetype spawns 4 slots in the lineup to be tinkered with, to create pareto usage optimizations. True 3&D really only happened in a lineup with Bron, who did all the dribbling and passing for the wings and really just needed shooters to fill in around him. Maybe heliocentrism hasn't gotten weird enough or the spectre of Bron hangs over the imaginations of decision makers in the way the mold of Jordan did in the NBA Bronze Age. Wouldn’t NBA decision makers force Boris Diaw into a primary role today, and wouldn’t it be glorious?

To ask a ZL or Antman or Jalen Green to be the alpha and omega of a team, to do the expected Heliocentric things, rather than building a better imagined system that allows their actual talents to be best optimized is kinda silly. Why not try and build a better paradigm around the talent at hand? Sure, Green is a fairly set idea, a scorer with burgeoning skills into other archetypes, but his role on a good team isn’t. Say another Point Diaw comes along, and is teamed up with Green in their early primes, and Green averages 28 ppg. Is Point Diaw meaningfully the primary, or the initiator, or the star? Of course not. We’ve just never had to ask those those of questions. And with this Mecha 2s, the type who may be best running jetsweeps off-ball, well, teams are going to have to ask if a star is better as a second side player, if they aren’t involved in the primary action, can a “primary” be involved in stampede actions, if the off-ball rim pressure/gravity is more meaningful than a mediocre crosscourt skip passing ability. To maximize Green is gonna require some rewriting of the modern team-building playbook - & that’s a good thing for everyone.

I'm picking up what he's putting down but he tries too hard to sound like the smartest guy in the room and that can turn off simpletons. Thanks for sharing

[buzzkilloton]

https://deanondraft.com/2021/07/19/lets-talk-about-all-of-the-little-sgs/comment-page-1/#comment-27286

Dean had some interesting points about Green. He noticed that Kuminga is listed at 6'6 but in pics looks 2 inches taller. Also noticed his teammate Nix looks the same height and is listed at 6'4.

Height Length Weight
Jalen Green 6’4.75 6’8 180
Devin Booker 6’5.75 6’8.25 206
Zach LaVine 6’5.75 6’8.25 181
Bradley Beal 6’4.75″ 6’8 202

I've said this before but Green is built like these guys not the MJs,Kobe, D.Wades of the world.

I still like Green but his upside is surely capped by being such a small guy. I think hes clearly under Mobley and neck and neck with Suggs for who should be pick 3 to 4 in the draft. Sam V just did his draft guide and had alot of questions about his defense on there as well maybe at a later time I'll copy paste some of it for discussion.

[CptCrunch]

https://deanondraft.com/2021/07/19/lets-talk-about-all-of-the-little-sgs/comment-page-1/#comment-27286

Dean had some interesting points about Green. He noticed that Kuminga is listed at 6'6 but in pics looks 2 inches taller. Also noticed his teammate Nix looks the same height and is listed at 6'4.

Height Length Weight
Jalen Green 6’4.75 6’8 180
Devin Booker 6’5.75 6’8.25 206
Zach LaVine 6’5.75 6’8.25 181
Bradley Beal 6’4.75″ 6’8 202

I've said this before but Green is built like these guys not the MJs,Kobe, D.Wades of the world.

I still like Green but his upside is surely capped by being such a small guy. I think hes clearly under Mobley and neck and neck with Suggs for who should be pick 3 to 4 in the draft. Sam V just did his draft guide and had alot of questions about his defense on there as well maybe at a later time I'll copy paste some of it for discussion.

Dean's 2cents on undersized scoring guards who can't pass is spot on.

LaVine, Booker, Beal are all arguably empty calorie scorers who don't impact the team. And then there is this take on twitter:

Read on Twitter

Green's ceiling is basically LaVine unless you think he can be MJ or Kobe. To be honest, I don't even know if Kobe is 'good' anymore. Kobe posted a career 4.6 BPM with 55% TS. Back in the days, Kobe was a great player, but with the modern shot jacking efficiency and point forward, point centers in the league, even a Kobe type player is arguably not that great.

[DCasey91]

https://deanondraft.com/2021/07/19/lets-talk-about-all-of-the-little-sgs/comment-page-1/#comment-27286

Dean had some interesting points about Green. He noticed that Kuminga is listed at 6'6 but in pics looks 2 inches taller. Also noticed his teammate Nix looks the same height and is listed at 6'4.

Height Length Weight
Jalen Green 6’4.75 6’8 180
Devin Booker 6’5.75 6’8.25 206
Zach LaVine 6’5.75 6’8.25 181
Bradley Beal 6’4.75″ 6’8 202

I've said this before but Green is built like these guys not the MJs,Kobe, D.Wades of the world.

I still like Green but his upside is surely capped by being such a small guy. I think hes clearly under Mobley and neck and neck with Suggs for who should be pick 3 to 4 in the draft. Sam V just did his draft guide and had alot of questions about his defense on there as well maybe at a later time I'll copy paste some of it for discussion.

For me Green has the most pop out of the four. He really has glitch level speed. Also I think he’s ahead of Lavine age for age he just seems to have more of a natural instinct to him. You’re right though he isn’t MJ/Kobe/Wade size but I think Morant athleticism inside Beal is a fair assessment. That’s still a seriously high ceiling of a player.

He’s in my tier one with Mobley and Cade. It’s boring and safe but I really can’t see anyone else being better at the end of the day.

Suggs/Kuminga followed close by.

Initially I was all over Mobley then Green now it’s both. Full circle lol

[DCasey91]

https://deanondraft.com/2021/07/19/lets-talk-about-all-of-the-little-sgs/comment-page-1/#comment-27286

Dean had some interesting points about Green. He noticed that Kuminga is listed at 6'6 but in pics looks 2 inches taller. Also noticed his teammate Nix looks the same height and is listed at 6'4.

Height Length Weight
Jalen Green 6’4.75 6’8 180
Devin Booker 6’5.75 6’8.25 206
Zach LaVine 6’5.75 6’8.25 181
Bradley Beal 6’4.75″ 6’8 202

I've said this before but Green is built like these guys not the MJs,Kobe, D.Wades of the world.

I still like Green but his upside is surely capped by being such a small guy. I think hes clearly under Mobley and neck and neck with Suggs for who should be pick 3 to 4 in the draft. Sam V just did his draft guide and had alot of questions about his defense on there as well maybe at a later time I'll copy paste some of it for discussion.

Dean's 2cents on undersized scoring guards who can't pass is spot on.

LaVine, Booker, Beal are all arguably empty calorie scorers who don't impact the team. And then there is this take on twitter:

Read on Twitter

Green's ceiling is basically LaVine unless you think he can be MJ or Kobe. To be honest, I don't even know if Kobe is 'good' anymore. Kobe posted a career 4.6 BPM with 55% TS. Back in the days, Kobe was a great player, but with the modern shot jacking efficiency and point forward, point centers in the league, even a Kobe type player is arguably not that great.

Disagree hard, Peak Kobe was a legit two way player. And his scoring along with a low turnover rate is solid.

There is though some serious truth to jacked up scorers that can’t do anything else. Hence why I don’t rate Mitchell that highly at all.

[buzzkilloton]

https://deanondraft.com/2021/07/19/lets-talk-about-all-of-the-little-sgs/comment-page-1/#comment-27286

Dean's 2cents on undersized scoring guards who can't pass is spot on.

LaVine, Booker, Beal are all arguably empty calorie scorers who don't impact the team. And then there is this take on twitter:

Read on Twitter

Green's ceiling is basically LaVine unless you think he can be MJ or Kobe. To be honest, I don't even know if Kobe is 'good' anymore. Kobe posted a career 4.6 BPM with 55% TS. Back in the days, Kobe was a great player, but with the modern shot jacking efficiency and point forward, point centers in the league, even a Kobe type player is arguably not that great.

Hes just not built like MJ and Kobe its just not realistic expecting that out of him . I think Kobe would change up his game more for the modern game but thats a whole diff discussion.

Yeah we've seen how teams with Lavine,Beal, and Booker as their best player fare its not very good. Its hard for a team like the Rockets to pass Green though just because hes a fan favorite whos really exciting to watch. He will score points in the league surely.

[tmorgan]

I'm picking up what he's putting down but he tries too hard to sound like the smartest guy in the room and that can turn off simpletons. Thanks for sharing

Thank you for this.

If I ever need a great example of irony, I’ll take this lovely quote from you, include a couple of your full posts as well, and viola, perfection.