Why the Jalen Green, Danuel House number fiasco is bad for everyone involved

Why the number fiasco is bad for both Jalen Green and the Houston Rockets

The other parties involved in are Green, obviously, and the Rockets (indirectly), and the two go hand-in-hand. Green is the exciting rookie sensation, who has been compared to Damian Lillard for his scoring ability and has many believing he could possibly lead the league in scoring in the future.

Green oozes with confidence, which is part of what drives him and fuels him. We had heard how he felt that he should have been the top overall pick over Cade Cunningham, which gives more credence to Green's uber-confidence in himself.

With that being said, we should expect him to also want the number, and he even said as much after the Rockets' first Summer League game.

With Green morphing into the franchise player, a large faction of Rockets fans have sided with him in this particular situation.

In other words, he deserves the number, because he'll be the face of the franchise, whereas House is a role player. But there are also those who feel that he should have to earn his stripes, as a rookie, and that he should be focusing less on such a nominal thing like what number he wears.

In fact, Charlotte Hornets 2020-21 Rookie of the Year LaMelo Ball was forced to do the exact thing, as he reportedly wanted to wear #1 but Malik Monk wouldn't surrender the number. Unfortunately for the Rockets, if they trade House, many will spin it as them giving Green what he wants. 

This would be a sore spot, as we've already been through that, with how the franchise reportedly bent over backwards for James Harden, who wasn't exactly prepared for that level of control.

And the Rockets certainly don't want to have to rule in such a mindless thing, because it could also be an eye-opener to veteran players of how they'll be put on the back-burner for incoming rookies.

All in all, the number situation, although it seems minor, could have a large determination in how each involved party is viewed and/or perceived for years to come. And for that reason, it's bad for all parties involved.