We should not look at the pedigree of the project, but at its tokenomics. Just because a project is Chinese does not mean that it is now obliged to grow when any restrictions are lifted. Look at the investment, the circulating supply, the exchanges and liquidity of that coin, and the overall timeline. Then it will become clear whether this coin will grow or not. If the founders are Chinese, growth won't just happen, the industry doesn't work that way.
I very much agree. However, the reason for arguing on why Chinese projects might pump is because of the speculation that they might be among the first projects to be whitelisted in Hong Kong then in mainland China through Shanghai. It is not because the projects are simply Chinese.
On the argument of tokenomics, what I like about some of the Chinese projects is their implementation of buy and burn for maintaining value. I have noticed that compared to western developers, it appears that buy and burn is a more liked tokenomics structure by Chinese development teams.
If this is the case, I would be more inclined to believe that successful projects from China may be new projects rather than those that have been on the market for a long time. If in the foreseeable future, announcements of new crypto projects that have a strong team and reliable investors will start to appear, such projects can easily take their niche in the top lines of the crypto rating. I support and agree with this development, but I don't believe in sudden success of already existing Chinese projects, for example EOS.