Point you (although JLord works)!We might need to rename one of these guys Jrobert Williams to make point #2 work
His athleticism seems to me more of the smooth and fluid type than explosive. Nesmith appears faster and more explosive to me, but in a far less controlled way than Langford. Walker is obviously faster, but so much smaller that he struggles at the rim.
- the best athlete on the Cs without a J starting his first name;
I'm here for the JLord!Point you (although JLord works)!
You think Romeo is a better athlete than TL?The corollary to your question is whether RL will stay healthy enough to realize his potential.
I mean RL is already:
And as noted earlier in this thread, one of the Cs coaches thinks he's already a way better shooter than people think.
- the best on-ball defender the Cs have;
- the best athlete on the Cs without a J starting his first name;
- Other than Kemba and the Js, the best finisher on the Cs (yes, I think he's a better finisher than MS and NG); and
- Other than maybe Tremont, who may not be on the Cs next year, the only non-starter on the Cs that can really run a PnR.
A fully developed and healthy Romeo is kind of exactly what the Cs need off the bench. Let's hope he gets there.
No, i was spelling Time with a "J". See above.You think Romeo is a better athlete than TL?
AN may be able to jump higher (not sure if that is true) but as you point out, Romeo is way more fluid. I think he's a lot quicker and it looks like he can hit another gear that helps him get by defenders or chase down blocks.His athleticism seems to me more of the smooth and fluid type than explosive. Nesmith appears faster and more explosive to me, but in a far less controlled way than Langford. Walker is obviously faster, but so much smaller that he struggles at the rim.
If Langford is that far up the athletic ladder for the C's then that points for a serious upgrade need on that front for the offseason.
I'd say the athleticism at the 4/5 (given how often JLord is hurt) and the 1 would be upgrade targets for the offseason. I'd agree that we're pretty well stocked on the wings.AN may be able to jump higher (not sure if that is true) but as you point out, Romeo is way more fluid. I think he's a lot quicker and it looks like he can hit another gear that helps him get by defenders or chase down blocks.
But more to the point, do the Cs really need more athletes? I mean they two top-tier athletes in JB and TL. RL and JT may not be "drop your jaw" athletes but they are certainly in the top tier. AN is a very good athlete. Maybe they could use a really athletic 1 but I have the sense that DA/ Brad think that if they have athletic, switchy wings, they can get away with smaller guards who can handle and shoot.
He really needs to get through the playoffs healthy so he can finally have a full offseason to work on his shot with Hanlan or whoever he uses as a trainer.They seem to see Romeo as a guy who's going to get combo guard minutes and guard opposing ballhandlers. And that should play to his strengths offensively. He's much more intuitive than Nesmith or young Brown. He looks good in space. Not sure if they stumbled upon that model or it was their plan all along, but I look forward to watching him develop next year.
Yeah, his real future on this team is if he can become the "bring the ball up the court and maybe run initial PnR" ball-handler.They seem to see Romeo as a guy who's going to get combo guard minutes and guard opposing ballhandlers. And that should play to his strengths offensively. He's much more intuitive than Nesmith or young Brown. He looks good in space. Not sure if they stumbled upon that model or it was their plan all along, but I look forward to watching him develop next year.
MoneyBut more to the point, do the Cs really need more athletes? I mean they two top-tier athletes in JB and TL. RL and JT may not be "drop your jaw" athletes but they are certainly in the top tier. AN is a very good athlete. Maybe they could use a really athletic 1 but I have the sense that DA/ Brad think that if they have athletic, switchy wings, they can get away with smaller guards who can handle and shoot.
If you're going to have cocaine and blow you really need hookers on that list too.Money
pitching
athletes
cocaine
Aircraft carriers
Blow
Not in today's climate. A forensic linguist could easily detect where the edit occurred leading to the doubling of the coke.If you're going to have cocaine and blow you really need hookers on that list too.
While we disagree about Romeo's length and athleticism (I think he's at least NBA average athletically, and he's long.), he's definitely not a sky walker and he's a guy who would actually benefit from being able to jump high. He's also not explosive. His game seems like it would rely heavily on explosion and jumping. I'm not sure Nesmith needs to be a sky walker or explosive though.Money
pitching
athletes
cocaine
Aircraft carriers
Blow
I'll take "what are things you can't have too much" of Aaron.
Also I am not sure how you watch this years Cs night after night seem to be playing against teams loaded with longer more athletic guys and think , off all teams, this team does not need athletes. I have said this before, and I will set off binky alarms again, but Nesmith and Romeo seem athletic only compared to Grant, Semi, Pritchard, Teague, TT. They are not top tier athletes they are just not below average. Neither is a skywalker, which is huge part of today's game, since after you are chased off the line you attack the rim. I watch Romeo and think (insert CEBL guy) dunks that, when he evades with finesse shot.
How big is your top tier? What % of the league is top tier? So We have Westbrook, Gianis, Lebron, that is a pretty long list before the Name Romeo Langford appears.
I think there are a fair number of professional athletes who think you can have too much blow, and frankly, previous iterations of teams like ORL might think at some point you need people who can play basketball rather than just jump out the building.How big is your top tier? What % of the league is top tier? So We have Westbrook, Gianis, Lebron, that is a pretty long list before the Name Romeo Langford appears.
I think there are a fair number of professional athletes who think you can have too much blow, and frankly, previous iterations of teams like ORL might think at some point you need people who can play basketball rather than just jump out the building.
I'm not going to say that i really have "tiers" of NBA athletes but let's just take Nesmith. It appears that you think Nesmith is a below-average athlete for the NBA. I watch him - and I think Scal and Gorman agree with me - and see at least an average NBA athlete and without quantifying it, I'd guess he's above-average. I mean for every guy who can jump out of the building like TL, there are several guys who get by on strength or technique or skill - Kemba, Pritchard, Semi, etc.
I mean look at PHI. In terms of sheer athleticism, isn't Simmons the only player who gets minutes that is clearly more athletic than Nesmith? Maybe Thybulle is (haven't watched him enough); Embiid is a beast but not really the kind of athletic you are talking about; Harris isn't really that athletic from what I see; and I'm sure people think Maxey is really athletic but he's a few inches shorter than Nesmith.
Your mileage may vary on all of this but I still think Romeo is pretty gifted from an athleticism point of view.
When he's healthy, his FB hits 97 but he has no control, no command, no movement, no secondary pitches and can't find the plate.Agis you used top tier. And I specifically said Nesmith was not below average. he is a much better athlete, from what we have seen, than Romeo. The part of what you say that I most disagree with is that the Celtics don't need more athleticism. We see from Nesmth the odd block, o board, etc he gets just from being an athlete that wins the odd physical battle.
Sorry man, but Romeo in not an athlete prospect like Siakam, for example was. He is a player. Or at least a potential player that can be skilled, and strong, good size for his skills. He is a good athlete and I called him average, which is as high as I can go. If it helps yur optimism to consider him a great athlete , then fine, but compared to other guys in the league he hasn't shown it. Maybe he has been hurt so much he isn't in shape. Is he the equivalent of a sore armed guy throwing 90, but when healthy hits 97? I don't know. But right now he has topped out at 90 and you are calling him a fireballer or a hard thrower.
Some good points here. There is “athletic” and then there is “how does the player utilize his athleticism.” Brent Barry and Pat Connaughton are two of the most athletic players to ever play in the NBA from standing and vertical jumping aspect......but they were guards whose game wasn’t built around their physical gifts. While Langford may not jump off the chart from his Combine numbers his length and timing allows him to play much bigger than he is in both finishing offensively and protecting the rim on defense.While we disagree about Romeo's length and athleticism (I think he's at least NBA average athletically, and he's long.), he's definitely not a sky walker and he's a guy who would actually benefit from being able to jump high. He's also not explosive. His game seems like it would rely heavily on explosion and jumping. I'm not sure Nesmith needs to be a sky walker or explosive though.
Semi Ojeleye can jump out of the building but jumping isn't part of his game so it's kinda useless. With RL, it would be incredibly useful and the fact he's not a great jumper and lacks explosion is a huge checkmark against him.
And yeah, the C's definitely need length and athleticism, regardless of what people think of Nesmith and RL. Partly because RL and TL are huge injury risks and probably 2 of our top 4 athletes on the team, and partly because RL has sucked to date.
When it comes to players who get the most out of their athleticism, Paul Pierce comes to mind. He played to his strengths. TL too.Some good points here. There is “athletic” and then there is “how does the player utilize his athleticism.” Brent Barry and Pat Connaughton are two of the most athletic players to ever play in the NBA from standing and vertical jumping aspect......but they were guards whose game wasn’t built around their physical gifts. While Langford may not jump off the chart from his Combine numbers his length and timing allows him to play much bigger than he is in both finishing offensively and protecting the rim on defense.
When I've seen him in situations where he's healthy and getting regular extended minutes (which admittedly hasn't been that much), he absolutely looked like a guy with skills. Ball handling, finishing touch at the rim, passing are all NBA skills he currently possesses, he just hasn't gotten the reps necessary to get them to game speed. The jump shot hasn't yet shown much. I think he has the potential to be a good player as soon as next year, given health and solid off season.When he's healthy, his FB hits 97 but he has no control, no command, no movement, no secondary pitches and can't find the plate.
A lot of it is the bolded part. At this point in time, he has very little skill. Can he add a secondary pitch or two? Can he gain some command over his pitches? Can something be done to add a little movement?
Personally, I think the C's get very little to no value out of Langford and his 2nd contract is with another team.
I admit I have missed some of the games Romeo has apparently been flashing competent offense. 99% of what I have seen is a combination of apathy and ineptitude, but I am glad to hear the games I've missed he has looked better.I actually agree that he's been really bad in the Brad Stevens Memorial Young Wing Potted Plant role. He's not a good shooter, and he often gets lost in no man's land when he drives closeouts.
But on the few occasions when he's been given the ball to create (against the Bulls and Knicks), he looks surprisingly competent/comfortable for a young wing, especially in PnR. If he can somehow get un-snakebitten and get a real summer in, I think there's something there.
The bigger question with Romeo imo is not "will he become a decent offensive player?", but rather "will he do it on this contract for the Celtics?"
Does anyone think that he is materially worse as an athlete than Tatum?His athleticism seems to me more of the smooth and fluid type than explosive.
To me they're similar, Tatum obviously much longer, maybe not quite as quick laterally. Based purely on in game observation.Does anyone think that he is materially worse as an athlete than Tatum?
Small quibble, but Barry was a very different player with the Clippers than he was with the Sonics and Spurs.Some good points here. There is “athletic” and then there is “how does the player utilize his athleticism.” Brent Barry and Pat Connaughton are two of the most athletic players to ever play in the NBA from standing and vertical jumping aspect......but they were guards whose game wasn’t built around their physical gifts.
Probably should have used "next tier" instead of "top tier" to distinguish betwen RL vs JB / TL, so sorry about that. And I misunderstood what you said about AN so txs for clarifying.Agis you used top tier. And I specifically said Nesmith was not below average. he is a much better athlete, from what we have seen, than Romeo. The part of what you say that I most disagree with is that the Celtics don't need more athleticism. We see from Nesmth the odd block, o board, etc he gets just from being an athlete that wins the odd physical battle.
Sorry man, but Romeo in not an athlete prospect like Siakam, for example was. He is a player. Or at least a potential player that can be skilled, and strong, good size for his skills. He is a good athlete and I called him average, which is as high as I can go. If it helps yur optimism to consider him a great athlete , then fine, but compared to other guys in the league he hasn't shown it. Maybe he has been hurt so much he isn't in shape. Is he the equivalent of a sore armed guy throwing 90, but when healthy hits 97? I don't know. But right now he has topped out at 90 and you are calling him a fireballer or a hard thrower.
Yes, I agree. Similar athleticism to Tatum, but not even comparable shots. Not a minor difference in today's NBA. Tatum without a shot is not special.To me they're similar, Tatum obviously much longer, maybe not quite as quick laterally. Based purely on in game observation.
Tatum is much stronger , explosive getting to the rim. Brown used to struggle at the rim, and his brerak away hops made us think he should dunk on people but he has done much better, getting to the edge of the board for layups. JB's speed and first step are nuts though. Sadly in this day and age he runs three step to three point line and stops. His speed really plays on d where he gets to shooters in transition really well.Yes, I agree. Similar athleticism to Tatum, but not even comparable shots. Not a minor difference in today's NBA. Tatum without a shot is not special.
Langford is two inches shorter than Tatum but has a half-inch longer wingspan. One thing I really like about Romeo is how he uses his timing to maximize his length and athleticism in challenging and blocking shots.Tatum is 4-5 inches taller than Langford. If one wanted to argue that they have similar athleticism, it's really not a point in Langford's favor considering he's significantly smaller than Tatum.
On the one hand, it is an objective fact that Langford's offensive production has been terrible during his time with the Celtics. But calling him apathetic is your own subjective value judgment based on very limited information.I admit I have missed some of the games Romeo has apparently been flashing competent offense. 99% of what I have seen is a combination of apathy and ineptitude, but I am glad to hear the games I've missed he has looked better.
Terry Rozier. Only 311 minutes, but he was older, not dealing with injuries, and he produced a 5.0 PER, 22% 3 PT%, 33% TS%, Ortg 81, on higher usage. Brandon Ingram was younger but a much better prospect who got to play (2279 minutes) as a rookie, and he managed all of an 8.5 PER and a negative WS/48. There's Avery Bradley who was pretty unequivocally terrible, albeit in fewer minutes.How big can the gap be between scouting and 650 minutes of production? Even accounting for the incorrect role, spotty playing time, etc.... at some point what you've done on the court has to count to at least SOME degree. https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/langfro01.html
Probably best to take his year 1 and 2 together as his "rookie year".
Any recent good comps for 50 games, 653 minutes, 5.2 PER, 35% FG%, 22% 3 PT%, 43% TS%, 6 Reb%, 5 Ast%, WS/48 0.016, Ortg 95, etc. becoming good offensive players? Not saying there aren't, just asking. I'd be happy to hear some.
I wish the NBA would add a players' wingspan & standing reach in addition to their height. It would add a little more context.Langford is two inches shorter than Tatum but has a half-inch longer wingspan. One thing I really like about Romeo is how he uses his timing to maximize his length and athleticism in challenging and blocking shots.
No one was trying to compare their shots, just find comps for Romeo’s general level of athleticism.Yes, I agree. Similar athleticism to Tatum, but not even comparable shots.
Tatum has also spent four healthy years working in a professional strength training program.Tatum is much stronger , explosive getting to the rim.
I‘m not claiming it to be a point in Langford’s favor; rather, I would say that the comp establishes that he has sufficient athleticism to succeed in the NBA if he improves his skill level. His athleticism, or lack thereof, is not going to be the determining factor in whether he becomes a productive NBA player.Tatum is 4-5 inches taller than Langford. If one wanted to argue that they have similar athleticism, it's really not a point in Langford's favor considering he's significantly smaller than Tatum.
Agree there for sure. The biggest reason for hope is that this offseason is a lot closer to the offseason between year 1 and 2 for most players.Langford is headed towards (hopefully) his first healthy and normal offseason as a pro. I think it will be a lot more fair to judge him harshly when he returns from that than it is now. The first offseason after getting into the league is a key time for any NBA rookie, especially one on the younger side who has a lot of areas where he needs to improve.
You really should have watched those games.I admit I have missed some of the games Romeo has apparently been flashing competent offense. 99% of what I have seen is a combination of apathy and ineptitude, but I am glad to hear the games I've missed he has looked better.
How big can the gap be between scouting and 650 minutes of production? Even accounting for the incorrect role, spotty playing time, etc.... at some point what you've done on the court has to count to at least SOME degree. https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/langfro01.html
Probably best to take his year 1 and 2 together as his "rookie year".
Any recent good comps for 50 games, 653 minutes, 5.2 PER, 35% FG%, 22% 3 PT%, 43% TS%, 6 Reb%, 5 Ast%, WS/48 0.016, Ortg 95, etc. becoming good offensive players? Not saying there aren't, just asking. I'd be happy to hear some.
Well one way to do that would be to go to a team where he could, umm, you know - run the PnR. Which is something he isn't given a chance to do with this iteration of the Cs since they are trying to win games.Langford needs to find a way to translate the dominant performance he put on as a lead guard utilizing the pick and roll in college.
Not that this changes your point, but first injury was to his right thumb; the second surgery was to his wrist.No we don't have a lot of comps for guys who came into the league with a wrist injury, needed a second surgery on it, and also played half of his 2 year career during a global pandemic, catching the disease.
Thanks. That's bad.Well one way to do that would be to go to a team where he could, umm, you know - run the PnR. Which is something he isn't given a chance to do with this iteration of the Cs since they are trying to win games.
I think, however, given a full offseason of training and a training camp, the Cs are going to ask RL to do more next year, particularly with the second unit.
Not that this changes your point, but first injury was to his right thumb; the second surgery was to his wrist.
I think he'll dominate summer league but I don't think it will mean anything.Summer league and his "2nd" season are going to be critical to see significant growth.
I don't think it does, beyond elimiating the scenarios where he steps in immediately and is playable. Those obviously didn't happen and aren't going to.2. Being really awful has SOME weight toward a player's projection, even in a pretty small 650 minute sample. If he wasn't horrible in that same 650 minutes we would be happy about that, right?
Yeah some guys come in and play ok right away and never improve. There's some value of course to being a useful bench piece from jump, but not much value over the guy's career or even first contract if he's a JAG. I'll take a guy with useful starter or above-average rotation potential over that guy any day, at least until we're legit knocking on championship's door.I think he'll dominate summer league but I don't think it will mean anything.
I don't think it does, beyond elimiating the scenarios where he steps in immediately and is playable. Those obviously didn't happen and aren't going to.
I think he'll dominate summer league but I don't think it will mean anything.
I don't think it does, beyond elimiating the scenarios where he steps in immediately and is playable. Those obviously didn't happen and aren't going to.
I’ve seen that a few times, and have no clue.May I ask who "NG" is?