Romeo Langford - Pick #14

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
662
Brooklyn by way of Orono
The short answer is that no information can be better than flawed information.
Very much agree. Admittedly, perhaps that flawed information is in my eye test, or perhaps (as I do believe) it’s the statistical analysis of a talented but often discombobulated young player on a talented but often discombobulated young team.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
32,383
Melrose, MA
Very much agree. Admittedly, perhaps that flawed information is in my eye test, or perhaps (as I do believe) it’s the statistical analysis of a talented but often discombobulated young player on a talented but often discombobulated young team.
If it were certain that his low usage was due to a lack of ability to make offesive plays in the NBA, then I think it would be completely fair to judge him harshly. But it is almost certainy due, in large part, to deferring to better teammates and not having enough practice time, especially this year.

In his first 228 minutes of the regular season, he attempted 43 shots from the field (30%) and 4 free throws.

In his last 55 minutes of the regular season, with the Celtics resting almost every top player, he attempted 16 shots from the field (50%) and 8 free throws.

Then came the play-in game, all the starters except Brown were back, and he got 14 minutes and attempted only one shot.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,824
Yeah,
If it were certain that his low usage was due to a lack of ability to make offesive plays in the NBA, then I think it would be completely fair to judge him harshly. But it is almost certainy due, in large part, to deferring to better teammates and not having enough practice time, especially this year.

In his first 228 minutes of the regular season, he attempted 43 shots from the field (30%) and 4 free throws.

In his last 55 minutes of the regular season, with the Celtics resting almost every top player, he attempted 16 shots from the field (50%) and 8 free throws.

Then came the play-in game, all the starters except Brown were back, and he got 14 minutes and attempted only one shot.
So the TL: DR version is he can shoot in garbage time.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,824
No, but thanks for the substance-free drive-by.
There are always going to be better offensive players on the floor than Romeo Langford unless it's in garbage time.

His only opportunity to shoot where he isn't the 5th option is garbage time.

You said it yourself, he doesn't shoot when the top players are out there. He only shoots when there are bums.

If Romeo Langford was on any other team, people would be a lot more harsh on Romeo Langford. This board trashes on people like Obi.
 

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
5,910
around the way
There are always going to be better offensive players on the floor than Romeo Langford unless it's in garbage time.

His only opportunity to shoot where he isn't the 5th option is garbage time.

You said it yourself, he doesn't shoot when the top players are out there. He only shoots when there are bums.

If Romeo Langford was on any other team, people would be a lot more harsh on Romeo Langford. This board trashes on people like Obi.
You clearly have a bias for tall guys who can shoot, even if they can't do anything else. Some people have a bias for guys who can initiate offense or play defense or do other things well.

If Romeo's role next year is tall, ballhandling, defensive 1-stopper on the second unit, and he's productive at that, that's a way more valuable player than Toppin who was garbage as a 22yo rookie.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,824
You clearly have a bias for tall guys who can shoot, even if they can't do anything else. Some people have a bias for guys who can initiate offense or play defense or do other things well.

If Romeo's role next year is tall, ballhandling, defensive 1-stopper on the second unit, and he's productive at that, that's a way more valuable player than Toppin who was garbage as a 22yo rookie.
Not really. I have a bias towards 2s who can actually shoot the ball and add some value on offense. Langford is not even close to being a playmaker yet and may never get there. I doubt he gets to an acceptable level by the end of his contract, never mind next season.

All of his rate stats are terrible too, and he flat lined from last year. The only hope I see from Romeo is playing time (or lack thereof).

I think this board heavily favors players who are better on defense than offense. It's the only thing that explains last year's love affair with Grant Williams to me.


I was all aboard the Romeo bandwagon until he actually returned. He did not improve at all. Right now, I doubt the C's could get a 1st round pick for Langford.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
24,016
Romeo Langford also doesn't rebound, pass, steal or block.
His % rates on RBD, AST, and Steals aren't great. His Block% is 9th on the team, ahead of every other non-big but NG and GW (surprisingly).

Also, one thing we know that RL can do is defend.

He's still the youngest player on the team. And frankly, if RL had played like a top 5 pick (which he probably would have been pre-injury or even if he had sat out the rest of his freshman season), the Cs wouldn't be able to afford him when he got to RFA.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,824
He's still the youngest player on the team. And frankly, if RL had played like a top 5 pick (which he probably would have been pre-injury or even if he had sat out the rest of his freshman season), the Cs wouldn't be able to afford him when he got to RFA.

That's a huge stretch. He was 5th in his HS recruiting class. Bol Bol was 6th. Players fall.

But yes, he can defend. So as is, he's a situational role player at worst. I think he ends up an ok player but it won't be on the Celtics and we won't cry over it.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
32,383
Melrose, MA
Not really. I have a bias towards 2s who can actually shoot the ball and add some value on offense. Langford is not even close to being a playmaker yet and may never get there. I doubt he gets to an acceptable level by the end of his contract, never mind next season.

All of his rate stats are terrible too, and he flat lined from last year. The only hope I see from Romeo is playing time.
The whole Romeo debate here is whether his limited NBA experience is indicative of his future value. I mean there's no one here arguing that Romeo's is producing valueable wing offense. Rather than engage with the question, you simply assume your opinion on it is correct and then enage in drive-by posting to shit on those of us who have a different view.
I was all aboard the Romeo bandwagon until he actually returned. He did not improve at all.
He spent his abbreviated offseason rehabbing after wrist surgery, missed training camp, then had Covid, and when he finally did return it was to a team that has had very limited opportunities to practice as a team. Whatever expectations you have of year-over-year improvement by young NBA players were not based on circumstances like that.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
10,933
The short answer is that no information can be better than flawed information.
Something tells me if there was a “re-draft” of 2019, teams would put at least a moderate amount of weight on what players have done in the NBA. Both the good and the bad.

The idea that we should ignore it because it’s incomplete or might not tell the whole picture I think is not how any team or scout would go about it. More information always moves the needle to some degree.

Just because Romeo has reasonable excuses for sucking doesn’t mean we get to pretend it didn’t happen at all.
 

shoelace

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 24, 2019
157
Not really. I have a bias towards 2s who can actually shoot the ball and add some value on offense. Langford is not even close to being a playmaker yet and may never get there. I doubt he gets to an acceptable level by the end of his contract, never mind next season.

I think this board heavily favors players who are better on defense than offense. It's the only thing that explains last year's love affair with Grant Williams to me.
You post stuff like this frequently, that you think people here "overrate" defense, which feels like a bizarre position to take. People here, correctly, realize that defense correlates with winning championships. I don't think any team that was outside of the top 10 in defensive rating has won a title in the last 20 years. The worst defensive team in recent memory to win a title was probably the 2015-2016 Cavs, and they were still in the top 10 in defensive rating and 4th in points allowed. Maybe Brooklyn will be the exception, but that's not exactly a realistic model for team building.

You also want to accuse folks of overrating Celtics prospects, but Grant Williams isn't a great example. Grant looked decent last year, and posters had a generally positive opinion. This year he has mostly looked awful and people have shifted their opinion. This isn't a green teamer forum, if anything, this board errs on the side of being intensely cynical of Celtics prospects and overrating prospects on other teams (usually based on stuff like raw 3 point percentage).
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
21,378
where I was last at
To finish up on my Romeo thoughts, on a night where we got little offensively from either Kemba or Fournier, and where Kemba is probably on some PT limit, and where many here believe Romeo is the Celts best on the ball defender, (not me, though I like his energy) why against a team with two high-powered scoring guards, did Romeo sit? I get it that his offense his nil, but maybe some defensive disruptions, etc would have been net (so to speak) positive.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
24,016
That's a huge stretch. He was 5th in his HS recruiting class. Bol Bol was 6th. Players fall.

But yes, he can defend. So as is, he's a situational role player at worst. I think he ends up an ok player but it won't be on the Celtics and we won't cry over it.
Of course you are going to say that. Romeo as you mention was top 5 in his recruiting class. He played something like six games in college before injuring his thumb. As this article points out, in his only two games against high-level competition — NCAA tournament No. 5 seed Marquette and NIT-bound Arkansas — Romeo averaged 22 ppg, 7.5 rpg, 3.5 apg, two steals and 1.5 blocks.

He undoubtedly hurt his draft stock by playing with the injury. Maybe I should have said probably "top 10," but he was mentioned in the same breath as Barrett and Culver prior to the injury and given his limited tape, it possible that some GM might have been tantalized by his all-around game.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
24,016
To finish up on my Romeo thoughts, on a night where we got little offensively from either Kemba or Fournier, and where Kemba is probably on some PT limit, and where many here believe Romeo is the Celts best on the ball defender, why against a team with two high-powered scoring guards, did he Romeo sit? I get it that his offense his nil, but maybe some defensive disruptions, etc would have been net (so to speak) positive.
As Brad said when asked about playing Parker, "We needed points."

Romeo wasn't going to help in this game because there was someone else they could ISO. Particularly with TL only going 20-ish minutes.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
32,383
Melrose, MA
I'm sort of neutral on Romeo, (I want him to suceed, but I haven't seen enough to convince myself he will) but I didn't understand last night's DNP.
I actually think it is very understandable. The Celtics were reasonably effective on defense but came up very far short on offense. But Langford's value at this point is defense. So he wasn't really a fit. Nesmith and Parker were each better bets to provide offense than Langford, so they played and he did not.

The final score was 104-93. If this game had been heading towards 124-113 territory, I think Langford would have got in.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
24,016
Something tells me if there was a “re-draft” of 2019, teams would put at least a moderate amount of weight on what players have done in the NBA. Both the good and the bad.

The idea that we should ignore it because it’s incomplete or might not tell the whole picture I think is not how any team or scout would go about it. More information always moves the needle to some degree.

Just because Romeo has reasonable excuses for sucking doesn’t mean we get to pretend it didn’t happen at all.
Good things there are no "re-drafts" in the NBA.

I'm not really sure what your point is here. I think everyone agrees that RL has put up poor offensive numbers this season and last.

So what?

What I'm hoping for is that RL can become a cost-controlled, wing contributor on the Cs for the next 6 years. Something they reaaaaaaallllllyneed given their salary structure. At the very least, he's going to get a second contract and as I'm sure you'll agree with me, there's not a GM in the NBA (or outside of the NBA) that is considering given RL a huge second contract.

Which is probably in the Cs' best interest.

If you think because of RL's numbers over the last two years, he's going to be in Europe when his rookie deal runs out, we'll to agree to disagree.

For the TL;dr version: I can squint and see RL as a contributor to the Cs for the next six years. That's the Cs' best case scenario. And if it doesn't happen, it's going to be because of health, not because he can't play in the NBA. So maybe we can all agree that his numbers currently stink and not have to go through them time after time again.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
21,378
where I was last at
As Brad said when asked about playing Parker, "We needed points."

Romeo wasn't going to help in this game because there was someone else they could ISO. Particularly with TL only going 20-ish minutes.
You can get points 2 ways. Scoring and defending-disrupting.
Again I'm not killing Brad's decisions, just surprised on a night when his best guard options had way off nights, Romeo sat.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
6,905
New York, NY
To finish up on my Romeo thoughts, on a night where we got little offensively from either Kemba or Fournier, and where Kemba is probably on some PT limit, and where many here believe Romeo is the Celts best on the ball defender, (not me, though I like his energy) why against a team with two high-powered scoring guards, did Romeo sit? I get it that his offense his nil, but maybe some defensive disruptions, etc would have been net (so to speak) positive.
Not playing good enough defense wasn’t the problem last night. They defended really well. But they shot 37% from the field. You don’t win upset games shooting under 40%. Romeo isn’t the guy that helps you shoot better either. Tatum, Kemba, and Fournier need to make shots for this team to win and none of them did.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
24,016
You can get points 2 ways. Scoring and defending-disrupting.
Again I'm not killing Brad's decisions, just surprised on a night when his best guard options had way off nights, Romeo sat.
Maybe I wasn't clear. BRK was targeting several below-average defenders on virtually every trip down the court. BRK was switching TT or KW or JP onto Harden or KD. What use would RL have in that situation? How is he going to contribute to reducing points when he's off ball trying to figure out when and how he should help/rotate.

Also, RL isn't matching up against KD so he has limited value when KD's on the court.

I think Brad was correct in trying to get as much offense on the floor. Putting one more limited defender isn't really going to change a lot of what BRK was doing.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
8,434
Kiev, Ukraine
You can get points 2 ways. Scoring and defending-disrupting.
Again I'm not killing Brad's decisions, just surprised on a night when his best guard options had way off nights, Romeo sat.
I'm on the Romeo train, but the team played good defense last night and needed scoring in the worst possible way.

It was not a game for Romeo.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
21,378
where I was last at
I guess you guys were more impressed with Kemba and Fournier's contributions last night than I was.

I thought there was little downside to getting fresh legs in there.

YMMV
 

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
5,910
around the way
I think that there are a couple of posters who are bullish on Romeo due to pedigree and scouting reasons, and there are a few posters who have decided that Romeo is no good. Most of us are undecided here. It's hardly fanboy chat here because we love defense.

I see Romeo's path to production as combo guard defensive wizard who learns someday to shoot league average, meanwhile he gets some transition and secondary transition and occasionally breaks down his guy off the dribble (not often). Is that a given? Hell no. But it's clearly what the brass thinks is his path. We'll see, as soon as this fall.

Imo the guys who have written him off based on SSS numbers are the ones being unreasonable here. Particularly people humping guys like Obi Toppin and Dragan Bender.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
10,933
Good things there are no "re-drafts" in the NBA.

I'm not really sure what your point is here. I think everyone agrees that RL has put up poor offensive numbers this season and last.

So what?

Re-draft is just another way to say current scouting opinion of a player. That’s what we’re doing here, right? Trying to talk about if we think a player is going to be any good in the future.


I think if we polled NBA front offices and scouts, Romeo would have less value now than he did when he was drafted and less value than a late lotto pick. Maybe Im wrong, though we did hear rumors he had little if any trade value at the deadline.

I think teams care about how players look against NBA competition, even though they understand all of the mitigating factors at play in Romeo’s case.

I don’t know how anyone could look at his career to date as anything other than at least a mild disappointment. He has been very bad, and that’s a bummer.

Still think he has time to turn it around, but I’m somewhat less optimistic now compared to draft day.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
6,905
New York, NY
I guess you guys were more impressed with Kemba and Fournier's contributions last night than I was.

I thought there was little downside to getting fresh legs in there.

YMMV
They were both not good last night. That doesn’t change the fact that the team needs their offense to compete. Their offense wasn’t there last night, but putting in a player that’s guaranteed to be bad offensively doesn’t solve that problem. It’s like if Tom Brady was having an off game throwing the ball and the running game is working so the game is close, you don’t play Michael Bishop in the second half because he’s better at moving outside the pocket.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
21,378
where I was last at
They were both not good last night. That doesn’t change the fact that the team needs their offense to compete. Their offense wasn’t there last night, but putting in a player that’s guaranteed to be bad offensively doesn’t solve that problem. It’s like if Tom Brady was having an off game throwing the ball and the running game is working so the game is close, you don’t play Michael Bishop in the second half because he’s better at moving outside the pocket.
Or its recognizing that maybe you can switch a -10 player for a -20 guy, who's having a brutal night and it might produce a net positive result.
Its just a a different way of trying to find a solution to a problem. I'm not guaranteeing that it would have worked, maybe they would have lost by 20 rather than 11, but so what?
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
32,383
Melrose, MA
Something tells me if there was a “re-draft” of 2019, teams would put at least a moderate amount of weight on what players have done in the NBA. Both the good and the bad.
I'm sure they would. But, a redraft is an evaluation of where a player stands relative to his draft class peers. Many of those players now have a more complete record on which to be judged than does Romeo. That added certainty has value.
The idea that we should ignore it because it’s incomplete or might not tell the whole picture I think is not how any team or scout would go about it. More information always moves the needle to some degree.

Just because Romeo has reasonable excuses for sucking doesn’t mean we get to pretend it didn’t happen at all.
Your framing here ("excuses") is unnecessarily pejorative.

An appropriate question to ask is "What inferences about Romeo's future value are reasonable to make based on his first 2 seasons?"

One option would to be to compare him to all NBA players entering their third year, msaybe throwing in an adjustment for age. This approach would surely suggest that Romeo is a fringe NBA player who is at risk of dropping out of the league entirely. But I think such an analysis would be worse than just evaluating Romeo based on what was known about him going into the draft.

Another, perhaps slightly better, option would be the same comparison, but comparing Langford to the first 651 minutes of other NBA players. That would be closer to reasonable, but still would not account for a lot of what has gone on during Romeo's first 2 years.

Just thinking in more qualitative terms, I think there are a couple of reasonable inferences to make:

1. Many first round picks step right into the NBA as productive players, others are projects who need time to develop before they are productive. Tyler Herro, drafted one spot ahead of Langford, to name one. I highly doubt (though of course don't know) anyone expected Langford to step right into the NBA and be able to handle regular minutes, but there was probably some level of probability that he would and that would be part of the value assessment. That probablity can be zeroed out now, just didn't happen, and that would have some negative impact on his estimated value.

2. He has shown that his defense plays in the NBA. To the extent that was ever in doubt, he's answered it in a positive way. (This is positive, but limited: I don't think he's proven that he's a 'plus' defender or anything, just a playable one who has that potential.)

But I mostly mark him incomplete for these 2 years.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
32,383
Melrose, MA
I guess you guys were more impressed with Kemba and Fournier's contributions last night than I was.

I thought there was little downside to getting fresh legs in there.
There wasn't much reason to think that putting Langford in was going to help the team score points. I would have bet more heavily on either of them turning things around offensive than on Langford. (Kemba actually did, though way too late to matter.)

I think Langford will get a look in a situation where he has more to offer, ie, when defense is needed.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
864
Something tells me if there was a “re-draft” of 2019, teams would put at least a moderate amount of weight on what players have done in the NBA.
Of course they would. The question becomes how much they would trust the analytics versus traditional scouting.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,824
You post stuff like this frequently, that you think people here "overrate" defense, which feels like a bizarre position to take. People here, correctly, realize that defense correlates with winning championships. I don't think any team that was outside of the top 10 in defensive rating has won a title in the last 20 years. The worst defensive team in recent memory to win a title was probably the 2015-2016 Cavs, and they were still in the top 10 in defensive rating and 4th in points allowed. Maybe Brooklyn will be the exception, but that's not exactly a realistic model for team building.

You also want to accuse folks of overrating Celtics prospects, but Grant Williams isn't a great example. Grant looked decent last year, and posters had a generally positive opinion. This year he has mostly looked awful and people have shifted their opinion. This isn't a green teamer forum, if anything, this board errs on the side of being intensely cynical of Celtics prospects and overrating prospects on other teams (usually based on stuff like raw 3 point percentage).
When the defense comes attached to a player who can't play offense at all, it is overrated. People were making Grant Williams out to be some savant who was supposed to be the next Draymond Green. That is people overrating defense. Both sides of the floor count. People on here seem to ignore that. They also hate strong offense/ weak defense players. They have a role too.

And Grant did not look good last year. He sucked. You can all keep telling yourself he was good though.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
21,927
Of course they would. The question becomes how much they would trust the analytics versus traditional scouting.
Why does it have to be one or the other? Anyone who bases their opinion solely on one or the other is by definition using incomplete information. There are always going to be mitigating factors in every players evaluation......it’s up to the evaluator to identify these clues and weigh them properly.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
21,378
where I was last at
When the defense comes attached to a player who can't play offense at all, it is overrated. People were making Grant Williams out to be some savant who was supposed to be the next Draymond Green. That is people overrating defense. Both sides of the floor count. People on here seem to ignore that. They also hate strong offense/ weak defense players. They have a role too.

And Grant did not look good last year. He sucked. You can all keep telling yourself he was good though.
CC you create false narratives to support your hyperbole.

Many here, myself included, liked the fact GW as a rookie did not look lost playing D last year and earned crunch time minutes late in the season. PERIOD. That was it. The hope I assume for many was that he would get better in year 2. He didn't.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
10,933
Of course they would. The question becomes how much they would trust the analytics versus traditional scouting.
Offensively, does Romeo rate well by analytics or traditional scouting?

I knew he has apparently flashed some skills in games I have missed, but my assumption is that overall he has been very bad any way you look at it on offense.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,824
CC you create false narratives to support your hyperbole.

Many here, myself included, liked the fact GW as a rookie did not look lost playing D last year and earned crunch time minutes late in the season. PERIOD. That was it. The hope I assume for many was that he would get better in year 2. He didn't.

Not looking lost on D is not being good or having a good year. So was he good or did he simply not look lost? He did not look lost, he just wasn't good.

You can find posts of me last year saying Grant Williams is awful. Everyone was on me for saying Carsen Edwards was awful too. Who ended up being right both times?

Hyperbole though, ok. Romeo Langford has sucked. So has Grant. It's not hyperbole.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,824
People always judge a rookie's defense based on hustle/effort and whether they look lost. Then year 2 comes around and they are shocked a player who didn't look lost is actually bad on D.

Romeo looked good on D, and continued to look good on D. It's a bit different than "not looking lost."
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
21,378
where I was last at
Not looking lost on D is not being good or having a good year. So was he good or did he simply not look lost? He did not look lost, he just wasn't good.
Last year, he played well on D, could guard several positions, on a team that last year was a pretty decent defensive team. And many rookies look lost on D coming into the NBA that he didn't was viewed as a positive.
You can twist this however you like but he earned his minutes last year.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,824
Last year, he played well on D, could guard several positions, on a team that last year was a pretty decent defensive team. And many rookies look lost on D coming into the NBA that he didn't was viewed as a positive.
You can twist this however you like but he earned his minutes last year.
Just like he earned his minutes this year. Health had nothing to do with it.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
21,378
where I was last at
Just like he earned his minutes this year. Health had nothing to do with it.
I gave some factors a couple of months ago I thought might explain his regression, in particular limited bubble play to '20-'21 season turnaround time, no real off-season, and not getting into game shape. I have hope a normal off-season and routine may help for him next year.But whatever it is, it does not mitigate the aggressive false narratives and hyperbole you seem to rely on.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,824
I gave some factors a couple of months ago I thought might explain his regression, in particular limited bubble play to '20-'21 season turnaround time, no real off-season, and not getting into game shape. I have hope a normal off-season and routine may help for him next year.But whatever it is, it does not mitigate the aggressive false narratives and hyperbole you seem to rely on.
Or maybe I just have a different opinion than you? I'm sorry I have a negative outlook on Grant Williams and thought he was a bad player in his rookie season. You are the one dismissing a take as false and aggressive because you disagree with it.

Again, Grant Williams was awful. And Romeo has been too. You can make all the excuses in the world for them but it doesn't change the results. You just think going forward they will be much better. I think they will both be marginal players at best and gone by the time their rookie deal is up.

Not everyone loved Grant Williams his rookie year. Sorry you seem to think otherwise and are creating a false narrative in doing so.

Oh no, someone thinks Grant and Romeo aren't going to be good basketball players and have been pretty awful to this point in their careers.. Better dismiss it as a false narrative!
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,824
mon dieu!

Fournier?

Dude go to facts from time to time. The hyperbole heavy patois you rely on is a little thivk..

How is it hyperbole? Do you think Grant Williams and Romeo Langford have been good to date in their NBA careers? They've been awful. Even if you are one of the people who thinks Grant Williams was good his rookie year... he was so bad this year that it more than negates his rookie season.

If you want to make excuses for the results, that's fine. Some of the excuses are even valid. It doesn't change the fact they've both been awful to date. How is that hyperbolic?

And yes Fournier. You made an entire thread about him after 3 or 4 games ignoring the rest of his entire career. That is hyperbolic. I'm not focusing on 3-4 games. I'm focusing on Grant and Langford's entire career to date. They have been awful. I'm sorry you have a hard time accepting that FACT.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
21,378
where I was last at
How is it hyperbole? Do you think Grant Williams and Romeo Langford have been good to date in their NBA careers? They've been awful. Even if you are one of the people who thinks Grant Williams was good his rookie year... he was so bad this year that it more than negates his rookie season.

If you want to make excuses for the results, that's fine. Some of the excuses are even valid. It doesn't change the fact they've both been awful to date. How is that hyperbolic?

And yes Fournier. You made an entire thread about him after 3 or 4 games ignoring the rest of his entire career. That is hyperbolic. I'm not focusing on 3-4 games. I'm focusing on Grant and Langford's entire career to date. They have been awful. I'm sorry you have a hard time accepting that FACT.
Unless I have an alter ego here, I don't think I've posted 10 words about Fournier in his entire NBA career.

You got the wrong guy.

And now you are conflating arguments. There is GW last year and GW this year, there is a difference.

And I'm on record as saying I think Romeo has to produce and show significant improvement next year or he may be playing in Europe by the year after. I am disaapointed to date.