Author Topic: Langford Fits in Well with the Young Core  (Read 8544 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Langford fits in well with the young core
« Reply #15 on: June 24, 2019, 10:16:47 AM »

Offline Somebody

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7816
  • Tommy Points: 560
  • STAND FIRM, SAY NO TO VIBE MEN
Langford is best suited to be a shooting guard. If we don't bring Rozier back, there's plenty of minutes up for grabs.

One thing the C's should consider is to experiment with Jaylen at power forward in spots. I'd rather see him defending down there than Tatum or Hayward. He's as long as Tatum is. He's also stronger than our other wings and defends post ups better, and he would eat power forwards alive on offense. It would also free up a few extra minutes for Langford if he shows he's ready.
He's actually shorter than Tatum in both height and wingspan measurements lol. Okay for small ball in spurts, but not really more than 10-15 minutes imo (and even that's a stretch).

Tatum's wingspan is listed at 6'11 by most sources, Jaylen's at 7'0. He does have Jaylen beat at standing reach with 8'11 vs 8'9. Thats  probably a more relevant number for a PF in a lot of ways.
I believe Tatum's wingspan is a bit outdated (iirc it was a few years ago), ntm that his wingspan looks longer than 6'11. But yeah his standing reach is more important for a PF. Problem is that he really doesn't have the mentality nor the strength to play PF, he's pretty much a pure SF.
Jaylen Brown for All-NBA

Re: Langford fits in well with the young core
« Reply #16 on: June 24, 2019, 10:18:57 AM »

Offline greenrunsdeep41

  • Jrue Holiday
  • Posts: 366
  • Tommy Points: 152
He gives us a different look and something different they brown and tatum don't bring. He's a slasher who can handle the ball and who can play multiple positions. He has a nice touch and after his hand injury fully recovers, he will be back in business. Good transition game, smart on the open floor.

This kid was a 5 star high school recruit. Not saying every 5 star high school recruit pans out, but he's long, has many strengths, and a clearly decent ceiling. Give him the Celtics shooting coach that taught brown how to hit the 3. Picking at 14 wasn't going to get us a "sure-thing." but we have a nice prospect

I dont get what there's not to like. I also keep seeing people say he's "redundant" and we "already have brown and tatum and Hayward. Why do we need Langford"

-You can never have too many wings
-There are 17 roster spots on a team
-Someone's gotta come off the bench.. Brown/tatum/Hayward can't play 40 minutes each
-langford is a good prospect. Even if we had 10 players like tatum and brown, id still get langford



As for his weaknesses:

-Stevens and staff need to fix his defense
-Give him the shooting coach that taught Brown how to hit the 3


Itll take time but it will pay dividends in the long run to have this kid.
Very good points, but I have issues with some of them. Assuming that Brad doesn't play Hayward at PG or PF (the latter which I support), there will only be 96 minutes to go around for all 3 of them, and that's not even factoring Smart's ability to play as a combo guard. Drafting a high risk prospect like Langford demands attention and minutes, and I don't really see where we can afford that barring an injury. It's not like he's a Jayson Tatum who had a pretty high floor when he was drafted to earn minutes under Brad. As for the "you can never have too many wings" argument, I agree with the sentiment itself, but there are different kinds of wings. You have wings like Brown who can play 2/3, pure SFs like Tatum and Hayward (Utah Hayward was a 2/3, but he's lost that step to play the 2 imo after the injury), "swings" like Morris who can play 3/4 and freaks like Kawhi/George who can play 2/3/4 (Giannis is another variant of this who can play 3/4/5). What we have are wings that really struggle to play the 4 full time, and drafting a 1/2/3 (with 1 and 3 being major question marks atm) wing in Langford isn't going to help with our versatility, it'd exacerbate the existing logjam of wings that can only play 2/3. What we needed (if we had to go down the wing hoarding route) was a Doumbouya type who can play 3/4, although he has an even lower floor due to his lack of skills. My main gripe was that we could've selected a few prospects (including Doumbouya) who'd give us a similarly good overall floor/ceiling mix (lower floor but higher ceiling/higher floor but lower ceiling/similar in both) and would've filled some holes in our team, aside from not causing even more of a logjam from happening. I'm not too mad with the pick though, if Celtics fans had their way we'd be seeing Bol Bol drafted at #14, which would've made us the laughingstock of the league.

Where are you getting 96 minutes from? My math says 144... 48 minutes per guy x 3. I’ve been under the impression that we play a 3 wing line up, as most teams do, with the pf playing on the perimeter. It seems like you agree by referencing Gordon as a pf.

Tatum will certainly play PF minutes and smarty will play Pg minutes. So if you assume 30 minutes each for jaylen, Gordon, jaysen, then you’ve got 54 minutes left to be taken up by semi, smarts sg minutes, Langford, and Williams.
2019 Historical Draft - Golden State

C - Bill Russell/Joel Embiid
PF - Giannis Antetokounmpo/Tommy Heinsohn
SF - Kevin Durant/Billy Cunningham
SG - Bruce Bowen/David Thompson
PG - Isiah Thomas/James Harden

Re: Langford fits in well with the young core
« Reply #17 on: June 24, 2019, 10:35:20 AM »

Offline Somebody

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7816
  • Tommy Points: 560
  • STAND FIRM, SAY NO TO VIBE MEN
He gives us a different look and something different they brown and tatum don't bring. He's a slasher who can handle the ball and who can play multiple positions. He has a nice touch and after his hand injury fully recovers, he will be back in business. Good transition game, smart on the open floor.

This kid was a 5 star high school recruit. Not saying every 5 star high school recruit pans out, but he's long, has many strengths, and a clearly decent ceiling. Give him the Celtics shooting coach that taught brown how to hit the 3. Picking at 14 wasn't going to get us a "sure-thing." but we have a nice prospect

I dont get what there's not to like. I also keep seeing people say he's "redundant" and we "already have brown and tatum and Hayward. Why do we need Langford"

-You can never have too many wings
-There are 17 roster spots on a team
-Someone's gotta come off the bench.. Brown/tatum/Hayward can't play 40 minutes each
-langford is a good prospect. Even if we had 10 players like tatum and brown, id still get langford



As for his weaknesses:

-Stevens and staff need to fix his defense
-Give him the shooting coach that taught Brown how to hit the 3


Itll take time but it will pay dividends in the long run to have this kid.
Very good points, but I have issues with some of them. Assuming that Brad doesn't play Hayward at PG or PF (the latter which I support), there will only be 96 minutes to go around for all 3 of them, and that's not even factoring Smart's ability to play as a combo guard. Drafting a high risk prospect like Langford demands attention and minutes, and I don't really see where we can afford that barring an injury. It's not like he's a Jayson Tatum who had a pretty high floor when he was drafted to earn minutes under Brad. As for the "you can never have too many wings" argument, I agree with the sentiment itself, but there are different kinds of wings. You have wings like Brown who can play 2/3, pure SFs like Tatum and Hayward (Utah Hayward was a 2/3, but he's lost that step to play the 2 imo after the injury), "swings" like Morris who can play 3/4 and freaks like Kawhi/George who can play 2/3/4 (Giannis is another variant of this who can play 3/4/5). What we have are wings that really struggle to play the 4 full time, and drafting a 1/2/3 (with 1 and 3 being major question marks atm) wing in Langford isn't going to help with our versatility, it'd exacerbate the existing logjam of wings that can only play 2/3. What we needed (if we had to go down the wing hoarding route) was a Doumbouya type who can play 3/4, although he has an even lower floor due to his lack of skills. My main gripe was that we could've selected a few prospects (including Doumbouya) who'd give us a similarly good overall floor/ceiling mix (lower floor but higher ceiling/higher floor but lower ceiling/similar in both) and would've filled some holes in our team, aside from not causing even more of a logjam from happening. I'm not too mad with the pick though, if Celtics fans had their way we'd be seeing Bol Bol drafted at #14, which would've made us the laughingstock of the league.

Where are you getting 96 minutes from? My math says 144... 48 minutes per guy x 3. I’ve been under the impression that we play a 3 wing line up, as most teams do, with the pf playing on the perimeter. It seems like you agree by referencing Gordon as a pf.

Tatum will certainly play PF minutes and smarty will play Pg minutes. So if you assume 30 minutes each for jaylen, Gordon, jaysen, then you’ve got 54 minutes left to be taken up by semi, smarts sg minutes, Langford, and Williams.
I didn't reference Hayward as a PF? 96 minutes come from the SG and SF positions, the only positions that they can really play full time in, although Hayward can play PG if Brown/Smart is the SG. And Tatum playing PF minutes is just asking for a random PF to go off on us like how random PGs did this season, he's really not ideal at PF. Look at my post above, which went in depth as to how our wings are redundant in the sense that their versatility are all in the same couple of positions, creating a logjam as the two positions can't offer enough minutes for them.
Jaylen Brown for All-NBA

Re: Langford fits in well with the young core
« Reply #18 on: June 24, 2019, 10:58:58 AM »

Offline keevsnick

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5515
  • Tommy Points: 549
He gives us a different look and something different they brown and tatum don't bring. He's a slasher who can handle the ball and who can play multiple positions. He has a nice touch and after his hand injury fully recovers, he will be back in business. Good transition game, smart on the open floor.

This kid was a 5 star high school recruit. Not saying every 5 star high school recruit pans out, but he's long, has many strengths, and a clearly decent ceiling. Give him the Celtics shooting coach that taught brown how to hit the 3. Picking at 14 wasn't going to get us a "sure-thing." but we have a nice prospect

I dont get what there's not to like. I also keep seeing people say he's "redundant" and we "already have brown and tatum and Hayward. Why do we need Langford"

-You can never have too many wings
-There are 17 roster spots on a team
-Someone's gotta come off the bench.. Brown/tatum/Hayward can't play 40 minutes each
-langford is a good prospect. Even if we had 10 players like tatum and brown, id still get langford



As for his weaknesses:

-Stevens and staff need to fix his defense
-Give him the shooting coach that taught Brown how to hit the 3


Itll take time but it will pay dividends in the long run to have this kid.
Very good points, but I have issues with some of them. Assuming that Brad doesn't play Hayward at PG or PF (the latter which I support), there will only be 96 minutes to go around for all 3 of them, and that's not even factoring Smart's ability to play as a combo guard. Drafting a high risk prospect like Langford demands attention and minutes, and I don't really see where we can afford that barring an injury. It's not like he's a Jayson Tatum who had a pretty high floor when he was drafted to earn minutes under Brad. As for the "you can never have too many wings" argument, I agree with the sentiment itself, but there are different kinds of wings. You have wings like Brown who can play 2/3, pure SFs like Tatum and Hayward (Utah Hayward was a 2/3, but he's lost that step to play the 2 imo after the injury), "swings" like Morris who can play 3/4 and freaks like Kawhi/George who can play 2/3/4 (Giannis is another variant of this who can play 3/4/5). What we have are wings that really struggle to play the 4 full time, and drafting a 1/2/3 (with 1 and 3 being major question marks atm) wing in Langford isn't going to help with our versatility, it'd exacerbate the existing logjam of wings that can only play 2/3. What we needed (if we had to go down the wing hoarding route) was a Doumbouya type who can play 3/4, although he has an even lower floor due to his lack of skills. My main gripe was that we could've selected a few prospects (including Doumbouya) who'd give us a similarly good overall floor/ceiling mix (lower floor but higher ceiling/higher floor but lower ceiling/similar in both) and would've filled some holes in our team, aside from not causing even more of a logjam from happening. I'm not too mad with the pick though, if Celtics fans had their way we'd be seeing Bol Bol drafted at #14, which would've made us the laughingstock of the league.

Where are you getting 96 minutes from? My math says 144... 48 minutes per guy x 3. I’ve been under the impression that we play a 3 wing line up, as most teams do, with the pf playing on the perimeter. It seems like you agree by referencing Gordon as a pf.

Tatum will certainly play PF minutes and smarty will play Pg minutes. So if you assume 30 minutes each for jaylen, Gordon, jaysen, then you’ve got 54 minutes left to be taken up by semi, smarts sg minutes, Langford, and Williams.
I didn't reference Hayward as a PF? 96 minutes come from the SG and SF positions, the only positions that they can really play full time in, although Hayward can play PG if Brown/Smart is the SG. And Tatum playing PF minutes is just asking for a random PF to go off on us like how random PGs did this season, he's really not ideal at PF. Look at my post above, which went in depth as to how our wings are redundant in the sense that their versatility are all in the same couple of positions, creating a logjam as the two positions can't offer enough minutes for them.

You are overrating this PF problem. Last year Baynes and Horford hardy ever played together, we had significant minutes with Hayward or Tatum as the PF and I don't recall us getting cooked. Both Jaylen and Hayward did a decent job against guys like Blake Griffin and Kevin Love. there arent many post up type fours who will kill you I the post. And whether we like it or not we have only two real PF's on this team, G Will and Yabu. So Hayward/Tatum/Brown will get significant minutes there barring a big acquisition in free agency. And thats fine, you make up for any defense loss (if any) by spreading the floor with shooting n those lineups.

Re: Langford fits in well with the young core
« Reply #19 on: June 24, 2019, 11:02:13 AM »

Offline keevsnick

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5515
  • Tommy Points: 549
Langford is best suited to be a shooting guard. If we don't bring Rozier back, there's plenty of minutes up for grabs.

One thing the C's should consider is to experiment with Jaylen at power forward in spots. I'd rather see him defending down there than Tatum or Hayward. He's as long as Tatum is. He's also stronger than our other wings and defends post ups better, and he would eat power forwards alive on offense. It would also free up a few extra minutes for Langford if he shows he's ready.
He's actually shorter than Tatum in both height and wingspan measurements lol. Okay for small ball in spurts, but not really more than 10-15 minutes imo (and even that's a stretch).

Tatum's wingspan is listed at 6'11 by most sources, Jaylen's at 7'0. He does have Jaylen beat at standing reach with 8'11 vs 8'9. Thats  probably a more relevant number for a PF in a lot of ways.
I believe Tatum's wingspan is a bit outdated (iirc it was a few years ago), ntm that his wingspan looks longer than 6'11. But yeah his standing reach is more important for a PF. Problem is that he really doesn't have the mentality nor the strength to play PF, he's pretty much a pure SF.

Its the latest measurements we have were taken after high school. Even if you believe he grew height wise his wingspan has not changes considerably. I think personally he has narrow shoulders but long arms, hence a shorter wingspan but higher reach. In any case all three of Jaylen, tatum Hayward have decent enough length to play PF. With Tatum its more a strength thing.

Re: Langford fits in well with the young core
« Reply #20 on: June 24, 2019, 11:02:14 AM »

Offline Somebody

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7816
  • Tommy Points: 560
  • STAND FIRM, SAY NO TO VIBE MEN
He gives us a different look and something different they brown and tatum don't bring. He's a slasher who can handle the ball and who can play multiple positions. He has a nice touch and after his hand injury fully recovers, he will be back in business. Good transition game, smart on the open floor.

This kid was a 5 star high school recruit. Not saying every 5 star high school recruit pans out, but he's long, has many strengths, and a clearly decent ceiling. Give him the Celtics shooting coach that taught brown how to hit the 3. Picking at 14 wasn't going to get us a "sure-thing." but we have a nice prospect

I dont get what there's not to like. I also keep seeing people say he's "redundant" and we "already have brown and tatum and Hayward. Why do we need Langford"

-You can never have too many wings
-There are 17 roster spots on a team
-Someone's gotta come off the bench.. Brown/tatum/Hayward can't play 40 minutes each
-langford is a good prospect. Even if we had 10 players like tatum and brown, id still get langford



As for his weaknesses:

-Stevens and staff need to fix his defense
-Give him the shooting coach that taught Brown how to hit the 3


Itll take time but it will pay dividends in the long run to have this kid.
Very good points, but I have issues with some of them. Assuming that Brad doesn't play Hayward at PG or PF (the latter which I support), there will only be 96 minutes to go around for all 3 of them, and that's not even factoring Smart's ability to play as a combo guard. Drafting a high risk prospect like Langford demands attention and minutes, and I don't really see where we can afford that barring an injury. It's not like he's a Jayson Tatum who had a pretty high floor when he was drafted to earn minutes under Brad. As for the "you can never have too many wings" argument, I agree with the sentiment itself, but there are different kinds of wings. You have wings like Brown who can play 2/3, pure SFs like Tatum and Hayward (Utah Hayward was a 2/3, but he's lost that step to play the 2 imo after the injury), "swings" like Morris who can play 3/4 and freaks like Kawhi/George who can play 2/3/4 (Giannis is another variant of this who can play 3/4/5). What we have are wings that really struggle to play the 4 full time, and drafting a 1/2/3 (with 1 and 3 being major question marks atm) wing in Langford isn't going to help with our versatility, it'd exacerbate the existing logjam of wings that can only play 2/3. What we needed (if we had to go down the wing hoarding route) was a Doumbouya type who can play 3/4, although he has an even lower floor due to his lack of skills. My main gripe was that we could've selected a few prospects (including Doumbouya) who'd give us a similarly good overall floor/ceiling mix (lower floor but higher ceiling/higher floor but lower ceiling/similar in both) and would've filled some holes in our team, aside from not causing even more of a logjam from happening. I'm not too mad with the pick though, if Celtics fans had their way we'd be seeing Bol Bol drafted at #14, which would've made us the laughingstock of the league.

Where are you getting 96 minutes from? My math says 144... 48 minutes per guy x 3. I’ve been under the impression that we play a 3 wing line up, as most teams do, with the pf playing on the perimeter. It seems like you agree by referencing Gordon as a pf.

Tatum will certainly play PF minutes and smarty will play Pg minutes. So if you assume 30 minutes each for jaylen, Gordon, jaysen, then you’ve got 54 minutes left to be taken up by semi, smarts sg minutes, Langford, and Williams.
I didn't reference Hayward as a PF? 96 minutes come from the SG and SF positions, the only positions that they can really play full time in, although Hayward can play PG if Brown/Smart is the SG. And Tatum playing PF minutes is just asking for a random PF to go off on us like how random PGs did this season, he's really not ideal at PF. Look at my post above, which went in depth as to how our wings are redundant in the sense that their versatility are all in the same couple of positions, creating a logjam as the two positions can't offer enough minutes for them.

You are overrating this PF problem. Last year Baynes and Horford hardy ever played together, we had significant minutes with Hayward or Tatum as the PF and I don't recall us getting cooked. Both Jaylen and Hayward did a decent job against guys like Blake Griffin and Kevin Love. there arent many post up type fours who will kill you I the post. And whether we like it or not we have only two real PF's on this team, G Will and Yabu. So Hayward/Tatum/Brown will get significant minutes there barring a big acquisition in free agency. And thats fine, you make up for any defense loss (if any) by spreading the floor with shooting n those lineups.
That was because we had Morris at the PF position (he's a decent full time PF) soaking up significant minutes for the small ball lineups to do their work in short spurts, and that didn't match the playoff success we had when we started Baynes and Horford last season. I'd say you're underrating the PF problem by playing wings that have the wrong versatility to play that position full time. Forcing square pegs into round holes would only lead to another repeat of last season.
Jaylen Brown for All-NBA

Re: Langford fits in well with the young core
« Reply #21 on: June 24, 2019, 11:09:05 AM »

Offline Somebody

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7816
  • Tommy Points: 560
  • STAND FIRM, SAY NO TO VIBE MEN
Langford is best suited to be a shooting guard. If we don't bring Rozier back, there's plenty of minutes up for grabs.

One thing the C's should consider is to experiment with Jaylen at power forward in spots. I'd rather see him defending down there than Tatum or Hayward. He's as long as Tatum is. He's also stronger than our other wings and defends post ups better, and he would eat power forwards alive on offense. It would also free up a few extra minutes for Langford if he shows he's ready.
He's actually shorter than Tatum in both height and wingspan measurements lol. Okay for small ball in spurts, but not really more than 10-15 minutes imo (and even that's a stretch).

Tatum's wingspan is listed at 6'11 by most sources, Jaylen's at 7'0. He does have Jaylen beat at standing reach with 8'11 vs 8'9. Thats  probably a more relevant number for a PF in a lot of ways.
I believe Tatum's wingspan is a bit outdated (iirc it was a few years ago), ntm that his wingspan looks longer than 6'11. But yeah his standing reach is more important for a PF. Problem is that he really doesn't have the mentality nor the strength to play PF, he's pretty much a pure SF.

Its the latest measurements we have were taken after high school. Even if you believe he grew height wise his wingspan has not changes considerably. I think personally he has narrow shoulders but long arms, hence a shorter wingspan but higher reach. In any case all three of Jaylen, tatum Hayward have decent enough length to play PF. With Tatum its more a strength thing.
I think all three of them have their own shortcomings in guarding PFs. With Hayward he's certainly strong enough, but he doesn't have the pop in his step to guard modern 4s that can slash to the basket (modern 4s utilise their length really well in drives to burst to the rim imo, Hayward isn't slow footed by any means, but he'll have trouble closing them out and then chasing them as they attack the rim), and doesn't have the length to bother traditional PFs. With Tatum his lack of strength makes him a prime target to get posterised by the Trey Lyles of the world. As for Brown, I think he can play PF full time if he works on his strength a bit more due to his athleticism and length (makes up for his height), but he'd be so much better as an SG. I'd prefer to move Hayward to PG if we wanted to start all three of them together. It's better to overload the lineup with size when you're not sacrificing much, if any skill.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2019, 11:19:00 AM by Somebody »
Jaylen Brown for All-NBA

Re: Langford fits in well with the young core
« Reply #22 on: June 24, 2019, 11:58:24 AM »

Offline greenrunsdeep41

  • Jrue Holiday
  • Posts: 366
  • Tommy Points: 152
He gives us a different look and something different they brown and tatum don't bring. He's a slasher who can handle the ball and who can play multiple positions. He has a nice touch and after his hand injury fully recovers, he will be back in business. Good transition game, smart on the open floor.

This kid was a 5 star high school recruit. Not saying every 5 star high school recruit pans out, but he's long, has many strengths, and a clearly decent ceiling. Give him the Celtics shooting coach that taught brown how to hit the 3. Picking at 14 wasn't going to get us a "sure-thing." but we have a nice prospect

I dont get what there's not to like. I also keep seeing people say he's "redundant" and we "already have brown and tatum and Hayward. Why do we need Langford"

-You can never have too many wings
-There are 17 roster spots on a team
-Someone's gotta come off the bench.. Brown/tatum/Hayward can't play 40 minutes each
-langford is a good prospect. Even if we had 10 players like tatum and brown, id still get langford



As for his weaknesses:

-Stevens and staff need to fix his defense
-Give him the shooting coach that taught Brown how to hit the 3


Itll take time but it will pay dividends in the long run to have this kid.
Very good points, but I have issues with some of them. Assuming that Brad doesn't play Hayward at PG or PF (the latter which I support), there will only be 96 minutes to go around for all 3 of them, and that's not even factoring Smart's ability to play as a combo guard. Drafting a high risk prospect like Langford demands attention and minutes, and I don't really see where we can afford that barring an injury. It's not like he's a Jayson Tatum who had a pretty high floor when he was drafted to earn minutes under Brad. As for the "you can never have too many wings" argument, I agree with the sentiment itself, but there are different kinds of wings. You have wings like Brown who can play 2/3, pure SFs like Tatum and Hayward (Utah Hayward was a 2/3, but he's lost that step to play the 2 imo after the injury), "swings" like Morris who can play 3/4 and freaks like Kawhi/George who can play 2/3/4 (Giannis is another variant of this who can play 3/4/5). What we have are wings that really struggle to play the 4 full time, and drafting a 1/2/3 (with 1 and 3 being major question marks atm) wing in Langford isn't going to help with our versatility, it'd exacerbate the existing logjam of wings that can only play 2/3. What we needed (if we had to go down the wing hoarding route) was a Doumbouya type who can play 3/4, although he has an even lower floor due to his lack of skills. My main gripe was that we could've selected a few prospects (including Doumbouya) who'd give us a similarly good overall floor/ceiling mix (lower floor but higher ceiling/higher floor but lower ceiling/similar in both) and would've filled some holes in our team, aside from not causing even more of a logjam from happening. I'm not too mad with the pick though, if Celtics fans had their way we'd be seeing Bol Bol drafted at #14, which would've made us the laughingstock of the league.

Where are you getting 96 minutes from? My math says 144... 48 minutes per guy x 3. I’ve been under the impression that we play a 3 wing line up, as most teams do, with the pf playing on the perimeter. It seems like you agree by referencing Gordon as a pf.

Tatum will certainly play PF minutes and smarty will play Pg minutes. So if you assume 30 minutes each for jaylen, Gordon, jaysen, then you’ve got 54 minutes left to be taken up by semi, smarts sg minutes, Langford, and Williams.
I didn't reference Hayward as a PF? 96 minutes come from the SG and SF positions, the only positions that they can really play full time in, although Hayward can play PG if Brown/Smart is the SG. And Tatum playing PF minutes is just asking for a random PF to go off on us like how random PGs did this season, he's really not ideal at PF. Look at my post above, which went in depth as to how our wings are redundant in the sense that their versatility is all in the same couple of positions, creating a logjam at the two positions can't offer enough minutes for them.

You are overrating this PF problem. Last year Baynes and Horford hardy ever played together, we had significant minutes with Hayward or Tatum as the PF and I don't recall us getting cooked. Both Jaylen and Hayward did a decent job against guys like Blake Griffin and Kevin Love. there arent many post up type fours who will kill you I the post. And whether we like it or not we have only two real PF's on this team, G Will and Yabu. So Hayward/Tatum/Brown will get significant minutes there barring a big acquisition in free agency. And thats fine, you make up for any defense loss (if any) by spreading the floor with shooting n those lineups.
That was because we had Morris at the PF position (he's a decent full time PF) soaking up significant minutes for the small ball lineups to do their work in short spurts, and that didn't match the playoff success we had when we started Baynes and Horford last season. I'd say you're underrating the PF problem by playing wings that have the wrong versatility to play that position full time. Forcing square pegs into round holes would only lead to another repeat of last season.

Yea, I totally disagree with this idea. First, you're looking at the position as if positional defense is static. We frequently switch everything, the days of bigs backing smaller defenders down every possession is gone.

I understand your concern about the bigger PFs. But, and this is really something I feel you are overlooking, there is only a handful of large/powerful PFs in the league, anyway. Further, only one or two teams have both a big powerful PF and a C next to him, that also play big minutes at the same time. I'm not looking at rosters but Detroit is the only one that comes to mind and they are a non-factor. I can confidently say, that we should not be constructing our roster with trying to compete with the pistons in mind.

Moreover, Tatum literally started the last TWO seasons game 1 at PF. So it seems that our coach and front office disagree with you. 
2019 Historical Draft - Golden State

C - Bill Russell/Joel Embiid
PF - Giannis Antetokounmpo/Tommy Heinsohn
SF - Kevin Durant/Billy Cunningham
SG - Bruce Bowen/David Thompson
PG - Isiah Thomas/James Harden

Re: Langford fits in well with the young core
« Reply #23 on: June 24, 2019, 12:19:03 PM »

Offline Somebody

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7816
  • Tommy Points: 560
  • STAND FIRM, SAY NO TO VIBE MEN
He gives us a different look and something different they brown and tatum don't bring. He's a slasher who can handle the ball and who can play multiple positions. He has a nice touch and after his hand injury fully recovers, he will be back in business. Good transition game, smart on the open floor.

This kid was a 5 star high school recruit. Not saying every 5 star high school recruit pans out, but he's long, has many strengths, and a clearly decent ceiling. Give him the Celtics shooting coach that taught brown how to hit the 3. Picking at 14 wasn't going to get us a "sure-thing." but we have a nice prospect

I dont get what there's not to like. I also keep seeing people say he's "redundant" and we "already have brown and tatum and Hayward. Why do we need Langford"

-You can never have too many wings
-There are 17 roster spots on a team
-Someone's gotta come off the bench.. Brown/tatum/Hayward can't play 40 minutes each
-langford is a good prospect. Even if we had 10 players like tatum and brown, id still get langford



As for his weaknesses:

-Stevens and staff need to fix his defense
-Give him the shooting coach that taught Brown how to hit the 3


Itll take time but it will pay dividends in the long run to have this kid.
Very good points, but I have issues with some of them. Assuming that Brad doesn't play Hayward at PG or PF (the latter which I support), there will only be 96 minutes to go around for all 3 of them, and that's not even factoring Smart's ability to play as a combo guard. Drafting a high risk prospect like Langford demands attention and minutes, and I don't really see where we can afford that barring an injury. It's not like he's a Jayson Tatum who had a pretty high floor when he was drafted to earn minutes under Brad. As for the "you can never have too many wings" argument, I agree with the sentiment itself, but there are different kinds of wings. You have wings like Brown who can play 2/3, pure SFs like Tatum and Hayward (Utah Hayward was a 2/3, but he's lost that step to play the 2 imo after the injury), "swings" like Morris who can play 3/4 and freaks like Kawhi/George who can play 2/3/4 (Giannis is another variant of this who can play 3/4/5). What we have are wings that really struggle to play the 4 full time, and drafting a 1/2/3 (with 1 and 3 being major question marks atm) wing in Langford isn't going to help with our versatility, it'd exacerbate the existing logjam of wings that can only play 2/3. What we needed (if we had to go down the wing hoarding route) was a Doumbouya type who can play 3/4, although he has an even lower floor due to his lack of skills. My main gripe was that we could've selected a few prospects (including Doumbouya) who'd give us a similarly good overall floor/ceiling mix (lower floor but higher ceiling/higher floor but lower ceiling/similar in both) and would've filled some holes in our team, aside from not causing even more of a logjam from happening. I'm not too mad with the pick though, if Celtics fans had their way we'd be seeing Bol Bol drafted at #14, which would've made us the laughingstock of the league.

Where are you getting 96 minutes from? My math says 144... 48 minutes per guy x 3. I’ve been under the impression that we play a 3 wing line up, as most teams do, with the pf playing on the perimeter. It seems like you agree by referencing Gordon as a pf.

Tatum will certainly play PF minutes and smarty will play Pg minutes. So if you assume 30 minutes each for jaylen, Gordon, jaysen, then you’ve got 54 minutes left to be taken up by semi, smarts sg minutes, Langford, and Williams.
I didn't reference Hayward as a PF? 96 minutes come from the SG and SF positions, the only positions that they can really play full time in, although Hayward can play PG if Brown/Smart is the SG. And Tatum playing PF minutes is just asking for a random PF to go off on us like how random PGs did this season, he's really not ideal at PF. Look at my post above, which went in depth as to how our wings are redundant in the sense that their versatility is all in the same couple of positions, creating a logjam at the two positions can't offer enough minutes for them.

You are overrating this PF problem. Last year Baynes and Horford hardy ever played together, we had significant minutes with Hayward or Tatum as the PF and I don't recall us getting cooked. Both Jaylen and Hayward did a decent job against guys like Blake Griffin and Kevin Love. there arent many post up type fours who will kill you I the post. And whether we like it or not we have only two real PF's on this team, G Will and Yabu. So Hayward/Tatum/Brown will get significant minutes there barring a big acquisition in free agency. And thats fine, you make up for any defense loss (if any) by spreading the floor with shooting n those lineups.
That was because we had Morris at the PF position (he's a decent full time PF) soaking up significant minutes for the small ball lineups to do their work in short spurts, and that didn't match the playoff success we had when we started Baynes and Horford last season. I'd say you're underrating the PF problem by playing wings that have the wrong versatility to play that position full time. Forcing square pegs into round holes would only lead to another repeat of last season.

Yea, I totally disagree with this idea. First, you're looking at the position as if positional defense is static. We frequently switch everything, the days of bigs backing smaller defenders down every possession is gone.

I understand your concern about the bigger PFs. But, and this is really something I feel you are overlooking, there is only a handful of large/powerful PFs in the league, anyway. Further, only one or two teams have both a big powerful PF and a C next to him, that also play big minutes at the same time. I'm not looking at rosters but Detroit is the only one that comes to mind and they are a non-factor. I can confidently say, that we should not be constructing our roster with trying to compete with the pistons in mind.

Moreover, Tatum literally started the last TWO seasons game 1 at PF. So it seems that our coach and front office disagree with you.
Yeah I totally disagree with your idea. Having size doesn't mean you back your defender down in the post every time, it gives you stifling defense (assuming the length and size aren't stiffs, which btw I think is the important thing here) and a more effective offense as you can exploit mismatches more through what we and most teams exactly run: a switching defense, whether it's pure size advantage or more mobile size advantage. What I'm an advocate for is mobile and skilled size to match the likes of Toronto and Milwaukee, who are very big as you start looking at their frontcourt, with Milwaukee steamrolling us by playing 1 guard, 1 wing and 3 bigs compared to our lineup of 1 guard, 2 wings, 1 swing and a big. Toronto plays with 1 guard, 1 wing, 1 swing and 2 bigs. And you're advocating to downsize even further without a significant improvement in skill (the skill upgrade with Hayward at PF doesn't improve our lineup's overall skill level with Kyrie's departure)! Pure size (as seen with Detroit) doesn't cause problems to us, but the elite teams of the league have mobile and skilled size in spades, and trying to wing it with three wings against that brick wall is not the way I'd like to see this team go down.

Moreover, the team switched very quickly by shifting Tatum back to SF once it was clear that he wasn't cutting the mustard at PF, so it seems that our coach and front office snap out of their small ball dream when faced with reality.
Jaylen Brown for All-NBA

Re: Langford fits in well with the young core
« Reply #24 on: June 24, 2019, 01:02:02 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
  • Tommy Points: 862
He gives us a different look and something different they brown and tatum don't bring. He's a slasher who can handle the ball and who can play multiple positions. He has a nice touch and after his hand injury fully recovers, he will be back in business. Good transition game, smart on the open floor.

This kid was a 5 star high school recruit. Not saying every 5 star high school recruit pans out, but he's long, has many strengths, and a clearly decent ceiling. Give him the Celtics shooting coach that taught brown how to hit the 3. Picking at 14 wasn't going to get us a "sure-thing." but we have a nice prospect

I dont get what there's not to like. I also keep seeing people say he's "redundant" and we "already have brown and tatum and Hayward. Why do we need Langford"

-You can never have too many wings
-There are 17 roster spots on a team
-Someone's gotta come off the bench.. Brown/tatum/Hayward can't play 40 minutes each
-langford is a good prospect. Even if we had 10 players like tatum and brown, id still get langford



As for his weaknesses:

-Stevens and staff need to fix his defense
-Give him the shooting coach that taught Brown how to hit the 3


Itll take time but it will pay dividends in the long run to have this kid.
Very good points, but I have issues with some of them. Assuming that Brad doesn't play Hayward at PG or PF (the latter which I support), there will only be 96 minutes to go around for all 3 of them, and that's not even factoring Smart's ability to play as a combo guard. Drafting a high risk prospect like Langford demands attention and minutes, and I don't really see where we can afford that barring an injury. It's not like he's a Jayson Tatum who had a pretty high floor when he was drafted to earn minutes under Brad. As for the "you can never have too many wings" argument, I agree with the sentiment itself, but there are different kinds of wings. You have wings like Brown who can play 2/3, pure SFs like Tatum and Hayward (Utah Hayward was a 2/3, but he's lost that step to play the 2 imo after the injury), "swings" like Morris who can play 3/4 and freaks like Kawhi/George who can play 2/3/4 (Giannis is another variant of this who can play 3/4/5). What we have are wings that really struggle to play the 4 full time, and drafting a 1/2/3 (with 1 and 3 being major question marks atm) wing in Langford isn't going to help with our versatility, it'd exacerbate the existing logjam of wings that can only play 2/3. What we needed (if we had to go down the wing hoarding route) was a Doumbouya type who can play 3/4, although he has an even lower floor due to his lack of skills. My main gripe was that we could've selected a few prospects (including Doumbouya) who'd give us a similarly good overall floor/ceiling mix (lower floor but higher ceiling/higher floor but lower ceiling/similar in both) and would've filled some holes in our team, aside from not causing even more of a logjam from happening. I'm not too mad with the pick though, if Celtics fans had their way we'd be seeing Bol Bol drafted at #14, which would've made us the laughingstock of the league.

I agree with a lot of your points, and personally I would not have minded drafting Sekou at that pick.   But Danny's draft philosophy and one that I agree with is that you don't draft for need.  You draft for talent and trade/FA for need.

You draft a player based on long-term future value.  What you might be able to extract from that player 4, 6 even 9 years out.   Not for what your current roster needs are.  Because rosters can change dramatically every year.

I think the argument that, if not for his injured hand possibly contributing to his modest shooting percentages, there is a fair case to be made that Langford would have been a low top-10 pick.  Somewhere in the 8-11 range.   If one buys that notion, then he's a pretty solid value pick.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Langford fits in well with the young core
« Reply #25 on: June 24, 2019, 01:10:54 PM »

Offline Somebody

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7816
  • Tommy Points: 560
  • STAND FIRM, SAY NO TO VIBE MEN
He gives us a different look and something different they brown and tatum don't bring. He's a slasher who can handle the ball and who can play multiple positions. He has a nice touch and after his hand injury fully recovers, he will be back in business. Good transition game, smart on the open floor.

This kid was a 5 star high school recruit. Not saying every 5 star high school recruit pans out, but he's long, has many strengths, and a clearly decent ceiling. Give him the Celtics shooting coach that taught brown how to hit the 3. Picking at 14 wasn't going to get us a "sure-thing." but we have a nice prospect

I dont get what there's not to like. I also keep seeing people say he's "redundant" and we "already have brown and tatum and Hayward. Why do we need Langford"

-You can never have too many wings
-There are 17 roster spots on a team
-Someone's gotta come off the bench.. Brown/tatum/Hayward can't play 40 minutes each
-langford is a good prospect. Even if we had 10 players like tatum and brown, id still get langford



As for his weaknesses:

-Stevens and staff need to fix his defense
-Give him the shooting coach that taught Brown how to hit the 3


Itll take time but it will pay dividends in the long run to have this kid.
Very good points, but I have issues with some of them. Assuming that Brad doesn't play Hayward at PG or PF (the latter which I support), there will only be 96 minutes to go around for all 3 of them, and that's not even factoring Smart's ability to play as a combo guard. Drafting a high risk prospect like Langford demands attention and minutes, and I don't really see where we can afford that barring an injury. It's not like he's a Jayson Tatum who had a pretty high floor when he was drafted to earn minutes under Brad. As for the "you can never have too many wings" argument, I agree with the sentiment itself, but there are different kinds of wings. You have wings like Brown who can play 2/3, pure SFs like Tatum and Hayward (Utah Hayward was a 2/3, but he's lost that step to play the 2 imo after the injury), "swings" like Morris who can play 3/4 and freaks like Kawhi/George who can play 2/3/4 (Giannis is another variant of this who can play 3/4/5). What we have are wings that really struggle to play the 4 full time, and drafting a 1/2/3 (with 1 and 3 being major question marks atm) wing in Langford isn't going to help with our versatility, it'd exacerbate the existing logjam of wings that can only play 2/3. What we needed (if we had to go down the wing hoarding route) was a Doumbouya type who can play 3/4, although he has an even lower floor due to his lack of skills. My main gripe was that we could've selected a few prospects (including Doumbouya) who'd give us a similarly good overall floor/ceiling mix (lower floor but higher ceiling/higher floor but lower ceiling/similar in both) and would've filled some holes in our team, aside from not causing even more of a logjam from happening. I'm not too mad with the pick though, if Celtics fans had their way we'd be seeing Bol Bol drafted at #14, which would've made us the laughingstock of the league.

I agree with a lot of your points, and personally I would not have minded drafting Sekou at that pick.   But Danny's draft philosophy and one that I agree with is that you don't draft for need.  You draft for talent and trade/FA for need.

You draft a player based on long-term future value.  What you might be able to extract from that player 4, 6 even 9 years out.   Not for what your current roster needs are.  Because rosters can change dramatically every year.

I think the argument that, if not for his injured hand possibly contributing to his modest shooting percentages, there is a fair case to be made that Langford would have been a low top-10 pick.  Somewhere in the 8-11 range.   If one buys that notion, then he's a pretty solid value pick.
True. I'm not hot on his BBIQ and decision making though, seems iffy to me alongside his effort. I guess I really value the mindset of a prospect and the way they play (as long as their physical attributes are at least decent) more than raw, unachieved talent. Not angry with the pick though, hope he converts into a PG so that we can have our logjam issues solved :laugh:
Jaylen Brown for All-NBA

Re: Langford Fits in Well with the Young Core
« Reply #26 on: June 24, 2019, 01:26:10 PM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 43394
  • Tommy Points: 3150

Re: Langford Fits in Well with the Young Core
« Reply #27 on: June 24, 2019, 01:29:57 PM »

Offline Walker Wiggle

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 613
  • Tommy Points: 125
I think the major reason the Celtics took Langford was that they (Stevens included) have probably been following this kid for years and believe in his character and upside.

One other possible reason is that Brown is entering the last year of his rookie deal this year, and if you need to trade him away or lose him in restricted free agency, it's nice to have another wing prospect who can take his place.

Re: Langford fits in well with the young core
« Reply #28 on: June 24, 2019, 03:04:53 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
  • Tommy Points: 862
He gives us a different look and something different they brown and tatum don't bring. He's a slasher who can handle the ball and who can play multiple positions. He has a nice touch and after his hand injury fully recovers, he will be back in business. Good transition game, smart on the open floor.

This kid was a 5 star high school recruit. Not saying every 5 star high school recruit pans out, but he's long, has many strengths, and a clearly decent ceiling. Give him the Celtics shooting coach that taught brown how to hit the 3. Picking at 14 wasn't going to get us a "sure-thing." but we have a nice prospect

I dont get what there's not to like. I also keep seeing people say he's "redundant" and we "already have brown and tatum and Hayward. Why do we need Langford"

-You can never have too many wings
-There are 17 roster spots on a team
-Someone's gotta come off the bench.. Brown/tatum/Hayward can't play 40 minutes each
-langford is a good prospect. Even if we had 10 players like tatum and brown, id still get langford



As for his weaknesses:

-Stevens and staff need to fix his defense
-Give him the shooting coach that taught Brown how to hit the 3


Itll take time but it will pay dividends in the long run to have this kid.
Very good points, but I have issues with some of them. Assuming that Brad doesn't play Hayward at PG or PF (the latter which I support), there will only be 96 minutes to go around for all 3 of them, and that's not even factoring Smart's ability to play as a combo guard. Drafting a high risk prospect like Langford demands attention and minutes, and I don't really see where we can afford that barring an injury. It's not like he's a Jayson Tatum who had a pretty high floor when he was drafted to earn minutes under Brad. As for the "you can never have too many wings" argument, I agree with the sentiment itself, but there are different kinds of wings. You have wings like Brown who can play 2/3, pure SFs like Tatum and Hayward (Utah Hayward was a 2/3, but he's lost that step to play the 2 imo after the injury), "swings" like Morris who can play 3/4 and freaks like Kawhi/George who can play 2/3/4 (Giannis is another variant of this who can play 3/4/5). What we have are wings that really struggle to play the 4 full time, and drafting a 1/2/3 (with 1 and 3 being major question marks atm) wing in Langford isn't going to help with our versatility, it'd exacerbate the existing logjam of wings that can only play 2/3. What we needed (if we had to go down the wing hoarding route) was a Doumbouya type who can play 3/4, although he has an even lower floor due to his lack of skills. My main gripe was that we could've selected a few prospects (including Doumbouya) who'd give us a similarly good overall floor/ceiling mix (lower floor but higher ceiling/higher floor but lower ceiling/similar in both) and would've filled some holes in our team, aside from not causing even more of a logjam from happening. I'm not too mad with the pick though, if Celtics fans had their way we'd be seeing Bol Bol drafted at #14, which would've made us the laughingstock of the league.

I agree with a lot of your points, and personally I would not have minded drafting Sekou at that pick.   But Danny's draft philosophy and one that I agree with is that you don't draft for need.  You draft for talent and trade/FA for need.

You draft a player based on long-term future value.  What you might be able to extract from that player 4, 6 even 9 years out.   Not for what your current roster needs are.  Because rosters can change dramatically every year.

I think the argument that, if not for his injured hand possibly contributing to his modest shooting percentages, there is a fair case to be made that Langford would have been a low top-10 pick.  Somewhere in the 8-11 range.   If one buys that notion, then he's a pretty solid value pick.
True. I'm not hot on his BBIQ and decision making though, seems iffy to me alongside his effort. I guess I really value the mindset of a prospect and the way they play (as long as their physical attributes are at least decent) more than raw, unachieved talent. Not angry with the pick though, hope he converts into a PG so that we can have our logjam issues solved :laugh:

Ha ha!  I said the exact same thing to a buddy right after the draft!

He's got a good enough handle to be a PG.   He doesn't have the greatest passing stats in college that makes one think "point guard" though.   Not sure he has the court awareness and willingness to play-make for others or not.

Of course, that may have somewhat to do with his teammates and system.   Working with much more talented scorers around him and in Brad's version of the motion offense might bring out his passing more, since drive-and-kick is such a common action.  He definitely already has the "drive" half of that.  If he can add the "kick" then things should work just fine.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Langford fits in well with the young core
« Reply #29 on: June 24, 2019, 04:21:07 PM »

Offline TheSundanceKid

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2493
  • Tommy Points: 199
The more I watch the more i dislike.

I dont like players that give up on defemse and play completely disinterested on that end.

I also dont like when I see teammates drop their hands when a player gets the ball. (That indicates they know they are not getting it back) right now I wouldnt value him more than rozier.

His off ball awareness really does suck right now. If he wants to become anything in the league then he needs to sort it out. I think Brad's system will force him to learn it though, the read and react doesn't allow you to switch off because you can always be involved. And he'll need to get that if he wants to see time on the floor
Which really makes drafting him at #14 questionable. The chances of him hitting his ceiling isn't really that high, and even if he does it's not like he'll be head and shoulders above other prospects available at #14 assuming they also hit their ceilings (which is more likely to happen imo).
Not sure I agree with that. On the ball he is very good, he finishes through contact and as a defender he's excellent at defending the ball.

Every player has flaws they must overcome. LeBron had no jumper coming out of high school..

Langford's flaws are very correctable with application. What makes him a great pick at 14 is his offensive ability at this age. He's got a game that will translate very well to the NBA. Much more so than other guys in that range like Doumbouya or Bidatze