Don't trade Romeo

[footey]

My point is:

Smart apparently has much more trade value than Romeo.  Romeo can replace Smart's value, and long term (starting next season) will exceed his value to the team.

So why would you insist on trading him rather than Smart?

"Romeo can replace Smart's value, and long term (starting next season) will exceed his value to the team." Well this is the premise you need to prove isn't it?

We don't know that Romeo can replace Smart's value.

You're right; I mean "may" not "will" exceed his value to the team next season. 

[#1P4P]

His injury history puts him on a similar track as RWIII (they played the same amount of games their rookie season and less games in their sophomore season). If Rob would've been in a trade last season, he would've been a fraction of the value he's at this season and I think Romeo will have a similar value increase.

We've only seen glimpses of Romeo's offensive ability and he's going to need more seasoning on that end (although he already has an excellent ability (vision) to see open driving lanes and is athletic enough to get to the rim), but the ability he's shown defensively is already above average (his lateral quickness, strength, and ability to block shots is impressive from the guard position).

He has enough defensive highlights that you can show NBA highlights instead of pre-draft scouting reports.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVW2zzd_L4k

BTW, if it's a question of either Smart or Langford, this team is too far in its development to subtract Smart's intangibles and experience for Langford's potential to develop. I am certain that Langford will eventually be better than Smart, but on this team for the next few years you'd have to trade Langford especially if another team values him as highly as Smart (who I think is worth 2 1sts right now).

[flybono]

Bust......

[Muzzy66]

I understand he's been injured, and I understand prospects don't become stars overnight...but even with relatively raw young rookies straight out of college I can usually see flashes of potential worth tapping into. 

I've watched Romeo play a number of times, and not once have I ever seen a single thing that led me to think he has the potential to be anything more then an end of bench / G-league guy.  He can't shoot, his ball handling doesn't look great, his defence hasn't impressed me, he moves awkwardly, seems to look lost on the court and shows no feel for the game. 

As another poster alluded to, I haven't seen a Celtics rookie that looked this utterly useless since James Young - who Danny (and several people on here) utterly obsessed over for years. 

You guys are saying don't trade him?  I'd be over the moon if Danny just outright waived him.  Far as I'm concerned he's a complete waste of a roster spot that could be better utilised on a solid, dependable veteran who can actually play. 

[Muzzy66]

My point is:

Smart apparently has much more trade value than Romeo.  Romeo can replace Smart's value, and long term (starting next season) will exceed his value to the team.

So why would you insist on trading him rather than Smart?

"Romeo can replace Smart's value, and long term (starting next season) will exceed his value to the team." Well this is the premise you need to prove isn't it?

We don't know that Romeo can replace Smart's value.

You're right; I mean "may" not "will" exceed his value to the team next season.

I think the only way Romeo exceeds Smart's value on the team next season is if Smart isn't on the team...

[Celtics4ever]

I like Marcus Smart, but I really like the potential of Romeo Langford.  Scouting Video on him produced by ESPN draft guru Mike Schmidt explains why.

You must be a Boston Doctor?   JK

[Ogaju]

Exhibit 8652467953 of C fans over-valuing their players. Don’t trade who?

[Ilikesports17]

Exhibit 8652467953 of C fans over-valuing their players. Don’t trade who?

I mean you are missing the point.

We aren’t saying don’t trade Romeo because he’s some kind of stud.

It’s don’t trade Romeo because we aren’t good enough for win now moves right now and his value is next to zero. So we should keep him because trading him now is just a bad value proposition. It’s like saying he’s a C- asset that is probably getting you D+ value at the moment

[Muzzy66]

Exhibit 8652467953 of C fans over-valuing their players. Don’t trade who?

I mean you are missing the point.

We aren’t saying don’t trade Romeo because he’s some kind of stud.

It’s don’t trade Romeo because we aren’t good enough for win now moves right now and his value is next to zero. So we should keep him because trading him now is just a bad value proposition. It’s like saying he’s a C- asset that is probably getting you D+ value at the moment

I would say he's a D asset with practically zero production and minimal upside, taking up a roster spot that could potentially accommodate a C+ asset that could actually help the team.  I genuinely believe Langford is a complete waste waste of a roster spot. 

See, here's the problem.  This team is DESPERATELY lacking depth...and yet we have numerous roster spots that are currently filled by players who have been pretty much totally useless. Langford, Waters and Edwards are three such examples.

When you have 3 totally useless players sitting on a roster that's in desperate need of depth, it doesn't feel right.  Somebody show me a free agent list, I bet you a TP that I can name at least 3 or 4 guys on that list that Danny could likely sign for a vet minimum who would prove to be a far better use of a roster spot the Romeo.

[Csfan1984]

Don't worry teams can't trade injured players so he will never be traded.

[Sophomore]

Do I know if Romeo is going to get healthy? I don’t. I do know there have been players who suffered a few years of injuries then turned it around. A lot of people were ready to call Joel Embiid a bust after his first two years, and said Steph Curry’s glass ankles meant he’d never amount to much.

If you trade him now you probably have to give a heavy discount for his injury. If that’s right, holding his rights in case he heals will have more value. He’s still on his rookie deal, and there are several guys on the team whose ceilings are plainly lower.

As for the people who’ve written he can’t jump, can’t dribble, moves poorly - watch and remember. https://youtu.be/13VeOv9vQeA

[Vermont Green]

I understand he's been injured, and I understand prospects don't become stars overnight...but even with relatively raw young rookies straight out of college I can usually see flashes of potential worth tapping into. 

I've watched Romeo play a number of times, and not once have I ever seen a single thing that led me to think he has the potential to be anything more then an end of bench / G-league guy. He can't shoot, his ball handling doesn't look great, his defence hasn't impressed me, he moves awkwardly, seems to look lost on the court and shows no feel for the game. 

As another poster alluded to, I haven't seen a Celtics rookie that looked this utterly useless since James Young - who Danny (and several people on here) utterly obsessed over for years. 

You guys are saying don't trade him?  I'd be over the moon if Danny just outright waived him.  Far as I'm concerned he's a complete waste of a roster spot that could be better utilised on a solid, dependable veteran who can actually play.

This is where the differing opinions come from.  My take away (and I believe others) from what I saw of him is that he does have plenty of potential to be a solid NBA player.  At this point, he has not been on the court enough for it to be any more than flashes of that potential but in my opinion it is there.

That potential may never come to fruition due to injuries or other reasons.  That is the part nobody knows.  I don't think the Celtics have given up on Langford.  He is not in the same end of the bench discussion as Waters or Green or Edwards in my view.  Absolutely more in the Nesmith or Pritchard discussion.

[Celtics4ever]

  Do I know if Romeo is going to get healthy? I don’t. I do know there have been players who suffered a few years of injuries then turned it around. A lot of people were ready to call Joel Embiid a bust after his first two years, and said Steph Curry’s glass ankles meant he’d never amount to much.

True, but two things

1) Those guys all have more talent that Romeo

2)  There are a  lot of guys are the opposite of what you claim after injury too.   They never come back, and for every Embiid and Curry that you cherry picked there are the Brad Daughtery, Grant Hill, T-MAC, Derrick Rose, Greg Oden and Jay Williams that never were healthy again and battled injuries causing their potential to never be met.   A lot of these group is also better than Romeo and some of them had healthier college careers which does not bode well.   I wish Romeo the best and hope he turns it around.    Right now he has a great gig though get paid millions to sit on a bench.

Time will tell, but right now you're complaining about losing a guy who has done for the medical economy of Boston than the Celtics.

The only spark I've seen from Romeo is his defense.   His shot is sketchy.

[timpiker]

Who would want him?

[hwangjini_1]

My point is:

Smart apparently has much more trade value than Romeo. Romeo can replace Smart's value, and long term (starting next season) will exceed his value to the team.

So why would you insist on trading him rather than Smart?

You hope that happens. There's no definitive way to know that. He could just as likely come back and injure himself again.

romeo has had a series of injuries, none of which would seem to result in an sustained injury - such as a serious knee injury.

please provide us with your source for believing that because a player has a different range of injuries due to different causes, that he will contintue have such injuries.

according to your thesis, hayward should be injured this year as usual. is he?