Langford or Nesmith: Who's the better long-term fit?

[Cesar Crespo]

I'm looking at him purely from a shooting standpoint. I agree with the consensus on his overall game. I think his form looks good but I see a shooter who is rushing and not getting his feet set at times. We'll know more about him once he settles down, which I don't anticipate to be until next year. I remain quite bullish on him. I won't begrudge anyone for not being as bullish as I am. I admittedly have a Vandy connection and bias there but he was electric last year. He played very well against Auburn, for instance, where he was guarded by Okoro for some of the game. I really hope he develops into that guy at the NBA level (obviously 52% ain't happening but low 40 to mid 40s is certainly within reach). But, there is always the risk of an RJ Hunter situation. I'm less concerned about that with Nesmith due to his body type.

Player development is weird. For anyone all that worried about Nesmith and Langford due to playing time, I remind them of this guy who's blossomed into quite the player.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/roziete01.html
I'd rather just hold on to AN + RL and hope one or both develop. They offer far more value to the Celtics than anything they'd get in return at this point.

The C's first round pick this year probably has more value than RL and AN. Would a team even trade a 1st round pick for RL or AN?

It's possible RL comes back and builds up some trade value but we'll see.

 

[BigSoxFan]

Player development is weird. For anyone all that worried about Nesmith and Langford due to playing time, I remind them of this guy who's blossomed into quite the player.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/roziete01.html
I'd rather just hold on to AN + RL and hope one or both develop. They offer far more value to the Celtics than anything they'd get in return at this point.

The C's first round pick this year probably has more value than RL and AN. Would a team even trade a 1st round pick for RL or AN?

It's possible RL comes back and builds up some trade value but we'll see.

Yup. Agreed. There is no real reason to trade either guy unless you're making a bigger move for a Barnes type. But they obviously don't have enough value to headline a trade. For this reason, it makes sense for Ainge to just hold and develop. Langford has a shot to play a small role in the playoffs. Nesmith clearly doesn't. We really just need one of them to pop. If we go 0-2 here, then we've got some problems.

 

[DannyDarwinism]

One thing I've wondered that I suppose if relevant to this question is just what is the value of good shooting. On decent volume of 400 attempts over a season (4.88/game), the difference between a 35% shooter and a 40% shooter is 20 makes, so 60 points, so about .73 ppg. Is the value of the difference in gravity between those two guys high enough to justify the gap in how two otherwise equal players would be perceived, or do we overvalue shooting in some instances?

 

[Jimbodandy]

Fact of the matter is, Aaron Nesmith isn't good enough to get on the basketball court

This is nonsense. Nesmith not meeting Stevens' criteria for rookie minutes doesn't mean that he's not good. You know this.

Nesmith is almost at Rozier's minutes total from his rookie year, similar draft pedigree. Is that guy not good?

Edit: nevermind. You since posted Rozier, sorry.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

One thing I've wondered that I suppose if relevant to this question is just what is the value of good shooting. On decent volume of 400 attempts over a season (4.88/game), the difference between a 35% shooter and a 40% shooter is 20 makes, so 60 points, so about .73 ppg. Is the value of the difference in gravity between those two guys high enough to justify the gap in how two otherwise equal players would be perceived, or do we overvalue shooting in some instances?

I'd take a fully developed Langford at 35% 3s than a fully developed Nesmith at 40%... I think.

The thing is, Langford might be a sub 30% shooter.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

This is nonsense. Nesmith not meeting Stevens' criteria for rookie minutes doesn't mean that he's not good. You know this.

Nesmith is almost at Rozier's minutes total from his rookie year, similar draft pedigree. Is that guy not good?

He wasn't. Now he is. It's like player development is a thing.

People are so defensive on this board about rookies and younger guys.

Aaron Nesmith is not a good basketball player right now. That doesn't mean he won't be next year.

 

[Jimbodandy]

He wasn't. Now he is. It's like player development is a thing.

If that's your take, that's like 20 guys out of every first round every year.

I inferred that you were writing his future off due to low rookie minutes, which is my bad.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

If that's your take, that's like 20 guys out of every first round every year.

I inferred that you were writing his future off due to low rookie minutes, which is my bad.

That and that while AN's performance this year doesn't really matter in the long term, it does impact his trade value a lot.

 

[Jimbodandy]

That and that while AN's performance this year doesn't really matter in the long term, it does impact his trade value a lot.

Oh damn right. The asset accumulation pipeline took a huge hit when Romeo couldn't come back, Grant regressed, and with the game being a hair too fast for Nesmith out of the gate.

Sometimes I wish that Brad's hook was a bit slower with prospects, but setting a winning environment is important too.

 

[BigSoxFan]

but setting a winning environment is important too.

Yes, but we seem to be forgetting the “winning” part

 

[Jimbodandy]

Yes, but we seem to be forgetting the “winning” part

His hardo push over the couple of weeks before break is the only reason why we're not 2-3 games underwater, which is even scarier.

 

[Devizier]

I root for both of them and hope they both flourish on the Celtics. But if I had to choose one right now, I'd choose the guy who seems to be a solid defender rather than a guy who, while promising, hasn't shown anything solid at the NBA level other than energy on defense, which I admire.

I basically agree, but my conclusion is different. That's because I don't think either player has shown anything in the NBA.

There's also the fact that many/most players picked where they were in the draft don't amount to much in the league.

 

[radsoxfan]

For guys like Langford and Nesmith, fit takes a major backseat to a MUCH more important question. Can either of them actually be decent NBA players? For the same reason you don't draft for need, you also don't value young guys based on fit.

I understand the topic and think the previous posts are valid, but I would just not really consider fit too much with either of them yet. Having a good shooter doesn't do anyone any good if he can't get on the court because he isn't worth a rotation spot.

If forced to pick, I would probably lean Nesmith. Not for any great reason, but Romeo was pretty underwhelming and has been injured for awhile.

 

[DGreenwood]

Romeo has been back for three games. I wonder if anyone is changing their opinion based on what we've seen so far? It's a very small sample size but I think we've seen some things worth noting.
1) Brad obviously thinks very highly of him (based on usage and Brad's own comments).
2) He looks a lot more comfortable than I expected him to after such a long layoff, especially on defense.
3) He looks like he was working on his shooting while he was out. The stats are meaningless at this point but he looks like a different shooter (That step back three was nasty).

edit: Here's the three I was talking about. That's a move he's obviously been practicing:
View: https://twitter.com/celtics/status/1379953133963542531?s=20

 

[lovegtm]

Romeo has been back for three games. I wonder if anyone is changing their opinion based on what we've seen so far? It's a very small sample size but I think we've seen some things worth noting.
1) Brad obviously thinks very highly of him (based on usage and Brad's own comments).
2) He looks a lot more comfortable than I expected him to after such a long layoff, especially on defense.
3) He looks like he was working on his shooting while he was out. The stats are meaningless at this point but he looks like a different shooter (That step back three was nasty).

edit: Here's the three I was talking about. That's a move he's obviously been practicing:
View: https://twitter.com/celtics/status/1379953133963542531?s=20

I was high on him before, health permitting. But he's shown a lot of growth even while not being able to play, which is extremely promising. I expect him to have a TL-style value jump next year.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

There were a few Romeo updates while he was out and every single one of them suggested he was doing all the drills he'd normally do, just one handed. He's also a very good athlete and he's ridiculously long. His wingspan is about the same as Jayson Tatum's at 6'11. His standing reach is an insane 8'8. Tatum's is 8'10.5.

TL and Romeo together on the court together should be fun to watch for years to come. So much length and athleticism. Enough that it could actually change the defensive atmosphere of the team. Brad said it but having Romeo on the team lets them play Carsen Edwards. That would mean Brad has some ability in either Carsen or RL to "run" the point. If Langford can actually do that at times in the way Avery Bradley/Rozier did it, sweet. That's not asking much, actually.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I was high on him before, health permitting. But he's shown a lot of growth even while not being able to play, which is extremely promising. I expect him to have a TL-style value jump next year.

I expect Romeo to continue his rise into that territory this year if he can remain healthy.

 

[lovegtm]

I expect Romeo to continue his rise into that territory this year if he can remain healthy.

I'm being low-key to avoid the nitpickers

Away from the keyboard, my pants are fully off.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

I'm being low-key to avoid the nitpickers

Away from the keyboard, my pants are fully off.

Just for fun

Brown 6'7, 8.6'5 standing reach, 6'11.75 wingspan
Tatum 6'8.25, 8'10.5 standing reach, 6'11 wingspan
Langford 6'4.5, 8'7 standing reach, 6'11 wingspan
TimeLord 6'8, 9'4 standing reach, 7'6 wingspan

Nesmith 6'6, 6'10 wingspan, can't find his standing reach.


If Langford could play point at all, that would allow for some very long and athletic lineups.

edit: fixed a typo.

 

[DGreenwood]

Nesmith's standing reach is atrocious.

 

[128]

Nesmith's standing reach is atrocious.

Are we sure that's not his wingspan? A quick Google search revealed nothing about his standing reach. If it were unusually short, some draftnik would have noted as much, I suspect.

 

[BigSoxFan]

Just for fun

Brown 6'7, 8.6'5 standing reach, 6'11.75 wingspan
Tatum 6'8.25, 8'10.5 standing reach, 6'11 wingspan
Langford 6'4.5, 8'7 standing reach, 6'11 wingspan
TimeLord 6'8, 9'4 standing reach, 7'6 wingspan

Nesmith 6'6, 6'10 standing reach, can't find.


If Langford could play point at all, that would allow for some very long and athletic lineups.

I think Nesmith’s wingspan is 6’10, not his standing reach. Can’t seem to find the latter though.

 

[128]

I think Nesmith’s wingspan is 6’10, not his standing reach. Can’t seem to find the latter though.

Whatever his shortcomings, a lack of length doesn't appear to be one of them.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Yeah that was a typo. A 6'6 person with a 6'10 standing length would be really funny looking.

 

[DGreenwood]

Are we sure that's not his wingspan? A quick Google search revealed nothing about his standing reach. If it were unusually short, some draftnik would have noted as much, I suspect.

I think Nesmith’s wingspan is 6’10, not his standing reach. Can’t seem to find the latter though.

Yeah that was a typo. A 6'6 person with a 6'10 standing length would be really funny looking.

It's clearly wingspan. I should have used an emoji to show I was kidding. Or maybe I should have just been less of a smartass.

edit: It is funny to think about a 6'6" guy with a 6'10" standing reach though.

 

[Cellar-Door]

Just for fun

Brown 6'7, 8.6'5 standing reach, 6'11.75 wingspan
Tatum 6'8.25, 8'10.5 standing reach, 6'11 wingspan
Langford 6'4.5, 8'7 standing reach, 6'11 wingspan
TimeLord 6'8, 9'4 standing reach, 7'6 wingspan

Nesmith 6'6, 6'10 wingspan, can't find his standing reach.


If Langford could play point at all, that would allow for some very long and athletic lineups.

edit: fixed a typo.

Some of these heights are wrong, due to mixing up with and without shoes.
Brown is 6'5.25"
Tatum has no official measurement, but since his with shoes is listed at 6'8" he's probably under 6'7" without
Langford's is right
TL has no combine either but I'd guess that height is right

Langford is a near identical physical match to Jaylen.

 

[DGreenwood]

Some of these heights are wrong, due to mixing up with and without shoes.
Brown is 6'5.25"
Tatum has no official measurement, but since his with shoes is listed at 6'8" he's probably under 6'7" without
Langford's is right
TL has no combine either but I'd guess that height is right

Langford is a near identical physical match to Jaylen.

Tatum is 6'8" without shoes
Brown is 6'6" without shoes
Link

 

[Cellar-Door]

Tatum is 6'8" without shoes
Brown is 6'6" without shoes
Link

I think those are lies unless both grew since the combine. Generally the official combine measurements on NBA.com are the only reliable height measurements. Since they go to the 1/4 inch and every player is measured the same.

 

[DGreenwood]

I think those are lies unless both grew since the combine. Generally the official combine measurements on NBA.com are the only reliable height measurements. Since they go to the 1/4 inch and every player is measured the same.

I'm not sure if they're lies. The NBA mandated that the Celtics turn in accurate measurements without shoes. Most players lost inches because of it. Rob Williams lost two inches. Only a few players stayed the same or went up. Why would they lie for only a few?

If you have an Athletic sub, they did an article on it.

https://theathletic.com/1274937/2019/10/08/most-nba-players-experienced-a-bit-of-shrinkage-this-week-not-jayson-tatum-hes-still-growing/

When the Celtics released their official roster Monday, most returning players lost at least an inch of height. A bit of shrinkage was expected after the NBA recently changed its policy on measuring heights, determining that for the first time every player’s size would be recorded without shoes on in an official preseason setting. But one returner, Jayson Tatum, did not get docked an inch or more. Instead, Tatum remained at the same 6-foot-8 listing he has maintained since entering the NBA.

“He’s the only honest person in the league,” said teammate Grant Williams.

Echoed Tatum, “A man of integrity.”

The truth is Tatum actually would have seen his listed height rise if players were still allowed to measure with shoes on. He said that from the time the Celtics drafted him, he has grown about three-quarters of an inch. The increase took him to about 6-foot-7 and ⅝, which was rounded up for the official roster. If Tatum had been measured by the old standard, he would now be listed at 6-foot-9, according to Brian Olive, the Celtics media services manager charged with putting together the roster.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

I used different sources. I thought I noted Brown and Tatum were with shoes but I forgot.

Either way, that's the least important part. Langford and TL are very long players.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Yeah that was a typo. A 6'6 person with a 6'10 standing length would be really funny looking.

would be a guy with no arms . . . .

or no legs.




either way, probably not a NBA player.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

would be a guy with no arms . . . .

or no legs.

Sounds like it would be JJ Barea.

 

[sezwho]

I'm being low-key to avoid the nitpickers

Away from the keyboard, my pants are fully off.

I have also joined the Romeo Dance Off

 

[Eddie Jurak]

I question the premise here, that we will ever need to choose between the two. While on their rookie deals, they are both relatively cheap. They are very different types of players.

If I had to choose, I'd go with Langford because he can play defense and he's a logical guy to start at the 2 if Smart leaves. (Different kind of player than Smart of course, but a more natural replacement for him than Nesmith.) And there is some untapped offensive potential there and him improving his shot is not out of the question. Nesmith seems like a bench shooter/energy guy to me, which is a good type of role player to have but we are still talking about a role player.

At this point, I'd say that Langford has the higher floor (already looks like he'll be a legit NBA wing defender, and maybe a 5th starter) and higher ceiling (could be a guy who can create his own shot in the NBA). Nesmith looks to me like a bench guy, but potentially a bench weapon.

Romeo is completely expendable. I'm keeping Nesmith because he's cheaper for longer and a much better shooter.

Between the two of them, they have attempted 100 NBA threes. It's a bit early to declare that Nesmith has an NBA-caliber 3 point shot or that Langford doesn't (and won't).

Neither has even 400 minutes played so impossible to say at this point which is the better long term fit. One more year of cost control for Nesmith so he gets my vote.

I agree with everything here except that I'd pick Langford.

Yeah that was a typo. A 6'6 person with a 6'10 standing length would be really funny looking.

That would be literal alligator arms.

 

[DGreenwood]

I question the premise here, that we will ever need to choose between the two. While on their rookie deals, they are both relatively cheap. They are very different types of players.

The original premise didn't say that the Celtics would need (or want) to choose between them because of finances or any type of redundancy. The topic started before the trade deadline and both Langford and Nesmith were coming up a lot in trade rumors and hypothetical trade proposals. The two names seemed to be getting used almost interchangeably in those rumors/hypotheticals. So the question was:

Aaron Nesmith and Romeo Langford are two of the Celtics more valuable trade chips (outside of the untouchables). If Ainge decides he wants to hold on to one of them but is willing to move the other in a trade, which would you prefer to see him keep?

 

[DGreenwood]

Almost two years later, they "Kept Nesmith". 58% got their wish?

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Almost two years later, they "Kept Nesmith".

For now. Wouldn't surprise me if they are both gone.

RL should get a chance in SA though.

 

[Cellar-Door]

\Funny thing.. I bet if you did this poll this year you'd get a very different result.

I think they kept Nesmith because Romeo was the only guy with value

 

[bakahump]

Free Nesmith! Now that Romeo isnt switching his contacts I predict Nesmith develops.
(Best part is if he doesnt no one will remember but if he does I will be a genius. )

 

[lovegtm]

With Begarin coming over, made a ton of sense for Romeo to move if another team thought he had value. Begarin is basically the same guy as Romeo, but with a chance to develop more of an offensive game.

I like Romeo and thought he should have gotten more run, but he's a 3&D&D guy who doesn't currently have the 3 or the second D. Pretty hard to find real minutes for that on a team with Tatum, Brown, Smart and an emerging Grant at the wings.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

distributor? What is a 3&D&D guy? That sounds like a complete basketball player.

 

[lovegtm]

distributor? What is a 3&D&D guy? That sounds like a complete basketball player.

"and drive" (closeouts)

 

[HomeRunBaker]

With Begarin coming over, made a ton of sense for Romeo to move if another team thought he had value. Begarin is basically the same guy as Romeo, but with a chance to develop more of an offensive game.

I like Romeo and thought he should have gotten more run, but he's a 3&D&D guy who doesn't currently have the 3 or the second D. Pretty hard to find real minutes for that on a team with Tatum, Brown, Smart and an emerging Grant at the wings.

As was said above, I’m sure Brad would have traded both if anyone wanted Nesmith whose value has to be close to nil at this point.

Romeo had that rough 4-25 stretch but began season 14-32 and is 11-26 since his drought. The sample is still small based on only 83 attempts but he has gone from .185 to .278 to .349 each year with much improved mechanics. His shooting is going to be fine I worry more about his loose handle and inconsistent intensity which was an issue when he was at Indiana. He doesn’t bring the defensive fire all the time and for a kid whose calling card has to be his defense that can be an issue in him reaching his potential.

 

[Devizier]

I would say that Romeo and Nesmith have second-rounder (early and late) value right now. Most expected benefit comes after they ink their second contract, anyways.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

THere was a Herald article a few days ago that said teams were asking about Nesmith. In that article - which is paywalled or I'd link it - I e said that AN was making 85 out of 100 3Ps in practice consistently.

RL not popping this year probably meant that his future in BOS was done contract-wise. If he remained inconsistent next year, BOS probably wouldn't have resigned him and if did pop, BOS wouldn't have been able to afford him. As I said in another thread, Derrick White is a lot of what people wanted Romeo to be. Yes there's a chance that Romeo will be better than Derrick White, but it's pretty small and RL needs a lot more reps with the ball in his hands if that's ever going to happen.

 

[Cellar-Door]

THere was a Herald article a few days ago that said teams were asking about Nesmith. In that article - which is paywalled or I'd link it - I e said that AN was making 85 out of 100 3Ps in practice consistently.

RL not popping this year probably meant that his future in BOS was done contract-wise. If he remained inconsistent next year, BOS probably wouldn't have resigned him and if did pop, BOS wouldn't have been able to afford him. As I said in another thread, Derrick White is a lot of what people wanted Romeo to be. Yes there's a chance that Romeo will be better than Derrick White, but it's pretty small and RL needs a lot more reps with the ball in his hands if that's ever going to happen.

This is not particularly good btw for an NBA player. Kris Humphries used to shoot 85% from 3 in practice too. Every single NBA player kills it on 3s and FTs in practice.

 

[reggiecleveland]

I will miss Romeo being compared to Mandela in terms of statesmanship, Shakespeare in terms of literary legacy, Voltaire on terms of influence on the age of reason, and Usain Bolt in terms of athleticism.

Mostly I will miss he defied expectations by becoming neither the MVP, or a bust but a solid rotation player .

 

[chilidawg]

Well I guess by process of elimination Nesmith is the better fit. He does strike me as a guy with good size and athleticism and shooting skills, who the game really needs to slow down for him. That seems like a better bet than say, PP getting longer and quicker.

 

[DourDoerr]

With the low contract #, and (at this point) longshot 3pt potential, I'd just ride AN out at this point. Maybe a teammate/coach is able to tap into whatever talent he has and the team benefits. Otherwise, he can drop down the rotation/out of the rotation until the contract expires. I'd hate to give up and have him figure it out elsewhere - especially when any return will be meager.

 

[Cellar-Door]

Well I'd say...

Nesmith was the guy they kept.
Romeo was the better fit now.
Nesmith is the better hypothetical fit.
Neither seems likely to have much of a role, Romeo was closer but is gone.

On paper, Nesmith the 3pt sniper is a great fit. Realistically, Romeo the defender and mediocre 3pt shooter was better, because Nesmith right now appears to have no NBA skills since he forgot how to shoot.