Jump to content

Romeo Langford


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 9.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
50 minutes ago, Bigred3588 said:

Players have all kinds of reasons for choosing a school. I don’t pretend to know each one’s personal motivation. And I’m pretty sure you don’t know their motivation either. And if I’m looking at a choice that affects my finances to the tune of millions of dollars, I’m evaluating every angle. These kids should be and probably are doing the same. One of those questions, to me, would be “how will these schools affect my draft stock.” It’s OK for us to say “Well he’ll get more exposure here,” but it’s unreasonable to say that a player might evaluate the level of success they’ll have against a particular schedule?

Most of these players are very competitive and will want to play against the best or play with the best.  Also they will get more publicity and seen a lot more at the bigger schools who at eon tv all the time,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, btownqb said:

I've never said he'd get more exposure here. Why don't more players go to La Tech and play? They don't play a good schedule, I'm sure. What about UCSB? They play no one. A player backing down from a tough schedule is a player no one wants. 

Never attributed the exposure comment to you, but plenty of others have said it. There actually was a top 10 draft pick from UL-LA in the past 5 years lol. And you’re right about nobody wanting a player that backs down from a tough schedule; which could be why you’ve literally never heard someone say it. Ben Simmons would be an example of someone I could see using that thought process. If I’m a consensus #1 pick before I step on campus, there’s only one direction to go. Why not play it safe and pick a school like LSU. It’s a power conference school so you have exposure, but you really only have a couple games where you could be exposed. Some would perceive it as backing down but if you look at it as a business move (and college b-ball is absolutely a business), you’re protecting your assets.

Vandy would fit this bill for Langford, as would Kansas with the exception of this year. We’ve discussed the SEC, but Kansas has won their conference for what? 12 years straight or something like that? If you go to Kansas, you can be pretty sure you’ll have the opportunity to get the numbers for a top draft spot. You could also look at what Buddy Hield did in that conference against what he’s done in the NBA as evidence of what a weak conference can do for your draft positioning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Most of these players are very competitive and will want to play against the best or play with the best.  Also they will get more publicity and seen a lot more at the bigger schools who at eon tv all the time,

I don’t necessarily disagree. I was just providing an alternate thought process for the sake of discussion. People keep saying they don’t understand how Langford could even be considering Vandy, but I can absolutely understand it if that reasoning comes into play. At Vandy, I have a pass-first PG who will get me the ball in a league where it’s easier to rack up numbers against the competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bigred3588 said:

Starting to understand why that poster said you only speak in absolutes. If you haven’t heard it or you don’t agree with it, it’s not even a possibility.

Yep. That's how I function. Your hypothetical isn't even imaginable by anyone who is a competitor. I am not sure why you're continuing to pursue it? It honestly makes no sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Bigred3588 said:

Never attributed the exposure comment to you, but plenty of others have said it. There actually was a top 10 draft pick from UL-LA in the past 5 years lol. And you’re right about nobody wanting a player that backs down from a tough schedule; which could be why you’ve literally never heard someone say it. Ben Simmons would be an example of someone I could see using that thought process. If I’m a consensus #1 pick before I step on campus, there’s only one direction to go. Why not play it safe and pick a school like LSU. It’s a power conference school so you have exposure, but you really only have a couple games where you could be exposed. Some would perceive it as backing down but if you look at it as a business move (and college b-ball is absolutely a business), you’re protecting your assets.

Vandy would fit this bill for Langford, as would Kansas with the exception of this year. We’ve discussed the SEC, but Kansas has won their conference for what? 12 years straight or something like that? If you go to Kansas, you can be pretty sure you’ll have the opportunity to get the numbers for a top draft spot. You could also look at what Buddy Hield did in that conference against what he’s done in the NBA as evidence of what a weak conference can do for your draft positioning.

Again.. the SEC is better than the Big Ten right now.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, btownqb said:

Yep. That's how I function. Your hypothetical isn't even imaginable by anyone who is a competitor. I am not sure why you're continuing to pursue it? It honestly makes no sense. 

That’s because you’re looking at it as a competitor. Most of these one-and-done players don’t give a damn about competing in college. They go to schools where they can showcase their game and get the biggest check possible come draft time. It’s that simple. Some conferences are better for that than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bigred3588 said:

I don’t necessarily disagree. I was just providing an alternate thought process for the sake of discussion. People keep saying they don’t understand how Langford could even be considering Vandy, but I can absolutely understand it if that reasoning comes into play. At Vandy, I have a pass-first PG who will get me the ball in a league where it’s easier to rack up numbers against the competition.

Have you seen Garland because the couple of times I saw him play he sure did not look like a pass first point guard. I think Phinissee is a pretty good point guard to play with as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Bigred3588 said:

Lol no worries, I’m done with this topic. If someone can’t understand how your competition can affect your draft stock, there’s not much else to say.

To me the scouts will look at players who played against great competition favorably over kids who took the easy way out.  If kids are talented enough it does not really matter where you play but like I said earlier that most will want to challenge themselves.  If a player gets exposed playing tougher competition then they were not good enough in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Have you seen Garland because the couple of times I saw him play he sure did not look like a pass first point guard. I think Phinissee is a pretty good point guard to play with as well.

In the footage I’ve seen it seemed to me that he shared the ball pretty well. He came across as more of a passer than a scorer at least.

I agree on Phinisee. With the season he’s having, I don’t regret missing on Garland in the least. I don’t think the talent disparity is that large at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

Big Ten fans are the only ones who think the SEC and Big 12 provide weaker competition than the Big Ten.  

If the Big 12 was as competitive as the B1G they wouldn’t have had the same conference champion for over a decade... And I’d love to do a B1G/SEC challenge lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Bigred3588 said:

If the Big 12 was as competitive as the B1G they wouldn’t have had the same conference champion for over a decade... And I’d love to do a B1G/SEC challenge lol.

I’ve made the same argument about the Big 12, but I’ve realized that the fact is we’re probably just Big 10 homers.  The Big 12 gets more national respect pretty much every year, and usually has better RPI, SOS, etc., numbers.  The SEC has traditionally been viewed as a worse conference overall, but now that it’s starting to draw in way more high-level talent than the Big Ten, that perception is also starting to change.

As an IU fan, I personally think the Big 10 is tougher than the Big 12 and the SEC.  But it’s pretty easy to see how an outsider could look at the conference and see a bunch of sub-par coaching and a serious lack of top-end talent.  And I’m positive recruits aren’t going to other Power 5 conferences because the competition is “easier.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FW_Hoosier said:

Big Ten fans are the only ones who think the SEC and Big 12 provide weaker competition than the Big Ten.  

The SEC almost EVERY year is weaker. This would be the first time in a long time that statement doesn’t ring true. You know that, I know that, the statistics know that. Did you mean to type SEC? The Big 12 I would say is typically not as strong as the Big10, but they’re always a lot closer, and can typically be compared with more sense. The SEC, you know better than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The case for Romeo showcasing his talents can be made at any of the schools. I don’t think that conference affiliation will have anything at all to do with his decision.

 

My case for IU is... he’s going to get just as much national recognition/TV time(not that I think it’s high on his priorities) at IU as Kansas. We will be better than Vandy and could quite possibly make a decent run next March if everything materializes. We have an up and coming coach, looking to place his stamp. Kansas will likely still be dealing with clouds looming overhead, because the NCAA won’t mess with any of the FBI’s ongoing investigations until they’re finished. Last but not least, Archie will give him the green light and he will make an immediate impact and get all the prime time, playing time that he can handle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2018 at 2:02 PM, Desert Hoosier said:

I completely agree with this. Many of my friends have said the same thing. If he is one and done, he may not be looking at a title run at the college level. He'll put in his year with his friends at Vandy and then follow the money. I also find it hard to believe that he has no idea where he is going prior to his big announcement. As for the pressure of waiting...if he chose another school, some may say he would face more pressure trying to break high school records and facing angry crowds throughout his home state of Indiana. Fans will feel betrayed and make sure he knows it in the stands. From what I'm reading, they are very excited for him right now and chanting IU IU. He has their full support. However, I think there really would be a backlash should he renounce us. Just my opinion...

I've seen many folks say he is waiting to commit to a different school because of the backlash; the flipside is he is taking a TON of time signing IU fans autographs every game that he could get back if he knew he wasn't going to IU.  You really think he is more worried about getting booed (and let's be real, people wouldn't pack the gym to boo him, it would be regular crowd sizes) outweighs the effort he is putting in?  I just don't see how that makes sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2018 at 4:28 PM, Bigred3588 said:

Players have all kinds of reasons for choosing a school. I don’t pretend to know each one’s personal motivation. And I’m pretty sure you don’t know their motivation either. And if I’m looking at a choice that affects my finances to the tune of millions of dollars, I’m evaluating every angle. These kids should be and probably are doing the same. One of those questions, to me, would be “how will these schools affect my draft stock.” It’s OK for us to say “Well he’ll get more exposure here,” but it’s unreasonable to say that a player might evaluate the level of success they’ll have against a particular schedule?

Why do to the SEC instead of a mid-major conference then? Hell why not go to Div II or JC then? NBA scouts take competition level into account as much as they can when evaluating players. I've never heard of a player choosing a school to get weaker competition in hopes of looking good enough to make it to the NBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, cybergates said:

Why do to the SEC instead of a mid-major conference then? Hell why not go to Div II or JC then? NBA scouts take competition level into account as much as they can when evaluating players. I've never heard of a player choosing a school to get weaker competition in hopes of looking good enough to make it to the NBA.

Going to a high major gives you exposure that you aren’t likely to get at a mid-major, and definitely won’t get at the D2/JC level. And I would definitely disagree that NBA scouts care all that much about competition. It wasn’t all that long ago that they were drafting straight from high school. And since then, you’ve had players like Exum, Mudiay, and Maker that find their way around the rule. You also see plenty of Euro players get drafted that scouts probably don’t see a lot of.

Lonzo Ball would be a perfect example for the argument I’m trying to make. He looked like a beast in the PAC 12...and then he played DeAaron Fox and got taken apart on national TV. A lot of people were speculating that he’d drop in the draft off that one game, which would have cost him millions. Do you think he still goes #2 if he played in the ACC or Big East, which traditionally have a lot of talent at the guard positions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/5/2018 at 5:11 PM, Bigred3588 said:

Going to a high major gives you exposure that you aren’t likely to get at a mid-major, and definitely won’t get at the D2/JC level. And I would definitely disagree that NBA scouts care all that much about competition. It wasn’t all that long ago that they were drafting straight from high school. And since then, you’ve had players like Exum, Mudiay, and Maker that find their way around the rule. You also see plenty of Euro players get drafted that scouts probably don’t see a lot of.

Lonzo Ball would be a perfect example for the argument I’m trying to make. He looked like a beast in the PAC 12...and then he played DeAaron Fox and got taken apart on national TV. A lot of people were speculating that he’d drop in the draft off that one game, which would have cost him millions. Do you think he still goes #2 if he played in the ACC or Big East, which traditionally have a lot of talent at the guard positions?

Taking competition into account means they try their best to evaluate a player based on competition level. If a player is putting up 30 points a game in high school or D2/JC is compared to a player putting up 30 points a game in the B1G, SEC, etc., you're trying to tell me that NBA scouts look at them the same? No way. NBA scouts certainly look at competition level. 

Lonzo Ball would have went #2 if he played in the ACC or Big East. You're contradicting yourself in those two paragraphs. First you say players are/were drafted high out of high school or internationally because competition isn't taken into account by NBA scouts, then you're saying Lonzo Ball would have dropped in the draft if he played in a tougher (IYO) conference. Which is it?

Players tend to fall in the draft (slightly IMO) if they play weak competition. See Stephen Curry, Damian Lillard, and CJ McCollum to name a few.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...