I like Porter's shooting projection better of course, so that's huge. Langford is far more polished as far as understanding his own game... as opposed to Porter, who is the opposite. You'll see him not attack in the correct situations and settle for jumpers far too often. One of his biggest offensive weaknesses is he'll have open lanes but bails out his defender and takes a step back.
Both are good finishers. Hoop-Math has Porter at 66.7% and Langford at 64.1% at the rim. Langford just does a far better job of getting there, reading his defender, getting the angle on his guy, etc. With that said, Porter's projection is safer I think just because of how much better of an athlete he is than Langford... he's had some absurd finishes with both hands this year.
Both guys are ball-stoppers for sure as well... but Porter won't kill your offense off-ball like Langford's lack of shooting could end up doing. Porter really needs to work on his off ball activity on offense though... his low scoring totals are a product of primarily that I think. He disappears far too often on that end if he doesn't have the ball. USC's offense is very "your turn-my turn", so that could partially be a product of that too.
To me neither are great passers.
I like both of their upsides on D. I've not watched Langford in awhile, but his off ball D was horrendous early on.. though I've heard it's improved of late. He just falls asleep on that end a lot from what I saw. Porter is the opposite... he really lacks control on D. He's extremely active, which you wouldn't expect given his supposed apathy for practice lol... his foul rate is pretty high I believe. But I've been REALLY impressed with Porter on-ball in the rare couple of moments he's guarded ISOs. He's just a top end athlete.
As usual so much of Porter's projection will come down to where his shooting #s are at the end of the year. I expect the 3PT% to decline, while the FT% improves. IIRC he was like a 45/35/65 splits guy in EYBL. His release is very low and across his body, but he gets to it pretty quickly and obviously has the handle to create enough space for it.
For Langford it's pretty much as simple as how much his lack of shooting will tank his career. His form is so unorthodox that I don't think his shot will ever be average. The things I'd want to see Porter fix on the court are all improvable, and that's why I still like him a lot. He already has some of the stuff that you see guys struggle to add to their games.
He has feel issues I think, but they're not THAT bad to me... you're not going to see him look just completely lost out there from time to time like you see with others. He just plays out of control at times. It's fixable.
That's helpful...I'm still not sold, but I had been thinking of Porter as sort of a similar prospect to Langford, but less highly touted out of highschool and with less of a track record in college, which bumped him a tier below Langford. Then I factor in the character red flags and bump him down another tier, at which point he's down and out of the range where I'd be interested in taking a serious look at him. Still tend to think you're reading too much into flashes when the big picture is much less encouraging (dare I say people did the same thing with Preston, albeit there people were looking at HS highlights).