Shavlik: Today is decision time

[Mazingerz]

^ Haiku?

[Yogi]

Seems pretty simple.

He's as good as gone.

Simple numbers game, both money and spots.

Don't need him now, not developing him for the future.

Let's talk about our good players...

I expect nothing to happen.  He doesn't make enough money that waiving him means something financially.  We are allowed to have 20 players on our roster in the off-season. 

Because we are most likely shedding a bigger salary to get under the luxury cap there are two reasons to hold on to Shavlik: 
1.  He's a very productive player relative to how much he makes.  That makes him an asset on the court and one to be used to sweeten a deal.
2.  I highly doubt there is a better player to fill out the last spot than Shavlik for the vet min. 

[danglertx]

If they were going to waive him I don't think they'd hold on to him until the last second to do it.  That is kind of a lame thing to do to the guy.  Let him go find another job if you aren't keeping him.  What benefit do you get waiting until the final seconds?

[nickagneta]

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/why-boston-celtics-retain-shavlik-randolph-151400463.html


did anyone read this article.....rebounds..!!! And more....of course THIS article is from a professional sports reporter...so I imagine some here are sure they know better..!   

I read the article. Its all about some really bad look at Shav's stats.

Aren't you the guy that said stats should only be used to measure anvils?

What happens to Randolph will once again, like Terrence Williams, come down to a business decision. A fiscal business decision. He is a player with severe limitations and the Celtics have a slew of players at the same position that can do what he does. His skills are redundant on the roster so the smart business decision will probably be to not pick up the contract.

Now as I said, if he is kept, its probably because there is a deal in place to move other people, or maybe even him because the Celtics have made the business decision to save money and not pay the luxury tax this year.

With or w/o Shav, we will be paying. We have to move someone else. It's pretty much dropping Shav with no benefit except for his roster spot... which we don't have to get down for a few more months now. This isn't a good business move, to me. Now, if you need to drop him b/c we wont have a way to rid ourselves of someone else, then do it for the spot. I like Crawford but I'd rather keep Shav... I don't care if Crawford gets us a 2nd round pick in 2020, we have enough people in his spot to withstand losing him easily. Shav is excess too but look at who they are Fab, Hump, Fav, Sully, and KO... of the bunch only Hump is proven and Sully is semi-proven coming off of season ending surgery.

Difference is Shav's contract is not guaranteed and everyone else on the roster has a guaranteed contract. So the easiest and best fiscal business decision is to not pick up his contract and let him walk thereby saving millions. Yes, work will still need to be done to get the little bit left to go to get under the cap, but not guaranteeing Shav's contract mitigates the money being spent as a whole(salary paid plus luxury tax penalty)

[LooseCannon]

2.  I highly doubt there is a better player to fill out the last spot than Shavlik for the vet min.

It's not necessarily about who is more useful for this season.  Sometimes, that spot is better off going to whoever is more likely to be useful in, say, 2015-2016.

[Yogi]

2.  I highly doubt there is a better player to fill out the last spot than Shavlik for the vet min.

It's not necessarily about who is more useful for this season.  Sometimes, that spot is better off going to whoever is more likely to be useful in, say, 2015-2016.

Shavlik Randolph will be 32 in 2015-16.  My guess is he will still be an extremely productive vet. and a sought after trade chip by contenders. 

On the small chance that there is a young player with that kind of potential available he would be invited to our summer league and training camp. 

Which one of our summer league guys would you rather have than Randolph?  Tony Mitchell, Courtney Fells, Nolan Smith, Tim Abromatis or Odom-Johnson?

[danglertx]

2.  I highly doubt there is a better player to fill out the last spot than Shavlik for the vet min.

It's not necessarily about who is more useful for this season.  Sometimes, that spot is better off going to whoever is more likely to be useful in, say, 2015-2016.

I'm not sure who we are going to pick up that will be better in 2015-16 but it could also be, who will be a more valuable trade chip at the deadline?  A big guy who can rebound and maybe even score if he gets some chances who is on an expiring small contract, or .... who would be our other choice?

If Shav doesn't get us under the cap, then what is the point?  $1mil?  Is that worth letting a player you like, and everyone I've seen, including Ainge, has said they like him get away?

He plays a role.  You need role players.

[LooseCannon]

2.  I highly doubt there is a better player to fill out the last spot than Shavlik for the vet min.

It's not necessarily about who is more useful for this season.  Sometimes, that spot is better off going to whoever is more likely to be useful in, say, 2015-2016.

Shavlik Randolph will be 32 in 2015-16.  My guess is he will still be an extremely productive vet. and a sought after trade chip by contenders. 

On the small chance that there is a young player with that kind of potential available he would be invited to our summer league and training camp. 

Which one of our summer league guys would you rather have than Randolph?  Tony Mitchell, Courtney Fells, Nolan Smith, Tim Abromatis or Odom-Johnson?

The Celtics currently have 16 players under contract, so it is a question of waiving Randolph vs getting rid of another player with a guaranteed contract.

I think that if it was a question of waiving Shavlik Randolph's contract or cutting Fab Melo and swallowing his guaranteed contract, keeping Melo is a no-brainer.  The same with Phil Pressey.  I'd be happy to waive Jordan Crawford if there weren't luxury tax implications.  Would you be willing to send out a second-round pick with Crawford so that you can keep Shav?

Shavlik Randolph is a Dukie with a high bbiq (I think he's been described that way) who might be a good fit if Brad Stevens requires intelligence to function in his offensive and defense systems.  He's a nice player and I like him, but players like Shavlik Randolph are the sort of players who get over-valued and eventually handed long-term contracts by teams on the so-called treadmill of mediocrity.

Unless you can imagine him having the upside of possibly becoming the kind of player who the Celtics should lock up with something like a two-year, $7 to 10 million contract after next season, then he's not some who you are desperate to save from being a salary cap casualty.

I like him, but a good GM won't be sentimental about players like Shavlik Randolph.

[Yogi]

The Celtics currently have 16 players under contract, so it is a question of waiving Randolph vs getting rid of another player with a guaranteed contract.

I think that if it was a question of waiving Shavlik Randolph's contract or cutting Fab Melo and swallowing his guaranteed contract, keeping Melo is a no-brainer.  The same with Phil Pressey.  I'd be happy to waive Jordan Crawford if there weren't luxury tax implications.  Would you be willing to send out a second-round pick with Crawford so that you can keep Shav?

Shavlik Randolph is a Dukie with a high bbiq (I think he's been described that way) who might be a good fit if Brad Stevens requires intelligence to function in his offensive and defense systems.  He's a nice player and I like him, but players like Shavlik Randolph are the sort of players who get over-valued and eventually handed long-term contracts by teams on the so-called treadmill of mediocrity.

Unless you can imagine him having the upside of possibly becoming the kind of player who the Celtics should lock up with something like a two-year, $7 to 10 million contract after next season, then he's not some who you are desperate to save from being a salary cap casualty.

I like him, but a good GM won't be sentimental about players like Shavlik Randolph.

It is not about being sentimental.  There is no financial reason to waive Randolph.  Waiving him will get our roster to 15, but we don't have to do that till the end of the off-season. 

What we absolutely do have to do is get under the tax line to avoid repeater tax penalties.  We have to move a bigger contract, at the very least Crawford but preferably Wallace, Bass or Lee.

The remaining roster spots are for productive players and assets.  Shavlik Randolph is both a productive player and a valuable asset because of his cheap contract.  His bird rights will prove useful to a contender even if he does play himself into a bigger contract.  There is also no risk involved because his contract is expiring. 

A contender might be unwilling to take Crawford or Lee with a trade exception, but might change their mind if we add Randolph too i.e.

OKC might consider sending a pick and Martin trade exception for Lee and Randolph.

Grizzlies might take Courtney Lee, Jordan Crawford and Shavlik Randolph with their exceptions and a pick. 

[LooseCannon]

It is not about being sentimental.  There is no financial reason to waive Randolph.  Waiving him will get our roster to 15, but we don't have to do that till the end of the off-season. 

There is a financial reason.  If you don't waive Randolph now, then if you can't work out a trade, you will have to waive a guaranteed contract.  If you are forced to do that, it becomes harder to get under the luxury tax threshold.  To avoid doing that, you may have to send out a second-round pick.  Is Shavlik Randolph so valuable that you are willing to risk either of those scenarios happening?

[Yogi]

There is a financial reason.  If you don't waive Randolph now, then if you can't work out a trade, you will have to waive a guaranteed contract.  If you are forced to do that, it becomes harder to get under the luxury tax threshold.  To avoid doing that, you may have to send out a second-round pick.  Is Shavlik Randolph so valuable that you are willing to risk either of those scenarios happening?

If we can't work out a trade, we are paying luxury tax anyway.  An extra million or two is not the issue, avoiding the luxury tax is. 

If we manage to dump the contract of least value, (Crawford) then Randolph doesn't put us over the cap.  So there is no reason to waive him.

Again, waiving Randolph doesn't change the fact that we still have to dump some salary.  If dumping salary is going to clear up a roster spot, then Randolph doesn't hurt us anyway. 

[LooseCannon]

If we can't work out a trade, we are paying luxury tax anyway.  An extra million or two is not the issue, avoiding the luxury tax is. 

Payroll for the purpose of luxury tax isn't calculated until the final day of the regular season.  A trade deadline salary dump may be sufficient to avoid the tax, and the Celtics have several players who might be moved by then.

[Yogi]

If we can't work out a trade, we are paying luxury tax anyway.  An extra million or two is not the issue, avoiding the luxury tax is. 

Payroll for the purpose of luxury tax isn't calculated until the final day of the regular season.  A trade deadline salary dump may be sufficient to avoid the tax, and the Celtics have several players who might be moved by then.

I understand, but that still is not a reason to waive Randolph.

1.  Randolph is an asset.
2.  We have 3 months before we have to trim our roster by one player.
3.  The absolute worst case scenario is having to waive his guaranteed salary of 1M later in the season which makes little to no difference (This is totally unrealistic because there will always be some team looking for depth)
4.  Waiving him right now means losing him for nothing.

[LooseCannon]

I understand, but that still is not a reason to waive Randolph.

1.  Randolph is an asset.
2.  We have 3 months before we have to trim our roster by one player.
3.  The absolute worst case scenario is having to waive his guaranteed salary of 1M later in the season which makes little to no difference (This is totally unrealistic because there will always be some team looking for depth)
4.  Waiving him right now means losing him for nothing.

I basically disagree with point 3.  Even his relatively small salary is a non-negligible difference.  The Celtics paid $1.18 million in luxury tax for last season.  Last season, it was a one-for-one tax rate, so that is how much they were over.  Basically, if the Celtics had not had so many season-ending injuries, the team would have not had to exceed the luxury tax just to get enough warm bodies on the roster.

It's easy to dump payroll if you are willing to give away draft picks.  The Celtics are in a place where it might make financial sense to give away a first-round pick rather than pay luxury tax this season and be eligible for the repeater rate.  I'm not sure that it's even worth losing a future second-round pick to keep Shav around.  That future second, by the way, has more trade value than Shavlik Randolph.

[clover]

If we can't work out a trade, we are paying luxury tax anyway.  An extra million or two is not the issue, avoiding the luxury tax is. 

Payroll for the purpose of luxury tax isn't calculated until the final day of the regular season.  A trade deadline salary dump may be sufficient to avoid the tax, and the Celtics have several players who might be moved by then.

Might be moved by then. It's the repeater's tax in future years that they really want to avoid.

Which is why I don't think Wyc lets Danny go over budget, then try to get under it at a time in the season where he'd have to dump twice the salary he'd have to dump before the season starts.

I thought this would have been over six hours ago, but it's good news we've still got another day here.

I find it interesting that celtics.com is still posting stories referring to CI as an unsigned pick.  I wouldn't completely rule out a deal that gives them room for both SR and CI this year.