Does DA make moves today?

[LooseCannon]

If it's decent-sized, wonder if he sticks around to be used as an expiring contract for mid-season trades.

The non-guaranteed contract of Bogans plus the expiring contract of Brandon Bass is enough trade ballast that can be used to acquire a max-contract guy who is available for a young player and draft picks.

I sort of like him as a veteran guy who is used to send a message to Brooks and Crawford that the Celtics may be rebuilding, but that doesn't mean that young players can feel entitled to playing time and free to be chuckers who don't care about defense.

[the_Bird]

Is there any word on what Bogan's contract looks like?  I'm assuming it's one of those three-year, but-but-only-one-year-guaranteed deals, since it was a S&T. 

If it's decent-sized, wonder if he sticks around to be used as an expiring contract for mid-season trades.

That's my guess too. I don't think we can keep him, not enough roster spots -- and I have doubts that any other trades will happen prior to the season's start.

Therefore, the two most expendable players (Bogans and Joseph) that are on nonguaranteed deals will likely be waived.

Bogans' deal has to be guaranteed, though, for the first year (unless the S&T rules changed).

[clover]

Scott Souza ‏@scott_souza 4m

Note that media presser advisory says: Ainge, Stevens & "new #Celtics players" - would wait on those Bogans, Humphries, Wallace shirts.

[kozlodoev]

Is there any word on what Bogan's contract looks like?  I'm assuming it's one of those three-year, but-but-only-one-year-guaranteed deals, since it was a S&T. 

If it's decent-sized, wonder if he sticks around to be used as an expiring contract for mid-season trades.

That's my guess too. I don't think we can keep him, not enough roster spots -- and I have doubts that any other trades will happen prior to the season's start.

Therefore, the two most expendable players (Bogans and Joseph) that are on nonguaranteed deals will likely be waived.

Bogans' deal has to be guaranteed, though, for the first year (unless the S&T rules changed).

If it is, I guess Randolph becomes the most likely candidate for the second waiver (Joseph is non-guaranteed, I think, so he's as good as gone, I guess).

[the_Bird]

There's still a chance they try to send Iverson to Europe for a year.  A guy like Shav, though, might as well let him come to camp and compete for a spot; there's really not much financial benefit to waiving him now, versus after the preseason.

[kozlodoev]

There's still a chance they try to send Iverson to Europe for a year.  A guy like Shav, though, might as well let him come to camp and compete for a spot; there's really not much financial benefit to waiving him now, versus after the preseason.

I find it counterproductive to ship Iverson to Europe, and keep Shav. Shav's a nice guy, but he's in his late 20s, so he is what it is -- and he's not appreciably better than Iverson.

Sending Iverson to Europe would make sense if we waived Shav, and were still a spot short.

[the_Bird]

I agree, I want Iverson on the squad - but I'm not sure Danny agrees.

[nickagneta]

There's still a chance they try to send Iverson to Europe for a year.  A guy like Shav, though, might as well let him come to camp and compete for a spot; there's really not much financial benefit to waiving him now, versus after the preseason.

If Shav is still on the roster after August 1st, his contract becomes guaranteed. So there is an incentive to not bring him to camp, a $1.1 million incentive not to bring him to camp.

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

I think Iverson stays here and plays and at worse goes to DL, I wouldn't send him overseas, I think he has the talent to get a few mins now. Hard fouls, hard screens, and rebounding is what we will need and he can provide that.

[hwangjini_1]

There's still a chance they try to send Iverson to Europe for a year.  A guy like Shav, though, might as well let him come to camp and compete for a spot; there's really not much financial benefit to waiving him now, versus after the preseason.

I find it counterproductive to ship Iverson to Europe, and keep Shav. Shav's a nice guy, but he's in his late 20s, so he is what it is -- and he's not appreciably better than Iverson.

Sending Iverson to Europe would make sense if we waived Shav, and were still a spot short.

Not to side track the thread, but I agree that Iverson makes more sense than shav on the roster. Shav brings nothing of particular value and has hit his ceiling. Plus will cost the celtics $1.1 million soon.

Iverson is the new flavor, perhaps but I was impressed by his willingness to throw his weight around and bang under the basket during the summer league. The odds are very high that Iverson will be another tall stiff and wash out.

But I am intrigued that he may turn out to be a good 3rd string center who can play defense against the tougher centers in the league.  But forget him being valuable in offense....ever.

Since the celtics are rebuilding, they should bring younger players when practical, play them and see if they development or not.

[danglertx]

There's still a chance they try to send Iverson to Europe for a year.  A guy like Shav, though, might as well let him come to camp and compete for a spot; there's really not much financial benefit to waiving him now, versus after the preseason.

I find it counterproductive to ship Iverson to Europe, and keep Shav. Shav's a nice guy, but he's in his late 20s, so he is what it is -- and he's not appreciably better than Iverson.

Sending Iverson to Europe would make sense if we waived Shav, and were still a spot short.

Shav isn't appreciably better than Colton Iverson?  OK.  Based on what?  Your expansive knowledge of Iverson because you watched him in college or from what you've seen in summer league?

[kozlodoev]

There's still a chance they try to send Iverson to Europe for a year.  A guy like Shav, though, might as well let him come to camp and compete for a spot; there's really not much financial benefit to waiving him now, versus after the preseason.

I find it counterproductive to ship Iverson to Europe, and keep Shav. Shav's a nice guy, but he's in his late 20s, so he is what it is -- and he's not appreciably better than Iverson.

Sending Iverson to Europe would make sense if we waived Shav, and were still a spot short.

Shav isn't appreciably better than Colton Iverson?  OK.  Based on what?  Your expansive knowledge of Iverson because you watched him in college or from what you've seen in summer league?

Based on what I've seen on scouting reports, in summer league, and during Shavlik Randolph's illustrious NBA career. And what are your snide remarks based on? General aptitude to troll?

[danglertx]

There's still a chance they try to send Iverson to Europe for a year.  A guy like Shav, though, might as well let him come to camp and compete for a spot; there's really not much financial benefit to waiving him now, versus after the preseason.

I find it counterproductive to ship Iverson to Europe, and keep Shav. Shav's a nice guy, but he's in his late 20s, so he is what it is -- and he's not appreciably better than Iverson.

Sending Iverson to Europe would make sense if we waived Shav, and were still a spot short.

Shav isn't appreciably better than Colton Iverson?  OK.  Based on what?  Your expansive knowledge of Iverson because you watched him in college or from what you've seen in summer league?

Based on what I've seen on scouting reports, in summer league, and during Shavlik Randolph's illustrious NBA career. And what are your snide remarks based on? General aptitude to troll?

It is based on the fact that Shav played great last year every opportunity he had.  He was a rebounding machine. Meanwhile Iverson hasn't been spectacular or even that good in the summer league.

[nickagneta]

It is based on the fact that Shav played great last year every opportunity he had. 

He did? Wow!!! That's news to me.

He had a couple of high rebound games but I don't remember him playing great given every opportunity he had. Not even close.