How many roster spots should be used for non-playable players?

[Roy H.]

Teams get a maximum of 15 roster spots, plus two 2-way contracts. 

Right now, our roster stands at:

1. Timelord
2. Horford
3. Tatum
4. Brown
5. Smart
6. Brogdon
7. White
8. Pritchard
9. Gallinari
10. Hauser
11. Kornet
12. Grant Williams (oops)
13. Open
14. Open
15. Open

16. (Two-way).  Open
17. (Two-way). Open

We're required by rule to fill at least 14 spots, so there will be at least three more signings.

My question is, on a contending roster, how many of a team's 15 spots should be filled by reliable players who can step into the rotation when called upon?  How many spots can be reserved for guys who are simply "locker room guys" (like Haslem on the Heat), or purely developmental rookies?

My take:  I'm already somewhat queasy giving two roster spots to Kornet and Hauser.  Neither can necessarily be relied upon.  I think Hauser has some potential, so I'm okay with him.  But Kornet?  Great guy, great nickname, great cheerleader.  But, I can't imagine a situation where I'd be comfortable with him in a non-garbage time scenario.

But, media reports are that we're going to give another roster spot to one of J.D. Williams or Brodrick Thomas.  What does a roster spot gain us that a two-way contract wouldn't?  I don't think Thomas has any future in the NBA.  Williams hopefully does, but he's not ready to play in NBA games, particularly playoff games.  A two-way contact allows him to be around the team and to play a little, without requiring us to burn a roster spot.

So, that's three tenuous spots right now.  That still leaves three open spots.  I'm going to assume that we leave a spot open, to maintain some flexibility and to save ownership some tax.  What are the chances that the remaining two spots get filled by bona fide NBA players, rather than undrafted rookies?

EDIT:  I forgot Grant Williams, as noted below.  So, modify the above accordingly.

[slamtheking]

Teams get a maximum of 15 roster spots, plus two 2-way contracts. 

Right now, our roster stands at:

1. Timelord
2. Horford
3. Tatum
4. Brown
5. Smart
6. Brogdon
7. White
8. Pritchard
9. Gallinari
10. Hauser
11. Kornet
12. Open
13. Open
14. Open
15. Open

16. (Two-way).  Open
17. (Two-way). Open

We're required by rule to fill at least 14 spots, so there will be at least three more signings.

My question is, on a contending roster, how many of a team's 15 spots should be filled by reliable players who can step into the rotation when called upon?  How many spots can be reserved for guys who are simply "locker room guys" (like Haslem on the Heat), or purely developmental rookies?

My take:  I'm already somewhat queasy giving two roster spots to Kornet and Hauser.  Neither can necessarily be relied upon.  I think Hauser has some potential, so I'm okay with him.  But Kornet?  Great guy, great nickname, great cheerleader.  But, I can't imagine a situation where I'd be comfortable with him in a non-garbage time scenario.

But, media reports are that we're going to give another roster spot to one of J.D. Williams or Brodrick Thomas.  What does a roster spot gain us that a two-way contract wouldn't?  I don't think Thomas has any future in the NBA.  Williams hopefully does, but he's not ready to play in NBA games, particularly playoff games.  A two-way contact allows him to be around the team and to play a little, without requiring us to burn a roster spot.

So, that's three tenuous spots right now.  That still leaves three open spots.  I'm going to assume that we leave a spot open, to maintain some flexibility and to save ownership some tax.  What are the chances that the remaining two spots get filled by bona fide NBA players, rather than undrafted rookies?

for those 4 remaining spots and the 2 2-ways, I think they end up being handled by
- 1 roster spot to Thomas
- 1 roster spot to a vet big man whether acquired as a vet him or as part of the Fournier TPE
- 1 roster spot to a vet min wing that can hopefully burn up a few minutes with productive play in a game ahead of Hauser
- both 2-way spots taken up by Begarin and Davison
- 40/60 change the last roster spot is taken by Trevion Williams vs left open for a later signing this season.  this could shift further in Williams' favor if Brad doesn't land a good vet big man

[celticsclay]

Teams get a maximum of 15 roster spots, plus two 2-way contracts. 

Right now, our roster stands at:

1. Timelord
2. Horford
3. Tatum
4. Brown
5. Smart
6. Brogdon
7. White
8. Pritchard
9. Gallinari
10. Hauser
11. Kornet
12. Open
13. Open
14. Open
15. Open

16. (Two-way).  Open
17. (Two-way). Open

We're required by rule to fill at least 14 spots, so there will be at least three more signings.

My question is, on a contending roster, how many of a team's 15 spots should be filled by reliable players who can step into the rotation when called upon?  How many spots can be reserved for guys who are simply "locker room guys" (like Haslem on the Heat), or purely developmental rookies?

My take:  I'm already somewhat queasy giving two roster spots to Kornet and Hauser.  Neither can necessarily be relied upon.  I think Hauser has some potential, so I'm okay with him.  But Kornet?  Great guy, great nickname, great cheerleader.  But, I can't imagine a situation where I'd be comfortable with him in a non-garbage time scenario.

But, media reports are that we're going to give another roster spot to one of J.D. Williams or Brodrick Thomas.  What does a roster spot gain us that a two-way contract wouldn't?  I don't think Thomas has any future in the NBA.  Williams hopefully does, but he's not ready to play in NBA games, particularly playoff games.  A two-way contact allows him to be around the team and to play a little, without requiring us to burn a roster spot.

So, that's three tenuous spots right now.  That still leaves three open spots.  I'm going to assume that we leave a spot open, to maintain some flexibility and to save ownership some tax.  What are the chances that the remaining two spots get filled by bona fide NBA players, rather than undrafted rookies?

Unless you have a prospect that you really think will develop, but is extremely raw (like a straight out of high school perkins back in the day, or Saric on the Pistons) you can't have more than 2 or 3 of these guys in my opinion. For example, Kornet should not have been given that roster spot. He has been around 5 or 6 years at this point and was actually given some decent minutes by the Knicks his first few years. He is not an NBA playoff calibar player. Maybe Hauser has some Struss like upside, so I am not really upset on that one. However, we need guys like Howard or Carmelo (these are just examples) that your stomach wouldn't turn if they played 5 minutes in a playoff game.

[Roy H.]

Teams get a maximum of 15 roster spots, plus two 2-way contracts. 

Right now, our roster stands at:

1. Timelord
2. Horford
3. Tatum
4. Brown
5. Smart
6. Brogdon
7. White
8. Pritchard
9. Gallinari
10. Hauser
11. Kornet
12. Open
13. Open
14. Open
15. Open

16. (Two-way).  Open
17. (Two-way). Open

We're required by rule to fill at least 14 spots, so there will be at least three more signings.

My question is, on a contending roster, how many of a team's 15 spots should be filled by reliable players who can step into the rotation when called upon?  How many spots can be reserved for guys who are simply "locker room guys" (like Haslem on the Heat), or purely developmental rookies?

My take:  I'm already somewhat queasy giving two roster spots to Kornet and Hauser.  Neither can necessarily be relied upon.  I think Hauser has some potential, so I'm okay with him.  But Kornet?  Great guy, great nickname, great cheerleader.  But, I can't imagine a situation where I'd be comfortable with him in a non-garbage time scenario.

But, media reports are that we're going to give another roster spot to one of J.D. Williams or Brodrick Thomas.  What does a roster spot gain us that a two-way contract wouldn't?  I don't think Thomas has any future in the NBA.  Williams hopefully does, but he's not ready to play in NBA games, particularly playoff games.  A two-way contact allows him to be around the team and to play a little, without requiring us to burn a roster spot.

So, that's three tenuous spots right now.  That still leaves three open spots.  I'm going to assume that we leave a spot open, to maintain some flexibility and to save ownership some tax.  What are the chances that the remaining two spots get filled by bona fide NBA players, rather than undrafted rookies?

for those 4 remaining spots and the 2 2-ways, I think they end up being handled by
- 1 roster spot to Thomas
- 1 roster spot to a vet big man whether acquired as a vet him or as part of the Fournier TPE
- 1 roster spot to a vet min wing that can hopefully burn up a few minutes with productive play in a game ahead of Hauser
- both 2-way spots taken up by Begarin and Davison
- 40/60 change the last roster spot is taken by Trevion Williams vs left open for a later signing this season.  this could shift further in Williams' favor if Brad doesn't land a good vet big man

I want no part of Thomas.  I don't see any appeal whatsoever.

I'd like to see the two-way spots on Williams and Davison.  Both guys seem to have some NBA potential, but I'm not sure how much they'll contribute right away.

For the remaining four roster spots, I'm fine keeping one open, so long as it's filled by playoff time.  With the other three, I agree that we need a wing and a big man.  I'd fill the last slot with the best NBA player available.  They'll undoubtedly add at least as much as Thomas.

[BitterJim]

The better question isn't how many spots should be used on non-playable guys, it's how small of a role legit playable guys are willing to take. If I still have the ability to contribute 10mpg on a good team, then there's no way I'd sign on to be a 15th man unless the money was way better. So at the end of the day the end of your bench is gonna be filled with guys who are okay with racking up DNPs: borderline guys like Kornet and projects like Hauser. Ideally you have project players that can also contribute a bit, but we traded those guys away.

Any good team should have a legit 9 or 10 man rotation for the regular season with 2 or 3 guys that can play in a pinch, but the last 3 roster spots (and especially the 2 ways) are gonna be pretty useless guys. Best case scenario, you drop one of those guys (or have an open spot) and pick up an older buyout guy that can contribute a bit and cares about a ring more than a big role (like Sam Cassell in 2008). I could see that happening with us.

So to answer your question, I think it's virtually guaranteed that at least one of those spots goes to a legit contributor. The other spot will depend on how the front office feels about Kornet and Hauser, but I hope it gets filled too. We could still use another playable big and wing.

[Celtics2021]

I think two is the right amount by the time the playoffs roll around, but I think it’s okay earlier in the year to have an extra spot for a fringe guy as you explore whether the fringe guy is actually playable.

The team definitely thinks Hauser is playable, hence giving him 2 years guaranteed.  Remains to be seen if they’re correct, but they think he can give emergency minutes now and maybe more in the future.  His shooting has translated in limited minutes, so it’s certainly possible.

It seems like they’ll have 2-3 such guys on the roster, which is fine to start.  As I’ve consistently said, I don’t think Kornet will be on the roster the full season, if even at the start, so I’m not concerned about him.  He’s a placeholder until something better comes along.

[Roy H.]

The better question isn't how many spots should be used on non-playable guys, it's how small of a role legit playable guys are willing to take. If I still have the ability to contribute 10mpg on a good team, then there's no way I'd sign on to be a 15th man unless the money was way better. So at the end of the day the end of your bench is gonna be filled with guys who are okay with racking up DNPs: borderline guys like Kornet and projects like Hauser.

I'm not sure if this is true.  There are only 450 slots in the NBA.  With 50+ rookies every year, that means guys who could potentially contribute minutes are getting squeezed out.

[Moranis]

This is why I keep saying Boston needs to use the big TPE and actually bring in someone you could play.  And there is a clear need for a at least 1 big guy, a swing, and probably a 2nd big guy.  The team doesn't need warm bodies, it needs guys that can actually play and that if needed can play fairly big minutes and not kill you. 

I'd optimally add someone like Robinson in the big TPE (with some sort of asset or two from Miami to take the contract since the team just traded some 1st's and could use some of those type players).  It would have been great if they hadn't signed Jovic yet and you could get him, but a future 1st would work as well.  That is the type of move I'd look at making.    I'd sign Dwight Howard for rebounding and interior defense.  There is some time on the other TPE, but if someone came available that would fit into it, I wouldn't hesitate. 

Boston wants to claim it is a contender, it needs to act like it.  You can't let a 17 million dollar exception just expire when they are actual players you could acquire that would help the team. 

[nebist]

I believe you were missing Grant Williams on your roster, so we’re at 12 with Kornet.

I would say you want 13 players you’d be somewhat comfortable with playing regular rotation minutes due to injury, rest, etc. Most coaches play 9-10 guys in standard regular season rotation, so 13 gives you a 3rd layer of depth at Guard, Forward, and Big. And I think you’d want at least 10 guys you’d be comfortable turning to in the playoffs. Most coaches run an 8-man rotation in the playoffs, so 10 gives you some matchup options or the ability to withstand injury.

I would say we have 10 players I’d be comfortable turning to in the playoffs (Tatum, Brown, Smart, Al, Rob, Brogdon, White, Gallo, Grant, Pritchard). I’d add Hauser as an 11th that I would not be comfortable yet relying on in the playoffs, but I wouldn’t mind turning to him in the regular season.

Spots 11-13 should be 3rd string guys who are not in your rotation, but you feel you can turn to if necessary. To me, you want 1 guard there, 1 forward/wing type, and one big. I’m willing to count Hauser as our 3rd string forward type. I don’t think we have a 3rd string C on the roster. Technically, we don’t have that 3rd string G either, but Smart, White, and Brogdon have so much size and versatility it probably doesn’t matter. 

That means I’d be willing to use spots 14 and 15 and the 2-way slots purely for developmental purposes. I’d agree that Kornet is basically a wasted spot, but hopefully he’s a wasted spot as the 14th man and not being relied on as that 3rd string big.

[Roy H.]

This is why I keep saying Boston needs to use the big TPE and actually bring in someone you could play.  And there is a clear need for a at least 1 big guy, a swing, and probably a 2nd big guy.  The team doesn't need warm bodies, it needs guys that can actually play and that if needed can play fairly big minutes and not kill you. 

I'd optimally add someone like Robinson in the big TPE (with some sort of asset or two from Miami to take the contract since the team just traded some 1st's and could use some of those type players).  It would have been great if they hadn't signed Jovic yet and you could get him, but a future 1st would work as well.  That is the type of move I'd look at making.    I'd sign Dwight Howard for rebounding and interior defense.  There is some time on the other TPE, but if someone came available that would fit into it, I wouldn't hesitate. 

Boston wants to claim it is a contender, it needs to act like it.  You can't let a 17 million dollar exception just expire when they are actual players you could acquire that would help the team.

Welp, if Pags wants to invest some of those billions he didn't get to waste on buying Chelsea FC, there are plenty of targets still out there.

Josh Richardson is presumably cheap.  I bet Denver would move Jeff Green.  Cam Reddish is available from New York. 

[Goldstar88]

C’s better not have 4 g-league players on the roster like they have the last few years. It was ridiculous. Need another veteran wing and C.

[Roy H.]

I believe you were missing Grant Williams on your roster, so we’re at 12 with Kornet.

I would say you want 13 players you’d be somewhat comfortable with playing regular rotation minutes due to injury, rest, etc. Most coaches play 9-10 guys in standard regular season rotation, so 13 gives you a 3rd layer of depth at Guard, Forward, and Big. And I think you’d want at least 10 guys you’d be comfortable turning to in the playoffs. Most coaches run an 8-man rotation in the playoffs, so 10 gives you some matchup options or the ability to withstand injury.

I would say we have 10 players I’d be comfortable turning to in the playoffs (Tatum, Brown, Smart, Al, Rob, Brogdon, White, Gallo, Grant, Pritchard). I’d add Hauser as an 11th that I would not be comfortable yet relying on in the playoffs, but I wouldn’t mind turning to him in the regular season.

Spots 11-13 should be 3rd string guys who are not in your rotation, but you feel you can turn to if necessary. To me, you want 1 guard there, 1 forward/wing type, and one big. I’m willing to count Hauser as our 3rd string forward type. I don’t think we have a 3rd string C on the roster. Technically, we don’t have that 3rd string G either, but Smart, White, and Brogdon have so much size and versatility it probably doesn’t matter. 

That means I’d be willing to use spots 14 and 15 and the 2-way slots purely for developmental purposes. I’d agree that Kornet is basically a wasted spot, but hopefully he’s a wasted spot as the 14th man and not being relied on as that 3rd string big.

Good catch.

And yeah, I think we need at least two other veteran players, preferably a center and a wing.

[Who]

I am not including the two-way guys in this. I do not consider them part of the team.

For a title contender? 1-2
For a midlevel team? 2-3
For a lottery team? 3+

Boston is a title contender. They should only have 1-2 guys who are not ready to play minutes. Sam Hauser is one of those 1-2 guys and frankly I would leave it at 1 (that means cutting Kornet). We have too many injury prone players and too little depth at center and with genuine wing plays (we have combo guards and combo forwards). We need to use those roster spots on steady vets.

This team has leveled up (title contender). It needs to act like that. That means useful end of bench players not raw possible diamonds in the rough.

[slamtheking]

Teams get a maximum of 15 roster spots, plus two 2-way contracts. 

Right now, our roster stands at:

1. Timelord
2. Horford
3. Tatum
4. Brown
5. Smart
6. Brogdon
7. White
8. Pritchard
9. Gallinari
10. Hauser
11. Kornet
12. Open
13. Open
14. Open
15. Open

16. (Two-way).  Open
17. (Two-way). Open

We're required by rule to fill at least 14 spots, so there will be at least three more signings.

My question is, on a contending roster, how many of a team's 15 spots should be filled by reliable players who can step into the rotation when called upon?  How many spots can be reserved for guys who are simply "locker room guys" (like Haslem on the Heat), or purely developmental rookies?

My take:  I'm already somewhat queasy giving two roster spots to Kornet and Hauser.  Neither can necessarily be relied upon.  I think Hauser has some potential, so I'm okay with him.  But Kornet?  Great guy, great nickname, great cheerleader.  But, I can't imagine a situation where I'd be comfortable with him in a non-garbage time scenario.

But, media reports are that we're going to give another roster spot to one of J.D. Williams or Brodrick Thomas.  What does a roster spot gain us that a two-way contract wouldn't?  I don't think Thomas has any future in the NBA.  Williams hopefully does, but he's not ready to play in NBA games, particularly playoff games.  A two-way contact allows him to be around the team and to play a little, without requiring us to burn a roster spot.

So, that's three tenuous spots right now.  That still leaves three open spots.  I'm going to assume that we leave a spot open, to maintain some flexibility and to save ownership some tax.  What are the chances that the remaining two spots get filled by bona fide NBA players, rather than undrafted rookies?

for those 4 remaining spots and the 2 2-ways, I think they end up being handled by
- 1 roster spot to Thomas
- 1 roster spot to a vet big man whether acquired as a vet him or as part of the Fournier TPE
- 1 roster spot to a vet min wing that can hopefully burn up a few minutes with productive play in a game ahead of Hauser
- both 2-way spots taken up by Begarin and Davison
- 40/60 change the last roster spot is taken by Trevion Williams vs left open for a later signing this season.  this could shift further in Williams' favor if Brad doesn't land a good vet big man

I want no part of Thomas.  I don't see any appeal whatsoever.

I'd like to see the two-way spots on Williams and Davison.  Both guys seem to have some NBA potential, but I'm not sure how much they'll contribute right away.

For the remaining four roster spots, I'm fine keeping one open, so long as it's filled by playoff time.  With the other three, I agree that we need a wing and a big man.  I'd fill the last slot with the best NBA player available.  They'll undoubtedly add at least as much as Thomas.

Thomas isn't an all-star in the making but there may be something there where he could be a productive 4th guard.  I wouldn't keep him over a solid vet but if it's him or a vet that can't provide anything, I'll take a shot on Thomas.

[pearljammer10]

JD Davison was just signed to a two way contract.