This is why I sometimes agree with a famous quote "If a coach starts listening to the fans, he winds up sitting next to them".
One should have a hard time proving that providing vast amount of PT for rookies, sophomores GUARANTEES a greater and faster development for them. "Rebuiling" is BS, to me. As I have said in numerous occasions, it's a mix of bad franchise management by GM and disrespect to fans and the game of basketball.
I have witnessed some 2nd round picks, late 1st round picks playing for contending teams, championship teams -with little PT- prove to be A LOT better, matured and reliable NBA players than lottery picks who get all the PT a player can get in a basketball game, who play vast amount of GARBAGE TIME because their team flat out sucks, consists of unproven youngsters and lacks leadership as well as veteran players who can get them understand the NBA game, can offer some valuable inside, tricks, advices.
I am very happy with the way the Jazz develop their players. Favors w/ 20-22 min/game in a team like the Jazz >>>>>>>>> Monroe w/ 30-35 min/game in a terrible "trying to rebuild (but has been TERRIBLE for last couple of years)" Pistons team. IMO, that's how you achieve a consistency in your franchise culture.
My point is that, if the team is bettered by it, then Favors or Kanter should start. Is that so hard to understand? Is that not what any coach, GM, or owner would want, a better team?
Some of you seem to think that instead, vets should be favored at all times and in all ways. Not if they do not produce, not if there is a better line-up. One can argue whether it is better starting say AJ-PS or AJ-DF. But if you think that the team would perform better starting AJ-DF with PS-EK off the bench, are you saying you would refuse to do that? Because it p-off a vet? Because rooks and youngin's gotsa earn their PT? BS.