It's taken as a point of fact here that Adelman doesn't play young guys enough or develop young talent. TWill supporters, please stand up!

It's true that Adelman seems to have a history of slowly bringing along (being hesitant to play, etc: choose your wording) young players. Brooks played only 10 games before New Year's his rookie season, and finished the year averaging less than 12 min/game. Landry barely played at all until spring of his first season. The same is true to a lesser extent of Bud last season. 

However, while I agree that Adelman hedges his minutes in favor of vets, I'm not sure I see evidence that this leads to poor development of young players. Each of those 3 has developed nicely in the NBA. Far better than their draft position would predict. 

Another way to think of this: there have been several players under Adelman who could just never get on the court, and were eventually let go (Taylor, Dorsey, Ish Smith). But none of those have gone on to develop better under other organizations that presumably aren't as stubborn as Adelman. I just don't see anyone who has been let go where in retrospect I think "how on earth could Adelman keep that kind of talent on the bench?" So does Adelman's go-it-slow approach to young players stunt their development? I understand you can go back forever in RA's history; someone can bring up Drazen. I didn't follow the league then, so I'll let others comment on that.

Of course, if you remove "stunted development" from the equation, there's another argument in favor of playing the rookies: they might be better and actually give us a better chance to win right now. I could certainly make the argument that RA cost us a couple wins in 07-08 by not getting Landry into the rotation sooner. But that's pretty speculative, and it certainly isn't the general tenor of most comments on this blog. Generally, the arguments for rookie PT say that Scola is too old and will decline in the future, and that Chuck is at his ceiling because of height, while Thabeet could eventually be much better. Comments welcome. Do we believe that Adelman's approach to rookies jeopardizes the future? That limited PT for the rookies is detrimental? What of the argument that Adelman's track record with Landry, Brooks, Bud, Ish, Taylor, and Dorsey means he should get the benefit of the doubt?