Have any of you experienced coaches ever done an analysis on what gives faster growth for a player - Starts or Playing Time?  I understand that the more Starts and more Playing Time you give, the quicker the player will realize their potential.  With that said, is either one more valuable than the other?  For example, all other things being equal, will a Freshman that starts, and plays only 5 minutes, grow faster or slower than if he did not start, but played say 15-20 minutes?  Any insight would be appreciated.  Thanks!

I have no idea on this one.  You may want to consider asking this one on the main HD forum -- you will get a lot more eyeballs on this question that way, and I bet a lot of other people are wondering the same thing.

Definitely throw this one in the main forum -- I'm morbidly curious how others will answer it.

The starts, if I'm not mistaken, will impact how quickly the player picks up work ethic (the type of student the player is "in the classroom and on the court" also impacts this if you have that data from scouting trips in recruiting). The attribute gains themselves though, I believe, are a function of minutes played, potential, practice patterns, HS GPA and WE. So I would say the WE of a kid getting to start but 5 mpg would grow faster than if he was coming off the bench, but the kid that sees 15-20 mph will gain more over the course of a season because the WE gain of the first kid won't come close to compensating for the minutes of playing time the second kid is seeing.

thanks rednu - I will post on the main forum and see what responses we get.  I thought I'd start with our world first since the responses would be less combative and accusatory!  I'm sure someone will try to call me out somehow.  Oh well, we shall see!
Your logic makes sense regarding the starts/WE versus PT/attributes.  It will be interesting to see what the so called self proclaimed experts in the other worlds think!