The official Josh Minott thread

[Klomp]

Finch really does like his half rotations.

Almost like it's probably a part of his game management philosophy or something...

[winforlose]

Finch really does like his half rotations.

Almost like it's probably a part of his game management philosophy or something...

Yes, but it is also part of his not developing young players. Thus when we need them, they play poorly and we lose. Finch has a philosophy, and it is… something

[Klomp]

Finch really does like his half rotations.

Almost like it's probably a part of his game management philosophy or something...

Yes, but it is also part of his not developing young players. Thus when we need them, they play poorly and we lose. Finch has a philosophy, and it is… something

Something that many, many coaches have had over the years.

How many young players did Phil Jackson play over the years? Look at the Bulls draft history from 1990-97. Why didn't he develop them? His failure in player development cost the Bulls the 1994 and 1995 titles, what a bum.

[winforlose]

Almost like it's probably a part of his game management philosophy or something...

Yes, but it is also part of his not developing young players. Thus when we need them, they play poorly and we lose. Finch has a philosophy, and it is… something

Something that many, many coaches have had over the years.

How many young players did Phil Jackson play over the years? Look at the Bulls draft history from 1990-97.

Before my time. How many of them showed promise. How many of them operated in the 2nd apron where guys like Minott might go from 3rd string to 2nd quite fast. Look at Denver’s championship year compared to today. They get it, Finch doesn’t.

[Klomp]

Before my time. How many of them showed promise. How many of them operated in the 2nd apron where guys like Minott might go from 3rd string to 2nd quite fast. Look at Denver’s championship year compared to today. They get it, Finch doesn’t.

The Denver comparison is hilarious. They've lost many key role players because they simply couldn't afford them due to the second apron and so many high salary guys, that's the only reason why the young guys are in there. That is why the Towns trade happened. With him here, you could guarantee the departures of Naz and Nickeil this upcoming summer right after we had to let go of Kyle last year for the same reason. There was zero path to keeping Naz here with Towns and Gobert in front of him.

Here's another thing...as I'm typing this, I'm realizing that more of the big departures for Denver have been at SG, playing off of Murray. Bruce Brown and KCP, for starters. That's a position they feel might be easier to fill on the open market or through smaller trades due to the system they run and the importance of the position in the offense and defense. Salary cap constraints force teams to pick and choose where to pour their assets into.

Could that be PF for us? Randle might not be "as good" as KAT here, but does he have to be? We saw the system run just fine when Naz would be in there or even when Kyle would be there. Denver has Jokic to take initiating burden off of the SG, but we have Gobert to help take defensive burden off of our PF.

[BlacJacMac]

Denver lost players because ownership didn't want to pay them.

Kroenke probably loves the 2nd apron penalties because he can act like that's the reason now...

[winforlose]

Before my time. How many of them showed promise. How many of them operated in the 2nd apron where guys like Minott might go from 3rd string to 2nd quite fast. Look at Denver’s championship year compared to today. They get it, Finch doesn’t.

The Denver comparison is hilarious. They've lost many key role players because they simply couldn't afford them due to the second apron and so many high salary guys, that's the only reason why the young guys are in there. That is why the Towns trade happened. With him here, you could guarantee the departures of Naz and Nickeil this upcoming summer right after we had to let go of Kyle last year for the same reason. There was zero path to keeping Naz here with Towns and Gobert in front of him.

Here's another thing...as I'm typing this, I'm realizing that more of the big departures for Denver have been at SG, playing off of Murray. Bruce Brown and KCP, for starters. That's a position they feel might be easier to fill on the open market or through smaller trades due to the system they run and the importance of the position in the offense and defense. Salary cap constraints force teams to pick and choose where to pour their assets into.

Could that be PF for us? Randle might not be "as good" as KAT here, but does he have to be? We saw the system run just fine when Naz would be in there or even when Kyle would be there. Denver has Jokic to take initiating burden off of the SG, but we have Gobert to help take defensive burden off of our PF.

Denver is an example of the process of being to expensive to keep everyone and needing to develop the young guys. Bringing back NAW and Naz is expensive. We probably got DDV to be able to lose NAW. Last year Denver saw KCP leaving coming and played young guys more to get them ready. If you assume we are trading Randle, that means behind Naz on the depth chart are Minott and Miller. One of them should be playing 12-14 minutes a game minimum. It is also worth noting that an 8 man rotation is harder on the 8. Wearing them down now will have consequences for the later part of the season and the playoffs. Just ask Thibs and NYK last year in the playoffs.

[shrink]

We are no longer the perennial losing franchise that we were for twenty years. We aren’t in a position any more to gift minutes to young players hoping they develop, while we leave better vet players on the bench. We are barely holding on here in the playoff race, and we need wins.

Players like Minott and Dillingham will get minutes when we accrue injuries. They haven’t passed people above them on the depth chart to deserve to take minutes away from them.

[winforlose]

We are no longer the perennial losing franchise that we were for twenty years. We aren’t in a position any more to gift minutes to young players hoping they develop, while we leave better vet players on the bench. We are barely holding on here in the playoff race, and we need wins.

Players like Minott and Dillingham will get minutes when we accrue injuries. They haven’t passed people above them on the depth chart to deserve to take minutes away from them.

True of Dilly who is a massive - in the +/- column. Minott is almost always in the plus. The more minutes he gets the more that should improve. But giving him 12-15 is neither a gift nor a sacrifice if he is playing well. At worst he eats minutes without hurting us, which reduce wear down on top 8 rotation guys.

[shrink]

We are no longer the perennial losing franchise that we were for twenty years. We aren’t in a position any more to gift minutes to young players hoping they develop, while we leave better vet players on the bench. We are barely holding on here in the playoff race, and we need wins.

Players like Minott and Dillingham will get minutes when we accrue injuries. They haven’t passed people above them on the depth chart to deserve to take minutes away from them.

True of Dilly who is a massive - in the +/- column. Minott is almost always in the plus.

Our back up SF has been NAW, who is the team leader in +/-. Ant plays there sometimes too.

[winforlose]

We are no longer the perennial losing franchise that we were for twenty years. We aren’t in a position any more to gift minutes to young players hoping they develop, while we leave better vet players on the bench. We are barely holding on here in the playoff race, and we need wins.

Players like Minott and Dillingham will get minutes when we accrue injuries. They haven’t passed people above them on the depth chart to deserve to take minutes away from them.

True of Dilly who is a massive - in the +/- column. Minott is almost always in the plus.

Our back up SF has been NAW, who is the team leader in +/-. Ant plays there sometimes too.

Minott can and has played + minutes at the PF. He doesn’t only play with Randle and Naz.

[shrink]

True of Dilly who is a massive - in the +/- column. Minott is almost always in the plus.

Our back up SF has been NAW, who is the team leader in +/-. Ant plays there sometimes too.

Minott can and has played + minutes at the PF. He doesn’t only play with Randle and Naz.

+/- is not the argument to defend Minott deserving minutes over other players. Randle and Naz are also above Minott in +/-. Randle is third on the team (above even perennial team leader Rudy Gobert!) so you can’t give Minott his minutes, and you love Naz and probably wouldn’t advocate to take more minutes from him. NAW and Ant are #1 and #2, btw.

If you want to make the +/- argument, then you could say he should play over Jaden. I don’t necessarily agree with that because Jaden helps Finch trust the defense, but if he’s having a bad night or he gets in foul trouble (or any of those guys, I guess), maybe that’s the case for Minott.

[winforlose]

Our back up SF has been NAW, who is the team leader in +/-. Ant plays there sometimes too.

Minott can and has played + minutes at the PF. He doesn’t only play with Randle and Naz.

+/- is not the argument to defend Minott deserving minutes over other players. Randle and Naz are also above Minott in +/-. Randle is third on the team (above even perennial team leader Rudy Gobert!) so you can’t give Minott his minutes, and you love Naz and probably wouldn’t advocate to take more minutes from him.

If you want to make the +/- argument, then you could say he should play over Jaden. I don’t necessarily agree with that because Jaden helps Finch trust the defense, but if he’s having a bad night or he gets in foul trouble (or any of those guys, I guess), maybe that’s the case for Minott.

Again, the argument for playing Minott at all is that he can hold is own and that is proven in the +/-. The argument for playing Minott instead of any of the 6 players who could occupy those minutes (Jaden, DDV, NAW, Randle, Naz, or Ant,) is to reduce the physical toll you take on those guys. Most teams could run 8 man rotations all year round, most teams don’t. I am not arguing that Minott is more than a 9th man. I am arguing that it makes sense to play 9, especially when #9 is developed by those minutes. If we get a backup C, maybe that pushes some or all of Minott’s minutes to Randle or Naz, but then we are developing the backup C.

[Klomp]

We are no longer the perennial losing franchise that we were for twenty years. We aren’t in a position any more to gift minutes to young players hoping they develop, while we leave better vet players on the bench. We are barely holding on here in the playoff race, and we need wins.

Players like Minott and Dillingham will get minutes when we accrue injuries. They haven’t passed people above them on the depth chart to deserve to take minutes away from them.

True of Dilly who is a massive - in the +/- column. Minott is almost always in the plus. The more minutes he gets the more that should improve. But giving him 12-15 is neither a gift nor a sacrifice if he is playing well. At worst he eats minutes without hurting us, which reduce wear down on top 8 rotation guys.

So you would have rather doubled his minutes in the Clippers game, and potentially doubled his -8 as a result?

The 9th spot is largely contingent on the success of his first rotation and how the others in the rotation are playing at the time the rotation would come up in the second half.

[winforlose]

We are no longer the perennial losing franchise that we were for twenty years. We aren’t in a position any more to gift minutes to young players hoping they develop, while we leave better vet players on the bench. We are barely holding on here in the playoff race, and we need wins.

Players like Minott and Dillingham will get minutes when we accrue injuries. They haven’t passed people above them on the depth chart to deserve to take minutes away from them.

True of Dilly who is a massive - in the +/- column. Minott is almost always in the plus. The more minutes he gets the more that should improve. But giving him 12-15 is neither a gift nor a sacrifice if he is playing well. At worst he eats minutes without hurting us, which reduce wear down on top 8 rotation guys.

So you would have rather doubled his minutes in the Clippers game, and potentially doubled his -8 as a result?

The 9th spot is largely contingent on the success of his first rotation and how the others in the rotation are playing at the time the rotation would come up in the second half.

Finch likes to talk about young players and the cycle of 3 games. Usually you get one good, one average, and one bad every three games. Young players tend to have more of the 2 bad or 2 average without the good. If it is a bad night that changes the calculus. But if it is a decent to a good night, I disagree with cutting minutes.

If we lose that game, you likely change your tune. It is the same with Ant’s hero ball. Last night it almost lost the game. The night before it won the game. My rule is I dislike hero ball and don’t celebrate it when it works. Likewise with young players, I don’t like being overly reactionary. There are times when you shorten their minutes. But otherwise I lean in favor of sticking to the principle of assigned role and consistent usage to develop in that role. If we trade Randle and Naz gets hurt Minott will be needed. Do you really want the less experienced version of Minott in that position?

[Klomp]

True of Dilly who is a massive - in the +/- column. Minott is almost always in the plus. The more minutes he gets the more that should improve. But giving him 12-15 is neither a gift nor a sacrifice if he is playing well. At worst he eats minutes without hurting us, which reduce wear down on top 8 rotation guys.

So you would have rather doubled his minutes in the Clippers game, and potentially doubled his -8 as a result?

The 9th spot is largely contingent on the success of his first rotation and how the others in the rotation are playing at the time the rotation would come up in the second half.

Finch likes to talk about young players and the cycle of 3 games. Usually you get one good, one average, and one bad every three games. Young players tend to have more of the 2 bad or 2 average without the good. If it is a bad night that changes the calculus. But if it is a decent to a good night, I disagree with cutting minutes.

If we lose that game, you likely change your tune. It is the same with Ant’s hero ball. Last night it almost lost the game. The night before it won the game. My rule is I dislike hero ball and don’t celebrate it when it works. Likewise with young players, I don’t like being overly reactionary. There are times when you shorten their minutes. But otherwise I lean in favor of sticking to the principle of assigned role and consistent usage to develop in that role. If we trade Randle and Naz gets hurt Minott will be needed. Do you really want the less experienced version of Minott in that position?

I wouldn't say his minutes have been cut. Everyone knows the expectation of that role, it isn't some arbitrary rule just because Minott is a young guy. It's been in place for a long time.

[winforlose]

So you would have rather doubled his minutes in the Clippers game, and potentially doubled his -8 as a result?

The 9th spot is largely contingent on the success of his first rotation and how the others in the rotation are playing at the time the rotation would come up in the second half.

Finch likes to talk about young players and the cycle of 3 games. Usually you get one good, one average, and one bad every three games. Young players tend to have more of the 2 bad or 2 average without the good. If it is a bad night that changes the calculus. But if it is a decent to a good night, I disagree with cutting minutes.

If we lose that game, you likely change your tune. It is the same with Ant’s hero ball. Last night it almost lost the game. The night before it won the game. My rule is I dislike hero ball and don’t celebrate it when it works. Likewise with young players, I don’t like being overly reactionary. There are times when you shorten their minutes. But otherwise I lean in favor of sticking to the principle of assigned role and consistent usage to develop in that role. If we trade Randle and Naz gets hurt Minott will be needed. Do you really want the less experienced version of Minott in that position?

I wouldn't say his minutes have been cut. Everyone knows the expectation of that role, it isn't some arbitrary rule just because Minott is a young guy. It's been in place for a long time.

Okay, call it a short leash approach. Do you honestly favor 8.5 man rotations over 9?

[Klomp]

I agree, Finch tends to have a short leash with the end of the bench. Do you blame him? If your main rotation guy is playing well and your fringe rotation guy is struggling, I don't understand the logic in preferring the fringe guy.

It's like choosing to have Drew Butera play over Joe Mauer because there's a chance Mauer might get hurt.

Josh has made one 3-pointer in 2025...that came on January 2. On a team with significant spacing issues. I don't get why it's a debate about increasing his role.

[BlacJacMac]

I agree, Finch tends to have a short leash with the end of the bench. Do you blame him? If your main rotation guy is playing well and your fringe rotation guy is struggling, I don't understand the logic in preferring the fringe guy.

It's like choosing to have Drew Butera play over Joe Mauer because there's a chance Mauer might get hurt.

Josh has made one 3-pointer in 2025...that came on January 2. On a team with significant spacing issues. I don't get why it's a debate about increasing his role.

I just don't see it with Josh. He's had 1 really nice boxscore game, but mostly I see a guy who is good for 1 or 2 really nice plays each game and a ton of mistakes.

Everyone notices a great block or pass. But most don't notice missed assignments or bad positioning.

[winforlose]

I agree, Finch tends to have a short leash with the end of the bench. Do you blame him? If your main rotation guy is playing well and your fringe rotation guy is struggling, I don't understand the logic in preferring the fringe guy.

It's like choosing to have Drew Butera play over Joe Mauer because there's a chance Mauer might get hurt.

Josh has made one 3-pointer in 2025...that came on January 2. On a team with significant spacing issues. I don't get why it's a debate about increasing his role.

I just don't see it with Josh. He's had 1 really nice boxscore game, but mostly I see a guy who is good for 1 or 2 really nice plays each game and a ton of mistakes.

Everyone notices a great block or pass. But most don't notice missed assignments or bad positioning.

I notice his often messing up at least one or two defensive rotations per game. I notice his not always being where his teammates expect him to be, ect… I also notice what Finch said over the summer about young fringe rotation players knowing their role and shutting their mouth (slight exaggeration for wresting purposes .) Minott knows he has a short leash, knows what is expected of him, and rarely tries to go beyond it, because that is how Finch instructed him to play. Minott lacks chemistry and fit with the defensive scheme because he doesn’t spend enough time in it. He lacks confidence in his shot because he hardly ever takes them. At this point JM is a minute eater and nothing more. Someone whose role is to be neutral. Don’t really help your team, but don’t hurt them.

Last night there was a great example of a player not following Finch’s instructions and thriving in spite Finch. His name is Jaden McDaniels, and he scored 27 points despite shooting 1 of 5 from deep. Finch has proven he cannot get through to Ant, properly utilize Jaden, find minutes consistently for any of the development projects including Miller, and has no intention of changing his rotations until he is basically forced to (DDV to start, Randle still starting instead of Naz.) Finch is an obstacle to Minott and every other fringe rotation player.