Both plays are good. Losing both is going to happen. 

As to your initial question – first I done cessarily think the way you played these 2 hands is indicative of a “min-cash” style. Both of the hands you posted are standard aggressive styles of play that are correct. What it sounds like you might be asking is that around the bubble you tighten up and end up min-cashing because you are thinly stacked going into the money stretch where other LAGGY players are hella-deep and eyeballing final tables.

My opinion on your question is this: essentially it depends on your goals. I am a live tourney player (not by choice mind you; by law – I am in Maryland). You online guys have it made. You can just fire another one up. If you are playing a lot of online poker and your goals are to maximize you profits then yes you probably need to jump on the bandwagon of aggression on the bubble and shifting the “I want to cash and then I will open it up” mindset to  “I want to win this whole shabang and that's really all I got my eye on” mindset. From the second comes a whole different set fo strategies and plays. You will  get knocked out more often and if you get playing very well you will only cash about 15% of the time. BUT…the idea is that a % of those cashes will be deeper runs into bigger $$$ and maybe some wins. This is the ROI approach and is really the goal of professional poker players. ANd again, be thankful you can play online poker because in live poker that 15% ITM rate sucks balls sometimes – a lot of driving home (again) from the casino with your tail between your legs wondering WTF! 

So that's a long answer to your question. No its not bad to play to cash if that is your goal. But if it is to maximaize your $$$ then you'll need to change your approach.

NOw…that said this is an important corollary that I think is relevant here. There are some cases that I think playing conservatively and passively and only to cash is perfectly acceptable, and maybe even optimal. One case is that if for some reason you get into a big tournament that is typically out of your reach entry fee wise (i.e. beyond your bankroll limits). The min-cash alone might be a HUGE infusion to your bankroll and might be hundreds (maybe thousands) entry fees at your standard buy-in average. An example is something I am facing this summer – I won a little local league thing into the Main event at WSOP. The $10,000 entry fee is not something I am doing on any regular basis (like never). So a min cash of $15k is a whopper of a win for me for basically nothing as an entry fee. I am going to go into this with one goal – to cash. yes the pros might spot this and can afford to play their LAGGY style and go deeper than me. I feel like there is merit in min-cashing in this type of scenario. If I were to ever run into millions and 10k entries are now standard for me…yes I'd be opening it up and playing to win the whole thing and not care about a piddly 15k.

Hope this helps. Just my thoughts.