Team average age; Team age weighted by minutes played

[Gant]

Dean Maniatt (via Reddit):

Average age of players with 100+ MP per team:




Average age weighted by minutes played:




https://twitter.com/AllTheBucks

[mademan]

6 best teams in the league; GSW/HOU/BOS/TOR/SAS/CLE. Impressive that Toronto/Boston are doing so well when they play guys 5 -6 years younger

[Bolivar]

Dallas kind of sticks out

[TheSheriff]

Dallas kind of sticks out

Well:

[HiRez]

I think it’s more important to look at how old your star players are, or at least your starters and rookies you project to be starters, than everyone on the team as a whole. Weighting by minutes gets you part way there but not entirely. For example I’m sure David West skews the Warriors older but since he doesn’t start and isn’t expected to be part of future seasons, his age is irrelevant. What about weighting by PER or RPM or some such?

[HeartBreakKid]

Poor Dallas lol.

[Warriorfan]

3 yrs from now there may be a changing of the guard at the top as the Celtics hit prime.

[mrlancers]

Dallas kind of sticks out

Well:

[kodo]

Weird viewing Washington and Minnesota as some of the oldest teams in the league now.

[Doctor MJ]

3 yrs from now there may be a changing of the guard at the top as the Celtics hit prime.

Boston is the clear stand out on this list, and that's typically a good sign. The thing is though that to me there's no indication that they're going to have star power that rivals the best in the league, no matter whose prime we're talking about. I honestly think Celtic fans might be in some frustrating times watching their team be a bridesmaid year after year. Of course, you don't get to experience that particular flavor of frustration unless you're really damn good to begin with. One them good problems really.

[LAL]

Pretty clear correlation between being an old team and being good. Makes me question what all these rebuilding teams are thinking drafting young players. Seems like the real way to compete is to fill out your roster with late-20, early-30 year old players. Maybe the NBA should change the one and done rule to a 27 or 28 year old age minimum if they want to have a more competitive league.

[TheSheriff]

3 yrs from now there may be a changing of the guard at the top as the Celtics hit prime.

Boston is the clear stand out on this list, and that's typically a good sign. The thing is though that to me there's no indication that they're going to have star power that rivals the best in the league, no matter whose prime we're talking about. I honestly think Celtic fans might be in some frustrating times watching their team be a bridesmaid year after year. Of course, you don't get to experience that particular flavor of frustration unless you're really damn good to begin with. One them good problems really.

Well I guess that depends what you think of Tatum. That young man is about as good as you can possibly hope for a 19 year old rookie.

[IgorK]

3 yrs from now there may be a changing of the guard at the top as the Celtics hit prime.

Boston is the clear stand out on this list, and that's typically a good sign. The thing is though that to me there's no indication that they're going to have star power that rivals the best in the league, no matter whose prime we're talking about. I honestly think Celtic fans might be in some frustrating times watching their team be a bridesmaid year after year. Of course, you don't get to experience that particular flavor of frustration unless you're really damn good to begin with. One them good problems really.

As much as I'd love to agree as a fellow Lakers fan.. no. Kyrie is a legitimate superstar. If people still doubt it, they're not looking at the situation objectively.

[mademan]

3 yrs from now there may be a changing of the guard at the top as the Celtics hit prime.

Boston is the clear stand out on this list, and that's typically a good sign. The thing is though that to me there's no indication that they're going to have star power that rivals the best in the league, no matter whose prime we're talking about. I honestly think Celtic fans might be in some frustrating times watching their team be a bridesmaid year after year. Of course, you don't get to experience that particular flavor of frustration unless you're really damn good to begin with. One them good problems really.

As much as I'd love to agree as a fellow Lakers fan.. no. Kyrie is a legitimate superstar. If people still doubt it, they're not looking at the situation objectively.

Kyrie's a top 15 player in the league though probably closer to the backend of the top 10. I agree with Doc MJ; Tatum is going to have to reach superstar status for them to be legitimate contenders for a title instead of a constistent 3rd or 4th best team in the league.

[IgorK]

Boston is the clear stand out on this list, and that's typically a good sign. The thing is though that to me there's no indication that they're going to have star power that rivals the best in the league, no matter whose prime we're talking about. I honestly think Celtic fans might be in some frustrating times watching their team be a bridesmaid year after year. Of course, you don't get to experience that particular flavor of frustration unless you're really damn good to begin with. One them good problems really.

As much as I'd love to agree as a fellow Lakers fan.. no. Kyrie is a legitimate superstar. If people still doubt it, they're not looking at the situation objectively.

Kyrie's a top 15 player in the league though probably closer to the backend of the top 10. I agree with Doc MJ; Tatum is going to have to reach superstar status for them to be legitimate contenders for a title instead of a constistent 3rd or 4th best team in the league.

Even if that's the case and Hayward doesn't turn out to be superstar material (most likely scenario), their existing assets can net them another star player. They're set up for long-term success better than any other team in the East.

[Izzite]

Pretty clear correlation between being an old team and being good. Makes me question what all these rebuilding teams are thinking drafting young players. Seems like the real way to compete is to fill out your roster with late-20, early-30 year old players. Maybe the NBA should change the one and done rule to a 27 or 28 year old age minimum if they want to have a more competitive league.

Lol you’re acting like all of these good teams’ players dropped into the league at the ripe age of 27. They were drafted at a young age and developed. That’s the purpose of the one and done rule anyways, to have more time developing talent.
(I couldn’t tell if you were kidding or not)

[mademan]

As much as I'd love to agree as a fellow Lakers fan.. no. Kyrie is a legitimate superstar. If people still doubt it, they're not looking at the situation objectively.

Kyrie's a top 15 player in the league though probably closer to the backend of the top 10. I agree with Doc MJ; Tatum is going to have to reach superstar status for them to be legitimate contenders for a title instead of a constistent 3rd or 4th best team in the league.

Even if that's the case and Hayward doesn't turn out to be superstar material (most likely scenario), their existing assets can net them another star player. They're set up for long-term success better than any other team in the East.

They have the best future. But what they don't have is that guy who's top 5 in the league. Embiid can be that guy; Porzingis can be that guy; Giannis will probably be that guy. At the end of the day, the team with the best top end talent is usually going to be at the top. I like Kyrie and think Hayward is gonna fit fine; but those guys are all-stars (or high end all-stars even) and guys who are gonna be in the top 5. In the past 20 years, 2 teams have won without having one of the few of the leagues best; Spurs in 2013 and Pistons in 2004.

Maybe Tatum can be that guy. Who knows?

[scrabbarista]

As much as I'd love to agree as a fellow Lakers fan.. no. Kyrie is a legitimate superstar. If people still doubt it, they're not looking at the situation objectively.

Kyrie's a top 15 player in the league though probably closer to the backend of the top 10. I agree with Doc MJ; Tatum is going to have to reach superstar status for them to be legitimate contenders for a title instead of a constistent 3rd or 4th best team in the league.

Even if that's the case and Hayward doesn't turn out to be superstar material (most likely scenario), their existing assets can net them another star player. They're set up for long-term success better than any other team in the East.

Completely agree. Celtics' fans should be in love with their roster, coach, and front office. They don't need anyone on this roster to become a top-five talent in order find their way to a championship or two in the the next six or seven years. They can make trades, their young guys can develop, or maybe get lucky in the draft next year (or the year after), etc. They have multiple paths open to possibly winning it all.

[Doctor MJ]

Kyrie's a top 15 player in the league though probably closer to the backend of the top 10. I agree with Doc MJ; Tatum is going to have to reach superstar status for them to be legitimate contenders for a title instead of a constistent 3rd or 4th best team in the league.

Even if that's the case and Hayward doesn't turn out to be superstar material (most likely scenario), their existing assets can net them another star player. They're set up for long-term success better than any other team in the East.

They have the best future. But what they don't have is that guy who's top 5 in the league. Embiid can be that guy; Porzingis can be that guy; Giannis will probably be that guy. At the end of the day, the team with the best top end talent is usually going to be at the top. I like Kyrie and think Hayward is gonna fit fine; but those guys are all-stars (or high end all-stars even) and guys who are gonna be in the top 5. In the past 20 years, 2 teams have won without having one of the few of the leagues best; Spurs in 2013 and Pistons in 2004.

Maybe Tatum can be that guy. Who knows?

Yeah to me this is the bottom line. I'm not saying anything is impossible, but you typically win championships win you have a guy who has a case for best player in the game, and Boston doesn't have that.

I'll add that while I'm not looking to put personally place a ceiling on Tatum, the idea that he could become a player on that level is new to me, and I personally wouldn't bet on it.

As for Ainge pulling off another heist, well look, I would indeed bet on Ainge pulling off another KG level move before he's done, but those don't become available every year simply because you wish them to. Maybe that happens, but certainly not something people should be counting on. I understand they have assets, but it's not that easy.

[Warriorfan]

3 yrs from now there may be a changing of the guard at the top as the Celtics hit prime.

Boston is the clear stand out on this list, and that's typically a good sign. The thing is though that to me there's no indication that they're going to have star power that rivals the best in the league, no matter whose prime we're talking about. I honestly think Celtic fans might be in some frustrating times watching their team be a bridesmaid year after year. Of course, you don't get to experience that particular flavor of frustration unless you're really damn good to begin with. One them good problems really.

As much as I'd love to agree as a fellow Lakers fan.. no. Kyrie is a legitimate superstar. If people still doubt it, they're not looking at the situation objectively.

Everyone had their own criteria for superstar.
By some measures Isiah Thomas had a better season than Irving this year and was a distant 5th for the MVP.