Are We the Youngest Team in the League?
by warriorsscore110 on Feb 21, 2009 11:17 AM PST
50 comments
If you take the 17 different players who played for the Warriors or the current 15 man roster, as a whole and get an average age then we are the youngest team in the NBA. But I have been wondering what would happen if we try to find out the age of the average player we play? What I mean is we got lots of young guys on our team, but most of the time their box score reads DNP-CD, while Jackson and Crawford’s reads 40+minutes. Take a look at the total minutes played this season:
|
Age |
Games Played |
Games Started |
Total Minutes |
|
|
Stephen Jackson |
30 |
45 |
45 |
1816 |
|
22 |
50 |
50 |
1549 |
|
|
25 |
50 |
30 |
1538 |
|
|
28 |
38 |
38 |
1455 |
|
|
24 |
52 |
13 |
1261 |
|
|
29 |
36 |
19 |
1185 |
|
|
26 |
53 |
7 |
1069 |
|
|
Anthony Morrow |
23 |
41 |
10 |
762 |
|
22 |
32 |
15 |
680 |
|
|
21 |
31 |
16 |
524 |
|
|
19 |
37 |
6 |
490 |
|
|
23 |
12 |
12 |
400 |
|
|
23 |
23 |
4 |
243 |
|
|
23 |
13 |
5 |
171 |
|
|
28 |
5 |
5 |
166 |
|
|
23 |
9 |
0 |
53 |
|
|
24 |
6 |
0 |
14 |
Jackson (despite games missed) has quite a bit of a lead over anybody else, followed by Biedrins and Azibuike (note that they have both played 50 games). Crawford and Maggette pop out, seeing how many minutes they played in the limited amount of games compared to Watson and Turiaf.
At first I hypothesized that the Warriors average age of player played would be close to 27, looking at the numbers I can probably skip doing a lot of math and conclude that it would be closer to 25 or 26(maybe sometime this week, I’ll take out the old calculator and try to actually compute that number). I decided to compare that to 3 other young teams: the Grizzlies, Trail Blazers, and the Thunder. Just glancing at the numbers it is safe to say that the Grizzlies and the Trail Blazers play with younger players than us. It’s not even close. As for the Thunder it looks like it would be a close call, too close to make a guess without doing the math.
Just from that, we can drop the claim that we are the youngest team in the NBA. Does it matter what Kurz, Davidson, and Williams’s age are? Not when Nellie is trotting out Jackson, Crawford, and Maggette for 35-45 minutes a game.
We all know Nellie enough at this point to know that if we are completely 100% healthy, Nelson would trot a 7 man rotation of Biedrins, Turiaf, Jackson, Maggette, Crawford, Ellis, and Azibuike. That doesn’t exactly scream out youth. Look at the game against the Lakers. Nellie did use a 7 man rotation(not counting 2 minutes and change by Watson and a cameo by Davidson) and that was with Marco(15 minutes) and Randolph(28 minutes) playing for Azibuike and Biedrins.
Just because the average age of our roster is the youngest in the league doesn’t mean by any means that we are the youngest team in the league. Of our primary 7 man rotation that Nelson uses, every player is in their 3rd year of the league. In that 7 man rotation we see Jackson and Crawford getting the bulk of the minutes.
CONCLUSION: We are not the youngest team in the NBA.
This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!
11 recs |
50 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Didnt want to put opions in the post, but here some other random thoughts I have.
Memphis, OKC, and Portland have MUCH better young talent than us. They also play their young talent alot more than we do. Hoping that said young talent can develop and build there team around them.
With Nellie its not so much of an age factor, its an expirience factor. Biedrins, Azibuike, Turiaf and Ellis are young in age but the have a decent amount of expirienc(maybe not Buike yet). Not sure if we can expect too much growth of those players. The players we play of have more less topped out. The players that need to play more to develop stay firmly cemented on Nelson’s bench until an injury forces Nelson to use his bench(see Marco, Morrow, and Randolph.
We will probably need to be patient and let this season play out.
-warriorsvictim
by warriorsscore110 on Feb 21, 2009 11:22 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Nice post WS...
I always suspected this to be true. I remember one of the guys from Blazer’s Edge pointing out that Raef is by far their oldest player and never plays at all.
This is a great example of one of the ways Fitz annoys me (I generally like him, but he can get under my skin). He grabs on to stats like this and constantly uses it as an excuse without providing context. I always wonder if he is told by the W’s PR people to push this stuff or if it’s just natural homerism. Then it catches on like wild fire with the fans repeating it and thinking we are in a similar situation to OKC or the Blazers without realizing that, health provided, we’d be playing mostly vets.
Anyway thanks for putting some time in to take a closer look.
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Feb 21, 2009 12:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
portland is...
a few years farther in rebuilt though… i dont think we can compare our youth to theres for 1-2 more drafts….. i like what theyve done though
by tafkasam on Feb 21, 2009 4:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well i agree biedrins, buke and turiaf wont get much better… monta easily can. he is the only of the 4 who is a potential allstar. Randolph and marco will prove to be quality nba players too, with the latter potentially being an all star….Still thats alot of ifs…
but you’re right about portland. Roy is 24, but undoubtedly a superstar in making, lamarcus alridge, oden could be a great frontcourt for future, and actually bayless could be the real star of all there young players.
With alot of luck warriors end up drafting ricky rubio then we could have the young core comparable…
by tafkasam on Feb 21, 2009 3:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
nice post
I was thinking the same thing and considered making that claim in response to someone who claimed we dont need to add any more pieces, but just wait for our young guys to develop because “we’re the youngest team in the league!” But I was too lazy to do the legwork. Rec’d!
"It’s a hobby of mine. Kind of like collecting your fingernail clippings or pooping in jars." -olympic mike
by sam23 on Feb 21, 2009 11:24 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Heh
Your conclusion statement makes the rest of the post sound long-winded BUT it’s an interesting study none-the-less.
by GoldenStateGuerrero on Feb 21, 2009 11:31 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Nice job, WS110
We need more diaries like this.
Based on your numbers (and subject to rounding errors) the average Warrior player, weighted by PT, is 25.6 years old. Still damn young. I’ll leave it to you work out that figure for the other 29 teams… ;-)
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Feb 21, 2009 12:20 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
p.s.
Anthony Randolph is freaking 19!!!!!
Just thought I’d point that out.
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Feb 21, 2009 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Did I get lost...
and end up in math class? =P
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Feb 21, 2009 12:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ouch.
Did you have to post that? It’s kind of painful reading that now. Somehow that dubbadown dude (where are they now?) managed to fully stir my inner prick-nerd. If I could, I’d take back everything except the cool pie charts…
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Feb 21, 2009 12:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Haha
I thought the whole thing was pretty funny, but it may be true that you have mellowed over time.
I consider it a classic. It belongs in the GSoM wing of the Smithsonian. What? There’s no GSoM wing of the Smithsonian? that’s lame…
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Feb 21, 2009 1:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sleepy,
can yo do me a solid and shoot me an email, I have a question to ask you
We will probably need to be patient and let this season play out.
-warriorsvictim
by warriorsscore110 on Feb 21, 2009 1:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
damn
those pics look hella hot
30 Y 197 cm 115 kg 0 IQ
by Lat We N Trash on Feb 21, 2009 2:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You had to research to find that out?
I think a lot of Warriors fans already knew that Nellie wasn’t our youngsters, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out. The whole season there’s been a ton of people saying things like, “Why the hell doesn’t that fat bastard play Wright?!?! (Or Randolph, Morrow, Belinelli etc)”.
Also, you’re saying that we’re not the youngest team in the NBA because we don’t play the youngsters? In my opinion, we are the youngest team in the NBA.
Part of being a young team means that you have players that are not ready to play. That’s why Nellie has been going with the vets a lot. A lot of teams lose games because they don’t have depth; one reason a team may not have a lot of depth is because they have a lot of young players that aren’t ready to play. When a team has a bad record in the season due to not having a lot a good bench, it could mean that it’s because they are a young team.
When you see games where Nellie only plays his veteran players, it only proves how much of a young team we are since he cant trust a lot of the youth on the team; that still sounds like being the youngest team in the league to me, when a team can’t play a lot of their players because they are too inexperienced.
CONCLUSION: We are the youngest team in the league. (At least in my opinion, lol).
I used the word ‘young’ way too many times in here, can’t think of another word for it haha.
I know what you mean, though. There was a point in the season when the Warriors were the tallest team in the NBA, but obviously it never showed on the court since Nellie always played small ball. Also, the Pistons used the be the 2nd lightest (least heaviest) team in the NBA when they had Billups, although no one really would expect that since they would always pound the ball in the paint and whatnot.
by Precise Films Productions on Feb 21, 2009 12:34 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
typo
I think a lot of Warriors fans already knew that Nellie wasn’t playing our youngsters
by Precise Films Productions on Feb 21, 2009 12:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
I wish I could rec your comment.
The youngest team moniker is not only an excuse used to describe the play on the court, but it’s also meant to describe how thin the team is in terms of players that are actually able to play NBA minutes. Moreover, we are the youngest team, and that’s why we can only play seven or eight players. And that sucks!!
We all know it’s time to give Randolph and Belinelli some legit burn. While some would argue that means we’re tanking the season, that’s bs. We all know that 15-20 minutes a piece for these guys would give the vets rest and allow us to have our best 5 on the court with fresh legs during crunch time.
Duke grad student missing the Bay but holding it down for the Dubs from afar.
by eastbayglory on Feb 21, 2009 12:52 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
It's not from the fans sometimes
Moreover, we are the youngest team, and that’s why we can only play seven or eight players. And that sucks!!
It’s usually not the Warriors fans saying that, since a lot of us know that guys like Randolph, Belinelli, Morrow, Wright etc. are very capable of competing at a good level. I personally think that every single player on this roster (except for maybe Jermareo) can be very productive on the court, that’s how deep our bench can be if they had a chance to play.
Unfortunately, where that type of quote usually comes from is the coach. Nellie just doesn’t trust his young players, and that’s where being the youngest team in the league hurts us. Nellie is the type of coach that doesn’t do well when given an inexperienced team, but he does well when given the right players (Somewhat like the 06-07 Warriors when they traded for Jackson and Harrington to pair up with Baron/Jrich/Monta etc). He’d rather stick to his regular veteran rotation since he’s too scared and unwilling to put the young guys in the game. Again, that’s where being the youngest team in the league hurts us.
by Precise Films Productions on Feb 21, 2009 1:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
I wish I could rec your comment.
You can! Just click “actions” under the comment you want to rec and then a “rec” button will appear. ; )
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Feb 21, 2009 1:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i say we are the youngest cause when you look some of our young guys are forced into being veterans
like buike turiaf is pretty young and andris is still only 22. and in games we have lost many were because a lack of experience or young mistakes
by GSW9 on Feb 21, 2009 1:14 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Precise Films -
I completely agree.
Being the youngest team doesn’t mean that the players getting 40mpg are 18 years old. It means that our two franchise players are 23 and 22. Our biggest potential comes from a 19 year old. etc.
by bradyk2 on Feb 21, 2009 1:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Looks like you will have to do the same thing for every other
roster in the league to prove your point. Otherwise you havn’t really proved anything. Don’t worry we will wait right here for you to get back….. Uh when do you think you’ll be done?
by dungeness crabdribble on Feb 21, 2009 1:59 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
give me a 3 or 4 days tops
We will probably need to be patient and let this season play out.
-warriorsvictim
by warriorsscore110 on Feb 21, 2009 2:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Just get some people to help you out so it'll be faster
Maybe 5 teams for each person to check, i’d help you out but i’m incredibly lazy. =[
by Precise Films Productions on Feb 22, 2009 12:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
young by definition, but not on the court
We still are the youngest team in the league by definition. But, like you said, that’s often not true on the court.
Your point should read: We are the youngest team by the definition, but that doesn’t excuse us from sucking.
The teams you mention play their young guys exclusively because, really, that’s all they have. The way the Warriors are constructed, a lot of your best players at the moment, are your veterans. So naturally, they get the chunk of the playing time.
by lightz0ut on Feb 21, 2009 2:20 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I think he gets that...
Everyone knows that we are by definition the youngest team in the league. I think the interesting part about this post is that it really asks the question “does that effectively mean anything?”
I think what he’s trying to do here is really create a new, more precise metric of “playing age” which actually tells you a lot more about the way a team is constructed than simply averaging the ages. Hey, this could be the new True shooting percentage or PER. I’d love to see the entire league ranked by “playing age”. It could be a really interesting stat to look at. I’m curious how closely (if at all) “playing age” correlates to winning.
Keep it coming WS110!
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Feb 21, 2009 3:01 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I can retool my parser to collect average playing age per minute sometime soon to check for chronological age weighted for minutes played. If I get it done soon, I’ll post the results.
Also interesting is something I’m working on called “starter minutes”. Some have said that Maggs is playing better because, off the bench he’s facing the other team’s second unit. I didn’t think that this was necessarily true as very few coaches wholesale sub to make sure bench players are playing against other bench players more or less exclusively. “Starter minutes” takes each matchup set and multiplies the time on court by the number of starters the other team has. For example, if Maggs was in for 8 minutes when the other team had 3 starters on the court, that would be 24 “starter minutes. If after a substitution, only one opponent starter was in for the next 3 minutes, he’d get 3 more "starter minutes”. While of course not all starters are equal and of course the drop off to backups from team to team varies, it should provide a rough guide to how often a guy is playing against the other team’s best players.
Give me a few days…
by jae on Feb 21, 2009 7:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Good stuff...
I’m really looking forward to seeing some of the numbers when your finished. Thanks for all the hard work.
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Feb 22, 2009 10:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe they meant...just maybe
the Warriors have more young players than any team in the NBA.
Hello people.
by girltothemax on Feb 21, 2009 2:29 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
even though most don't play
Hello people.
by girltothemax on Feb 21, 2009 2:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yea thats what he’s saying.
"It’s a hobby of mine. Kind of like collecting your fingernail clippings or pooping in jars." -olympic mike
by sam23 on Feb 21, 2009 3:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Just an observation
I’m a CJ Watson hater because of his ridiculously porous, indifferent defense (IMO definitely in the bottom 5 defensive players in the league)…
How the hell does he play the 5th most minutes on our team?
I know a lot of guys have been out with injuries, but DOUBLE the minutes Belinelli has? Double the minutes of B Wright? WTF?!
I’m basically at a loss for words. What does Watson bring to the table that Belinelli doesn’t? The only thing Watson does is score on wing jumpers and eff up fastbreaks… Are you telling me Marco couldn’t do that? He has been injured, but not long enough for CJ WACKSON to have double the minutes he has.
"beans"= the worst nickname ever
by dubshoops on Feb 21, 2009 3:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
early seasons injuries.....
he hasnt played much at all lately
by tafkasam on Feb 21, 2009 3:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Randolph
HE needs to play alot more due to his skill level. And Rob Kurz shouldnt even start at ALL in my opinion. Randolph has proven that he can run with the big guys and Don Nelson just needs to capitalize on that. Once again all in my opinion, feel free to agree or disagree.
by lolkrislol on Feb 22, 2009 2:11 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
This is indeed an interesting take on the situation, but it still doesn't tell the whole story
What are the similar averages for the other teams in the league? Rookies tend not to get much PT, as do raw young potential guys… lots of teams have young players sitting at the end of their bench. I’m sure there are some teams out there like Memphis and OKC who are starting their young guys because they’ve completely blown everything up, but the vast majority of teams have older guys playing the bulk of their minutes. Also, the fact that we have so many 22-23 year olds says that we don’t have any veterans to come in and play when one of our starters goes down. We have no veteran depth, which hurts us in other ways. I’d say take the average of the playing time average age and the overall average age and you’ll have a good estimate for the effect youth has on the team.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
by Dubs fan in Boston on Feb 23, 2009 8:01 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
You look at a team like Boston last year
And one of their advantages in the playoffs was they had solid veterans like Eddie House, James Posey, and PJ Brown who could come in and give quality minutes. They didn’t play a ton of minutes, but you knew they’d deliver when they came in.
"No no Nene!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB5DxNl4EB0
by Dubs fan in Boston on Feb 23, 2009 8:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I dont understand the point of your post...
Its simple math man… on average, were the youngest. You dont get that average by not being the youngest team…..cause its Math you know?
At any rate, there is a downside and upside to being the youngest. Were now experiencing the downside. Players not ready to play, players making mistakes, ‘players being a 1 trick pony’.
I posted this before, but the Trail Blazers were terrible for 3 years before their youth kicked in playing well. The Grizzlies are awful, and I know what you’re thinking " well then why did they beat the Warriors?"
Simple, our entire time has been practically on IR. OJ Mayo, Gasol, Gay etc.. they’ve been lucky to be healthy all year long. Health goes a LONG way in the NBA, when you are talking about playing 82 games.
I think we have the most D-Leaguers to NBA starters/roster spots in the NBA. We basically have to make due with what we have.
Lets not forget we are the Golden State Warriors. Not the Chicago Bulls, Boston Celtics, Los Angeles Lakers. Its really hard to make a franchise a winner. It takes YEARS. Look at the Cardinals in the NFL. Like 30 years? lol.
Its all about changing the culture, and I think were just hitting 2nd base on the whole “were playing to win, and not retire” field.
I just cant wait for the day when all the youth is in full form annihilating people in the NBA, and I can wear my 2X “TOLD YOU SO” (front) “NOW EAT IT” (Back) T-Shirt. I normaly wear a Large, but I want it to look that obvious and that ridiculous.
I’ll even organize a trip down to LA and go into Staples. It’ll be great, we can throw hot dogs at the celebrities, actually scratch that, Tony.PSD would probably get mad were putting good fuel to waste.
by sjboy on Feb 23, 2009 8:30 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Ok,
if you take the 17 players that played for the dubs(or the current 15 man roster) add their ages toghether and divide you get a numbers like 23.4(not sure exactly I left my notes at home). But when you get the age weighted on playing time I think I got something like 25.6. Thats a pretty big jump, Ill get you the numbers exactly on Wednesday or Thursday(at the lastest) with the all the numbers.
Lets not forget we are the Golden State Warriors. Not the Chicago Bulls, Boston Celtics, Los Angeles Lakers. Its really hard to make a franchise a winner. It takes YEARS. Look at the Cardinals in the NFL. Like 30 years? lol.
Not 30, it took the Cardinals about 4. Some good draft classes and the hiring of Ken Wisenhunt.
But thats exactly my point(not in this post, but in others). Who cares if we make the playoffs this year or next, if we really want to build a championship caliber team(top 8-10 teams in the league) we have to sell of our some of youth and depth for some legitment building blocks, so we can build for the future. I know your a big Rowell guy(for whatever reason), but flat out Robert Rowell knows that if he can keep this team in the hunt for the 8th seed he can sell tickets. Signing Maggette, trading for Crawford, extending Jackson and Nelson tell you that Rob Rowell’s motives are not to be a legitment contender, but to continuosly keep our team mediocre and entertaining enough so he can sell tickets.
We will probably need to be patient and let this season play out.
-warriorsvictim
by warriorsscore110 on Feb 23, 2009 9:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
very nice post man!
you really did your homework on this one..you definitely deserve a rec!
I hop up out the bed, turn my swag on and then do the stanky leg...yeaaaaahhh I'm gettin' Arab money!!
by ItsDatFriscoSwag415 on Feb 23, 2009 9:11 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
What is our age based on average years of NBA experience?
I think is the most important stat, not years out of the womb. Someone like LeBron would seem to bring the number down for his team, but he has been in the NBA for what, 4 years now?
by warriorsvictim on Feb 23, 2009 10:20 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
OK, I answered my own question
Here are the average years of NBA experience for the teams in the Pacific Division (I dont have that much time on my hands)
Warriors = 2.87 years
Kings = 4 years
Clippers = 4.8
Lakers = 4.86
Suns = 5.67
I think it is telling that the teams with the least amount of NBA experience overall have the worst records. Also, the Lakers only have 1 Rookie on their team. They are not using roster spots to develop rookies. If they want to develop a player they are building on someone with atleast a year or two in the game which gives them an advantage over a team like ours.
I think the bright spot in this statistic is that the Warriors despite having the youngest team have the most potential to improve and do not have close to the worst record.
I am willing to bet this is true even if you calculate the averages for the entire NBA
I say go Dubs. Maybe we are on the right track afterall
by warriorsvictim on Feb 23, 2009 11:11 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Nice work,
I agree that years of expirience is important. Azibuike, Beidrins, Ellis, and even Watson are not much older than the other rooks’ and sophs’ but the year or 2 they have playing under their belt for Nellie obviously puts them ahead of the curve.
However I think raw age is in fact more important because with youth comes the the promise of development…
We will probably need to be patient and let this season play out.
-warriorsvictim
by warriorsscore110 on Feb 23, 2009 11:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
FYI
above numbers are for current roster
by warriorsvictim on Feb 23, 2009 11:11 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Good find
That stuff is pretty interesting. Although I disagree with the first comment saying that our youngsters are leveling off and will not see as much progress. Yes, monta, andris, and others are gaining loads of experience, but they still have much more room to improve in their game. And I think that all of our players have extreme potential to improve on their current skills as well.
Gonna hopefully roll to clippers game tonight.
By the way I’m giving away free music at my site if anyone wants it. Just click on my name.
by melbo on Feb 23, 2009 12:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
nellie's a loser
and that is yet ANOTHER problem with him in charge—a coach pushing 70 cannot relate to professional players in their early 20’s.
and if it weren’t for all of the face fat smoothing out his wrinkles—like a suction cup smoothing out dents in an auto body shop—he’d look a hell of a lot closer to 80.
by nelliehater on Feb 23, 2009 12:36 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Age ain't nothin' but a number...
Scott Skiles is in his 40’s and I guarantee you that Nellie can relate with his players better than he can.
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Feb 23, 2009 2:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
if we draft rubio or griffin
i say fuck it, go full youth, dump anyone who good young players a la portland and reap the benefits in the future.
infact while we’re at it lets get kevin pritchard from portland or sam presti from ok city… they seem to know how to build a young team
by tafkasam on Feb 23, 2009 2:48 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
