Every year its the same story, "The Spurs are old and boring," "The Spurs are just geezers," but are the Spurs really as old as the media tells us they are? We all know Tim Duncan (37) is old, although his game says otherwise, and we know Manu Ginobili (36) is seeing the last of his playing days, but other than those two the Spurs are actually a pretty young team. Maybe the fact that the big three have been playing together so long it gives the illusion that the entire team has aged with them.
If you take a look at the average ages of each team, there are five teams with an older average age than the Spurs. Topping the list as the oldest team in the NBA? Who else? The back to back defending champion Miami Heat with an average age of 30.3. Coming in at number three on the list is the Los Angeles Clippers with an average age of 29. Why do the Spurs (average age of 28.3) get labeled as old while teams like the Clippers and Heat don't?
The argument most make is "the key players for the Spurs are old," and if you think Ginobili and Duncan are the only key players, this is true. But, if you consider guys like Kawhi Leonard, Tony Parker, and Danny Green as key players, the Spurs are relativity young. One could even argue that Leonard is the Spurs' most important piece if they look to win another title this season as they are a .500 with him not in the lineup.
If you take Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili out of the lineup, the average age of the Spurs is 27. Its time to stop trying to pull the AARP card on these guys. The Spurs have gotten younger and have somehow rebuilt without relinquishing their title of the big dogs of the West. Makes me wonder, what will they say when Duncan and Manu are retired and they're still competing at a high level?