I don't think we've realized yet how young the Pacers as a team are after the offseason moves. It's not that we filled the roster with rookies, but it's that we've taken a bunch of 30 year olds from last year's team (Foster, D. Jones, Amundson, Barbosa) and replaced them with 25 year olds.
Last year's team has an average chronological age of 27.09 (or 26.9 by my calculation), which places the Pacers in the middle of the pack according to this link. This year's team has an average age of 25.63, a number which would have placed the Pacers as the 6th youngest team last year.
Some points of interest:
* Our third oldest player is Tyler Hansbrough, at 26.7 years.
* Paul G and Lance remain our youngest players, by a fairly wide margin.
* 7 of our 13 players are roughly in the 25-26 age range (round up Augustin, round down Hansbrough). Likewise, we have a bunch of guys with 4-5 years experience. We seem to be heavy on "young veterans" - guys who aren't on rookie contracts anymore, but aren't exactly grizzled vets either.
* Actually, Green and Mahinmi's years of experience are misleading. Officially, they've played 5 and 4 years respectively in the league, but both were light minute players in their career so far. Green has only totaled 3673 NBA minutes, while Mahinmi only has 1815. In comparison, Paul G has totaled 3223 minutes in his 2 NBA seasons.
* Our 2 oldest players (West and Granger) are both starters and key players for the team. No "veteran mentor" types on this squad!
Age and experience is generally correlated with winning in the playoffs, so it's a little disturbing to see us go young at a point when most are expecting us to make a move towards the ECF. Maybe the Pacers' FO doesn't believe that age is related to winning - OKC for example, is a notable exception to the general rule. But I would think that the FO knew they were potentially taking a step back by going so young.
It does cast this offseason's moves in a new light. Far from taking the next step as a team, it would seem that the FO has rebuilt the team with long term viability in mind. It's a Spurs-like move really, of keeping the core players intact while swapping the replaceable parts around. A big difference though is that the Spurs' core has proven a heck of a lot more than the Pacers' core.
All that aside, we have one of the youngest teams in the league with still some upside to improve. That's the kind of team fans like to see, right?