As always, not criticism or correction (well, maybe a minor semantic one) but curiosity and elaboration:
"Interestingly, very few of the players are in their peak years - most are either approaching or receding that peak."
You are right but how unusual is this for such a "mixed field" concept? I would count five players in their peak years, six receding ones and five juniors - where "on the rise" may be more accurate (or flexible-vague) than "approaching ... that peak". Approaching could be interpreted as "already close, they may gain 20-30 additional rating points but not more than that" - I don't think this is your intended meaning.
At their peak: Carlsen, Giri, Duda (unless he, youngest non-junior, is still considered "approaching"), Le Quang Liem, Saric (he had 2700+ intermittently but 2668 is about his average rating over many years).
Still improving: obviously the juniors Erigaisi, Keymer, Niemann (some would put a question mark, I don't), Pragg, Yoo.
Receding: Aronian (maybe harsh but he's 70 points below his peak rating and the oldest one but for Ivanchuk and Gelfand), Wojtaszek, Navara, Gelfand, Ivanchuk.
How could they get more players "in their peak years"? Obviously by inviting more current world-top players, but sub-2700 players are (exception Saric) invited because they were much better in the past or are expected to become much better in the (near) future.
Players rated 2650-2700 "in their peak years" might be the likes of Swiercz, Nyzhnyk (former prodigies - "rising stars that quit rising"), Guseinov, Kovalenko, Salem, Oparin, Predke - only Oparin might "make sense"?
Further players rated 2650-2700 and well above 2700 earlier: Inarkiev, Kryvoruchko, Kasimdzhanov, Matlakov, Korobov, Najer, Jakovenko - only Kasimdzhanov may have the "status" of those who were invited?
[I include Russians - Oparin recently changed federations and is now representing the USA. Not clear whether lack of Russians in this field is "by design".]
As always, not criticism or correction (well, maybe a minor semantic one) but curiosity and elaboration:
"Interestingly, very few of the players are in their peak years - most are either approaching or receding that peak."
You are right but how unusual is this for such a "mixed field" concept? I would count five players in their peak years, six receding ones and five juniors - where "on the rise" may be more accurate (or flexible-vague) than "approaching ... that peak". Approaching could be interpreted as "already close, they may gain 20-30 additional rating points but not more than that" - I don't think this is your intended meaning.
At their peak: Carlsen, Giri, Duda (unless he, youngest non-junior, is still considered "approaching"), Le Quang Liem, Saric (he had 2700+ intermittently but 2668 is about his average rating over many years).
Still improving: obviously the juniors Erigaisi, Keymer, Niemann (some would put a question mark, I don't), Pragg, Yoo.
Receding: Aronian (maybe harsh but he's 70 points below his peak rating and the oldest one but for Ivanchuk and Gelfand), Wojtaszek, Navara, Gelfand, Ivanchuk.
How could they get more players "in their peak years"? Obviously by inviting more current world-top players, but sub-2700 players are (exception Saric) invited because they were much better in the past or are expected to become much better in the (near) future.
Players rated 2650-2700 "in their peak years" might be the likes of Swiercz, Nyzhnyk (former prodigies - "rising stars that quit rising"), Guseinov, Kovalenko, Salem, Oparin, Predke - only Oparin might "make sense"?
Further players rated 2650-2700 and well above 2700 earlier: Inarkiev, Kryvoruchko, Kasimdzhanov, Matlakov, Korobov, Najer, Jakovenko - only Kasimdzhanov may have the "status" of those who were invited?
[I include Russians - Oparin recently changed federations and is now representing the USA. Not clear whether lack of Russians in this field is "by design".]