Lakers-Celtics: Celtics Win One for the Old Guys

Somewhere in South Texas, Robert Horry was watching P.J. Brown help change the complexion of Game One between the Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers and chuckling to himself.

See, he likely said to himself, 38-year-old guys can still play. Thanks to Kobe Bryant and the Lakers, he will have to wait until next season to do it, but the Celtics winning Game 1 suggests maybe he can.

This season, like every other one in recent memory, gullible sportswriters and analysts latched on to the youth movement and promised that a team with an average age below 27 would win the title.

And yet, here the old and slow Celtics are, three wins away from becoming the next veteran, defense-first team to make those writers look like idiots. You might not hear much about their age, but make no mistake, they are as ancient as the San Antonio Spurs or hot pants from the 1980s.

Do not let second-year point guard Rajon Rondo or fifth-year center Kendrick Perkins fool you into thinking this team has the young bug.

Youngsters Tony Allen, Glen Davis and Leon Powe provided energy off the bench during the regular season. Powe had his moments in his team's first Finals appearance in 21 years, but this night belonged to the old guys.

The ages of the key Celtics players, besides Rondo, who contributed most to the victory?

Kevin Garnett (31)

Paul Pierce (30)

Ray Allen (32)

Sam Cassell (38)

P.J. Brown (38)

James Posey (30)

And just for kicks, a look at the Lakers' three most important players (besides Not Scottie Pippen, er, Lamar Odom):

Kobe Bryant (29) is relatively young, but he is finishing his 11th season, has won three championship rings and played in every situation that a superstar can.

Derek Fisher (33) has three championships and a ton of veteran smarts.

Pau Gasol (27) is young, too. It's his first time out of the first round and into the Finals, but he has competed at every major level overseas in Spain and that counts for a lot.

The Spurs lost to the Dallas Mavericks in 2006 and an Associated Press writer attributed the team's defeat to its old age: "They lost to a team with younger, fresher legs."

The Mavs then proceeded to blow a 2-0 lead in the NBA Finals against a Miami Heat team with role players who were older than dirt.

It turned out those guys, including two-shot Gary Payton, could still play. It also turned out that the Spurs were not too old to win a championship the next season. They eclipsed the Mavs and Phoenix Suns, darling teams that amassed great regular seasons, to win their fourth in nine years.

When the Spurs failed to defend their title this year and lost to a Laker team with a youthful image, an AP writer wrote the same article but inserted a different team: "They lost to a team with younger, fresher legs."

Any writer who composed such drivel would have a tough time explaining Brown, 38, stealing momentum-changing rebounds from those young Lakers big men in Game 1. Is Brown experienced or old?

Ask Gregg Popovich. He loves that question. Maybe these writers secretly hate the Spurs or any veteran team and want to see new blood take over? They cannot believe what they are writing if history disagrees with them, can they?

Three years ago, I might have believed that the NBA was going in the direction of run-and-gun basketball and kiddos. A look at the last 10 teams to win an NBA championship, and you could go back 20 if you want, tells you what you need to win a title: a pair or trio of superstars, defense and savvy veterans who know what to do when the ball swings their way.

Nothing suggests that piling up a bunch of 23-year-olds and having them turn games into track meets will win anything—unless, of course, you prefer winning 50-60 games and losing in the first or second round.

Am I urging every team to load up on 38-year-olds? Far from it. The Lakers still have a great chance to win this series and will likely steal Game 2 in Boston.

But if these two teams are evenly matched, as most say they are, what do you say when Cassell, a guy who had a free pass to basketball's old folks home two years ago, makes three huge shots in a row. Is he experienced or old?

Just writing "the Spurs lost to a better team" is boring. Nobody wants to read such a simple analysis, do they?

The New Orleans Hornets will stick around near the top of the Western Conference, but age will not be the reason. Smart and driven, the team's star duo of Chris Paul and David West determined the only way to beat the Spurs was to play like them. They fell short this year to a deeper San Antonio team, but fans of South Texas' dynasty should be nervous.

If the Hornets continue to practice the defense-first philosophy preached by coach Byron Scott, they will go far. Instead of copying a flavor of the month, they Xeroxed the defending champion.

They might play at a faster pace for more of the game, but when they lost in the second round, offense was not the first area Paul or West addressed in the post-game interviews.

"We have to get better defensively," Paul said after his team lost 91-82. He gets it.

Teams and owners who watch the Warriors and Mike D'Antoni's "Fun-and-Gun" Suns grab all the headlines might be tempted to press the "copy" button. They will do so, and if they have talented enough players (a Carmelo Anthony or a Steve Nash), they will earn their moment in the sun.

And when they lose in the second round to a better defensive team with "old" guys, they can head to a beach somewhere and get all the sun they want. No sunscreen required.

Age has always been an overblown subject in the NBA. If a player can contribute, that is all that matters. The better team wins a seven-game series and my loose prediction says Beantown will celebrate banner No. 17 after a Game 6 or 7 victory.

If the Celtics win, it will prove that "too old" is a non-issue if the role players contribute. Then, next season, talk about the NBA becoming a younger and faster league will dominate the pre-All-Star break talk.

Does that mean any team with multiple key role players over 30 has no shot at a championship? Nah. Those writers and analysts who spread false hype need to grow up.