Too old to rock in the NBA playoffs? Not these Spurs

Last year’s NBA playoffs seemed to be such a changing of the guard. Out with the old—very old, the way some of the more veteran contenders went out—and in with the new. The time had come for the Thunder, Heat and Bulls. Time had run out for the Celtics, Lakers and Spurs.

Oh, those Spurs. Wheezing their way out of the 2011 postseason, the No. 1 seed in the West bounced by the No. 8 Grizzlies. Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker, slow, hobbling, done. And now, a year older.

Those Spurs … your 2012 NBA champions.

Yeah, it’s a little bit of a trendy pick, seeing as how the Spurs have lost two games since mid-March and somehow stretched past the Thunder for home-court in the West. But these Spurs are trendy for a reason, a lot of them, actually.

Not really. Guessing a champion this year is even more of a crapshoot than last year, when absolutely nobody outside of Mark Cuban’s household picked the Mavericks to win it all. As Sean Deveney pointed out, there are a million variables in play this year that usually aren’t, many of them resulting from the lockout, and no team went untouched by them.

It’s not that hard to find ways for Miami, Chicago and Oklahoma City to lose. Yes, for the Spurs, too, if only because of last spring. Yet there are so many signs that these Spurs are not like last year’s.

They’re also not quite like the four previous versions that won NBA titles, the last time five years ago—but they don’t really need to be. Besides, this version looks stronger than the Spurs teams since then, and that counts for a lot more.

The most critical difference: Everybody’s healthy, rested and in rhythm. In past years, when one or more parts of the main trio missed lots of time, the team never clicked well enough without them—and that’s happened each of the previous four seasons. Last season in the series against Memphis, it was Ginobili hurting all series long, and Duncan was shaking off a season’s worth of nicks, bruises and twists.

Not the case this year. Gregg Popovich, along with Boston’s Doc Rivers, did the best jobs imaginable—and the only jobs possible—nursing their aging stars through the compressed season. If not for Tom Thibodeau’s miracles getting Chicago to thrive without Derrick Rose so often, Popovich would be waved through to an easy Coach of the Year win.

The playoffs are what he aimed for—Parker, amazingly, is the only player on the roster to average 30 minutes a game—yet he managed to wring 50 wins out of the group. They’ve won 10 in a row, and shortly before that had won 11 in a row. In the first streak, they won three games in three nights; in their current run, they won three games in three nights on the road.

Credit Parker for much of that. The calls for him to get MVP consideration were legit. The 2007 Finals MVP—still easy to forget that sometimes—played so refreshed that he and his team have no reason to fear the young point guards in his path in the West. Not Russell Westbrook, not Ramon Sessions, not even Chris Paul or one of last year’s tormentors, Mike Conley (both possible opponents in the second round).

Also, credit the kind of depth that might even challenge the title teams of the past. While depth isn’t always as crucial in the playoffs as in the regular season, for this team it can only help, so good thing they have Gary Neal, DeJuan Blair, rookie Kawhi Leonard, Matt Bonner, Tiago Splitter, Danny Green and late additions Boris Diaw and Stephen Jackson.

Also: Good thing they don’t ever have to count on Richard Jefferson again.

And they have Duncan, even at 36, even after playing the fewest minutes per game of his career. (But extend his stats in the big categories out to what his minutes likely will be in the playoffs and … wow.)

You can count on LeBron James, on Kevin Durant, on Derrick Rose … or you can count on the four-time champion and three-time Finals MVP. You sure you know who you’d choose?

Especially in this season, when absolutely nothing is a sure thing? When in doubt, count on what that player, and this team, has done this year, and for a long time.

Out with the old? Back in with the old.