1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Pistons coach Michael Curry... oops. Wait.

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by slappy4428, Jun 30, 2009.

  1. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Well, people also forget that the Pistons miraculously lucked out in 2004, by making the Finals in a sub-mediocre year in the Eastern Conference, then by sheer chance facing the Lakers at the precise moment Shaq and Kobe decided to go into an infantile pissing match for control of the team, with Kobe in effect tanking the finals in a power-play shit fit aimed at forcing the team to choose between him and the Big Load.

    At that precise moment, any reasonably-decent above-.500 team could have beat the Lakers in a best-of-7 series. The Pistons happened to be the reasonably-decent above-.500 team that got to do it.

    The main aftereffects of this was that Dumars was anointed as a management genius, and Larry Brown was suddenly acclaimed as an omniscient coaching wizard. He set us straight in Athens a couple months later. :eek: :eek: ::) ::)
     
  2. sgreenwell

    sgreenwell Well-Known Member

    Malone also got hurt, which I think had the bigger effect on that team. Their bench was also really, really thin, if I recall correctly, with immortals like Medvedenko, Byron Russell and Horace Grant playing big minutes.
     
  3. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    Yep, all true; bottom line, the Pistons lucked into the 2004 title, one of the least impressive/accomplished champions in the last 20-30 years, probably dating back to the Sonics and Bullets in the late 1970s.

    Yet in the aftermath, Dumars and Brown were canonized as if they had put together some enduring juggernaut of excellence, a quasi-dynasty. Since their run is over now, the Pistons of the 2000s can be summed up as a consistently-better-than-average team -- but that's about all.
     
  4. NDub

    NDub Guest

    Are you guys fucking kidding me?

    I'm really hoping for some blue font here.
     
  5. BrianGriffin

    BrianGriffin Active Member

    I don't think Joe or Larry need to apologize for anything on their resumes. But I also beg to differ on the notion that Chauncey was done. Maybe it was a salary cap move, but if they wanted to get younger, you don't start by keeping Rasheed (33, soon to be 34 at the time) and bringing in Iverson (33).

    I think Joe's judgment has mostly been good, but when you identify Rasheed as somebody with great locker room character you can build around while you let Billups go...something's wrong with that picture.
     
  6. sgreenwell

    sgreenwell Well-Known Member

    I think Starman is downplaying the Pistons' success - it is hard to consistently make the finals and conference finals, even if you don't win - but I do agree that the year they won the championship was a combination of luck and skill. It helps that they ran into the Lakers without Malone.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page