Remembering an Era: 2005-06

“Prince, Billups, Ben Wallace and Rasheed Wallace were All-Stars.”

Nope. Tay wasn´t. Rip was.

Lasting Memories: It’s easy to say that because the Pistons had such a successful regular season, losing in the Conference Finals was a huge disappointment. It certainly left a bitter taste, although some would tell you the Heat winning a championship was slightly, um, predetermined that season.

Wrong link perhaps? This just sends us back to basketball reference for the Grizzlies game.

And I’d like to hear you argue that losing Ben was the end of an era… and I’d like to see if that argument holds more water than the notion that not having a consistent bench since the chip run is to blame.

From my perspective, this era ended when we lost a bench that 1) provided some potent scoring options and 2) provided an intense commitment to defensive intensity.

I remember the beginning of the year, when everyone was sure that the lesson of the previous season (loss to the Spurs in the Finals) was that Detroit needed to have home court advantage all the way through the playoffs. So the regular season domination seemed exactly right. The bench was terrible, though, and the players seemed a bit tired in the Miami series. So the lesson for the future was “get a better bench,” which didn’t happen.

The four Pistons playing together (with Paul Pierce from the then-miserable Celtics) at the all-star game was very cool, though.

Ah … my bad on saying Prince was an All-Star. That’s bush league.

Re: the bench thing: they had guys on their bench who have been contributors elsewhere, but when they were here, didn’t do much. Flip Murray and Maurice Evans, on Atlanta for example, have had solid seasons. Neither of them were consistently in the rotation in Detroit. Carlos Delfino scored 9 points a game with consistent minutes in Toronto. Same with Jarvis Hayes this year in NJ (granted, for a bad team). And maybe it wouldn’t have happened here because of the pressure of being the No. 2 pick, but Darko is at least a competent third big who can block shots and rebound in the NBA. Even Smush Parker had some success post-Detroit.

I don’t really have a point with that … just pointing out that the whole “they have no bench” thing isn’t entirely true, especially when McDyess was part of the second unit for about three seasons. They had no coaches who would consistently give bench guys not named McDyess minutes, that is true. But there have been some semi-serviceable guys that were possibly capable of contributing more had they been given more opportunities.

And bgrulker, here is the correct link:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/060620

My bad again. Just a Simmons column ripping the league/Heat during the 2006 Finals.

As far as Ben being the end of the era, I am certainly glad he didn’t stay around to kill the cap. But when he went, a lot of their success defensively was exposed. Having both Wallaces in the middle hid the fact that Billups/Prince/Hamilton are not necessarily the greatest perimeter defenders. When Ben was around, the Pistons were capable of dominating teams even when their offense was horrid. When Ben left, the defense was still good, but not as dominating. When is the last time post-Ben that you saw the Palace crowd get hyped about a defensive play? Doesn’t happen anymore, and that’s all I mean by that really being an end to the era. They were certainly still among the league’s best after he left, but it just felt … weird.

hey Patrick?

thanks for the eulogies… should I wear black the rest of the week?

Maybe Michael Curry morphs into Phil Jackson and becomes the best playoff coach in NBA history … there’s a chance, right?

Patrick:

I’m still in the “they had a bad bench” camp. I don’t think the stats on other teams for, say, Delfino and Hayes, are all that impressive, given the extra minutes and shot-jacking you can do on bad teams, and beyond that those guys were always mediocre on defense. I remember the starters having huge leads in any number of games, and the bench barely being able to hold them.

Of course it’s possible they could have been better with better coaching. But we’ve now heard that Larry Brown didn’t like the bench guys, Flip Saunders didn’t like the bench guys, and Michael Curry apparently doesn’t play some bench guys enough for some posters. Look, I like Maurice Evans as much as the next guy, but he’s no Manu, Ben Gordon, Robert Horry, etc., etc.

This was an intresting yearm but I never thought the idea that sprinting for the best regular season record tired the team out. I mean most were still in there prime and in the case of Hamilton and Prince Iron Men.
Honestly though? This was the season the complacency and over-confident swagger happened. And it happened right in February. When they were roughly 37-5 (or something) and they named Rip, Chance, Sheed and Ben All-Stars. Suddenly these good players believed they were some sort of Dream Team and that it didnt matter if they struggled because they could flip the switch…..

Here’s the problem. Only the Superstar go to guy gets to the that, not the overachieving blue collar team. It doesnt work, you cant expect the whole starting lineup to flip the switch on and off and thats what they did and they continued to do so for the next couple of years…

Honestly getting those All-Star call ups was the worse thing to happen to them (in bizarre odd way because obviously I know its stupid to say that but follow me…).Instead of playing with a chip on there shoulder they developed a false sense of invincibility.

I knew during the month of March and April and in the first couple of rounds, this team wasnt gonna win the title because they werent focused even with 64 wins (Orlando game where Ben didnt come on, The Miami/Wade Meltdown that Sunday, The Knicks Loss, The Laker Loss, throwing one away to the Bucks in the he first round, underestimating the Cavs)

This always seems to happen with certain teams who become the Alpha dog of the NBA. They gain a swagger in the Playoffs and then struggle a little on the way to the title because they get overconfident (2000 Lakers and 2008 Celtics were very fortunate they just avoided this and got there shit together)

I dont think you’ll see that from the Cavs because they have witnessed (no pun intended) what overconfident swagger gets you from there opponents in the playoffs the past 3 years. Thats why I think we’re gonna see a Cavs Dynasty for the next few years. They get it, they have a gritty deep squad and focused superstar. Way too much of a deadly combination.

But thats neither here nor there. This 06 team had a title in there sights but they really undestimated there conference and namely two young players named Dwyane Wade and Lebron James.

It’ll be interesting to see how the NBA looks back on these Pistons teams of the 2000s. They put a lot of effort into crafting and shaping their history to highlight specific things and hide others. I hope we get the respect that we deserve, but I have a feeling we’ll be a small blip in the Lakers/Spurs dominance of the first half of the decade and the rise of the next wave of superstars (Wade, James) in the second half.

Garrett:

Detroit will be a blip. It might have been different if Game 7 in 2005 had turned out differently, and I think it’s unfair, but that’s my prediction.

P-P: OK, I’m going to be the designated “it wasn’t our ‘attitude’ that was the problem” guy. Detroit did get off to a fast, dominating start, and then got 4 guys named to be SECOND TEAM All-Stars. If anything, it was more of a confirmation that they weren’t a “superstar” team. You throw in some late season losses in games they could have won, but that sort of thing happens to every elite team every year. No team wins EVERY game it “should” win, and I don’t think Detroit won fewer than, say, Miami, LA, the Spurs, etc. did in this era.

Botton line: I don’t see any reason to think that in Detroit’s case, losing was because of mental issues when the physical issues were so obvious. The bench was woefully unproductive — whether that was the fault of the bench players or the fault of the coaches doesn’t matter in this context, because it put a LOT of pressure on the starters. AND Detroit had no “superstar” to carry them — or to get the calls, as the series against the Heat brutally remined us. AND the league was changing the rules to prevent the type of defense Detroit had been playing.

And, while I hated the calls Wade got, the fact is Miami peaked at the right time.

Re: the bench thing: they had guys on their bench who have been contributors elsewhere, but when they were here, didn’t do much.

…

I don’t know, Patrick. I certainly see where you’re coming from.

But, I think it ultimately comes down to how one defines productivity or contributors.

Flip Murray and Maurice Evans currently contribute offensively to a better-than-average Atlanta team — and let’s not pretend they do anything more than that. Sometimes Flip gets a steal here and there, but I don’t think that makes him a good defender. Not to mention the fact that while ATL is certainly exciting to watch, they’re not going anywhere this season or any season in the immediate future with the roster they have. They’re fun to watch, but they’re not a threat. So in short, these guys are contributing to a team that’s not really going anywhere. I’m not sure what the argument buys you at that point.

Jarvis Hayes. Sweet shooter. That’s about it. I wish he had gotten more burn in the playoffs under Flip — at least give him 5 minutes to see if he can get hot on the offensive side. But defense? Well, I think we’d all agree on that one.

I like those guys as much as anyone here likes former ‘stons players, but let’s be honest. Those guys aren’t going to put any team over the top — which is what our bench did at our best moments, because they were never committed to the defensive side of the ball and only provided streaky offensive production (hence, I agree with TJ).

So, I guess this is kind of how I’m hearing you:

“Hey, didn’t we used to have that average offensive player who comes off the bench for that decent team at some point? Why didn’t he put us over the top again?”

Forgive the sarcasm, but it makes for lively blog debates :P

Detroit will be a blip. It might have been different if Game 7 in 2005 had turned out differently, and I think it’s unfair, but that’s my prediction.

It kills me to admit this, but I agree… mostly because I think the NBA is still a business, and businesses need to make money, and superstar athletes make businesses money.

I think they could market the ‘stons as a wonderful exception to the rule — that Team is greater than I — but I don’t think they will.

Had we won two in a row, we would have been the contemporary Bad Boys — not just in the minds of ’stons fans, but everywhere. And we would have seen the Wallace brothers, Rip and Chauncey, and maybe even Tay all in the HoF.

But I’m skeptical any of that will happen, especially as I’m so biased by this season’s flameout.

I agree with Brgulker that one of the reasons that Detroit will — unfortunately and I think unfairly — be more of a blip is the whole “lack of a superstar” issue.

Then again, since 2002-03, this has been an era with a lot of arguably “blip” teams. LA wins in ‘03 but then the Shaq/Kobe team gets dismantled in all meanings of the word in ’04. Detroit then wins and almost repeats but doesn’t (and doesn’t get back to the NBA Finals). Still, the only team in this era to do better than Detroit is the Spurs; they won twice, but not in consecutive years. Miami gets a win in between, but they fall off the map afterwards. Unless Boston wins it all again this year, Detroit’s record — overall, in the playoffs, and in the finals — will be better than anybody else’s except the Spurs in the seven years from 2003-09.

Still, this will be known as the era of Kobe, LeBron, and Wade, with some obligatory nods to Duncan.

Given that there really hasnt been many consecutive champs in this decade like in the 90’s, I think Detroit’s run this decade will be remembered as how they are now. Phenomanal Eastern Conference run but could have been better. They’ll be debated about for years to come.

And a lot depends on how consistent other great teams are in the future.

P-P:

Yeah, if Boston doesn’t repeat, the Cavs don’t win 2 ‘ships in the next three years, and the Lakers and Spurs don’t get another in the next couple of years, Detroit must be considered the most successful team in this era except the Spurs. Whether Detroit could have/should have been even better will indeed be debated.

But the problem is that the NBA hypes players more than teams. So if nobody repeats soon, my guess is that the video packages of this era will still have lots of LeBron, Kobe, and Wade, some perfunctory shots of Duncan, and some “intense” KG. Hell, even if the Celtics never make it back to the Finals, I’ll bet we’ll see more of KG and/or Pierce than we will of any of the Pistons core.

Unless Chauncey brings a couple of ’Ships to Denver. . . .

I never get tired of watching that Ben Wallace block … the other big block was the Prince/Miller one. That one remains tied @ #1 overall with the Joe Dumars block/save … both were in championship years … both were game-savers.

@ 6:08, relive the glory of Joe’s fantastic defensive play.

bgrulker:

The sarcasm is fine. I’ve been used to “OMG, your an idiot, LOLZ” on MLive, so reasoned responses, even if they make fun of me, are a welcome change.

As for the point, I agree, those guys were certainly useless defensively, but I think that was known before they came (maybe not with Delfino, but certainly with Murray and Jarvis). They were brought here to score, and they have scored at least moderately well when other teams have played them consistently.

So again, I think that failure lies more with coaching/management than the players. If you are bringing guys who don’t play defense in and expecting them to learn to play defense, it seems like a waste. Good teams/systems let guys use the talents they do have.

Look at Roger Mason on the Spurs this year. That guy isn’t a good defensive player, he’s a shooter. They let him shoot and he is moderately productive for them. The Cavs do the same thing with Wally … when he is in the game, they put him in to score. I think the mistake was that guys like Murray were signed thinking they would replace what Mike James did, which was just silly. The players changed but the roles they were asked to play didn’t.

Look at Roger Mason on the Spurs this year. That guy isn’t a good defensive player, he’s a shooter. They let him shoot and he is moderately productive for them. The Cavs do the same thing with Wally … when he is in the game, they put him in to score. I think the mistake was that guys like Murray were signed thinking they would replace what Mike James did, which was just silly. The players changed but the roles they were asked to play didn’t.

That’s a very good point.

So, would the point be, then, that Joe D did make ‘appropriate’ moves to improve our bench — but the error is that he misjudged what was ‘appropriate’ in terms of winning?

I’m hoping that once Tay retires, the 2003-2006 Pistons starting lineup will sign up to play in, say, New Zealand as the starting five for a team there.

“Prince, Billups, Ben Wallace and Rasheed Wallace were All-Stars.”

Hopefully one day Prince will be an all-star but it was Rip that was an all-star that year not Prince.

I know Diablo, it was noted above. Again, my bad.