2003-2004 NBA Season (1 Viewer)

[Seth Paxton]

I think Del Harris' tentative coaching is what did that squad in.

While he seems like a likeable guy, I have to agree.



Kobe to Memphis...I can see that. Frankly, I think that whole situation is one big mess right about now. And for Payton's pay LA won't find a better player, same for Karl. It's not like either is a big cap hit that could help loosen things up in the market.


Really though, the whole expansion draft, then FA/trades situation, plus realignment makes this offseason a real fog IMO.

I do predict that DET at least keeps Sheed if not somehow also Okur (numbers won't work it appears). That's just about the only team that will look the same for certain IMO. Maybe the Spurs stay put as well.

 

[Seth Paxton]

Home team fans...

Well, I love the Pacers and the Colts, BUT as I said I rooted for LA over Boston despite Bird being a Hoosier. I just didn't like them for whatever reason and really enjoyed the PLAYERS on LA's roster - Kareem, Magic, Worthy, Scott, Rambis, etc. In the pre-Shaq era especially LA was my favorite "good" team while the Pacers usually lost 60 games. :frowning:


Also the home baseball team here is Cincy. Indy was their farm club for years and Cincy is just 80 miles down the road, by far the closest MLB park. But when I was old enough to care I had moved from Pittsburgh and naturally hated Cincy as a Pirates fan, and then the Reds beat NY in a WS in which Cincy was the Big Red Machine favs and everyone I knew just loved them.

So I went against it instead. NY was not "the" team at the time and had been in a long losing spell till 76, so to me they kinda were likeable underdogs. The 78 comeback really solidified it for me and I've been with them ever since.


I also was a Pats fan up until about 87 when the Colts had a decent year and had finally been around long enough to be the home team. Plus my fav Pats guys started retiring or got traded and then they changed the jersey. Being in the AFC East with the Colts only made it worse and by the time Bledsoe and Coates were hooking up I hated them.



I think there are plenty of good reasons to like teams outside your city, though its tough as a kid to not come to root for the home town team if there is one. Once you are in your 20's and perhaps move, all bets are off. No way I would root against the Colts or Pacers ever. Luckily I had a thing for the Astros (my 2 fav NL teams are HOU and CHI) and Rockets (liked them as LA's rival and The Dream era) to a lesser extent before moving to Houston for a few years.

If I moved to LA it would be a cold day in hell before I rooted for the Dodgers, though if the Lakers altered their roster quite a bit I could come around on that being a former fan.

God forbid I'd ever have to move to Boston though, I even hate the Bruins.

 

[Seth Paxton]

just that his KNOWN gambling was bad enough to generate serious buzz about such a plan

Haggai, serious as in "a lot of". He was such a well-known gambler than many people began to bring this conspiracy up and it was much discussed even if few ever thought it could be legit.

 

[Seth Paxton]

Could be Seth, but I do think you are ignoring match-ups in this purely comparison-based approach.

Yes, but this is why I invoked FAIR PLAY.

IF an LA win over DET was going to prove that the top 3 East teams were just also rans, then certainly the reverse should be true.

I think a case could be made that a healthy Cassell could have got Minny to the Finals and been a different matchup. However, I don't think any West team has a serious edge over either DET or INDY. Only NJ has a style of play that makes them partially vulnerable. They are more like a straight gamble and when it works they kick butt, when it doesn't they have big trouble.

Obviously NJ lacks the size that DET does, but then DET hasn't really gone with doubling Shaq and throwing all that size at him like most people thought they would.

Of course different teams mean different coaches and approaches. However, Indy plays defense in a style very similar to DET, with DET having the shot blocking edge only. After all, both teams do have the Carlisle connection and Brown has still spent less time with the core of the team than Rick did. DET was a defensive team before Brown showed up after all.


Anyway, MY point by MY logic is that Indy was a legit 61 game winner, proven by the fact that the team that beat them likely could have won more games had Sheed been there all year and might have actually won the division in that case, in effect being perhaps a 62-63 win team by the end of the season. And this is partially proven by the fact that DET is on their way to winning the title.

Records DO mean something and 55+ wins also means something, as does 20-8 (and DET also had a winning record against the West). It was wrong to dismiss Indy as a top team, or even a healthy Jersey despite the 2 previous losses. The fact is that those previous NJ teams were healthy and still won less games than Indy or DET did this year.

The improvement in DET and IND record was tied directly to the team's real improvement, and not that somehow the 2004 East was worse than the 2002 or 2003 East. Maybe a few more teams were down, but basically DET and IND were doing better in the same situation than they had done before, as well as doing better against the West competition.

People blew that off as "just twisted stats" even if W/L is about as pure a stat as there is. The Finals are proving that to have been a mistake IMO.

 

[Chris Farmer]

It does make for an interesting set of questions, how would Team X match up against Team Y in the Finals. From the West, had SA or Minny advanced instead of LA, I'm gonna agree with Casey that Minny would have the easier time of it. THey have more offensive options and are more diffuse through them, with Garnett, Spreewell, Cassell, Hudson (hey, if we're gonna let Minny advance over LA, they have to get at least Cassell and Hudson is fair, they definitely don't beat LA without both as we saw ), etc. Detroit would probably struggle mroe defensively against them, because they can't lock down Minny as easily as LA's role players. Minnesota just has too many offensive options for them to be locked down as completely as the Lakers. Minny is also much younger and more athletic, and are better equipped to be able to keep up with Detroit. I'm not sure if they could win, but I think Minny would actually provide a better match up with Detroit then LA has.

The Spurs are a more interesting possibility to analyze because of how close SA and Detroit are in philosophy. This isn't surprising, because Popovich got started as an NBA coach under Brown when Larry was still coaching the Spurs, and the two are still close friends. SA is a tough, hard-nosed, defensive oriented, grind it out team, just like Detroit. They play with a strong team mentality, although they do revolve more around a single player in Duncan, whereas Detroit plays a more diffuse offensive game overall, with many players getting involved. It would definitely be a slow, ugly series, making last year's Spurs-Nets finals look like the Kings-Mavs by comparison. However, the Spurs do have several flaws that are similar to the same ones that Detroit has exploited to such success against LA. They're more limited offensively then the Timberwolves, with the offense running through Duncan first, and Parker second, similar to Shaq-Kobe. They do have a better colleciton of role players overall, especially with Manu on the court, but it definitely would allow the Pistons to lay out a similar defensive scheme to the one that has absolutely stymied the Lakers. That said, from a player perspective, I think the Spurs are better equipped to deal with it. They're younger, more athletic, and play a better team game then LA, which would help with some of the isolation that Detroit has done so well. Where the Spurs would get killed, though, is in the coaching. I think for raw ability, the first two games of the LA-SA series showed a pretty good idea of where the balance lies, but the last four showed why Pop is a good coach, but not yet a great one. The Lakers got in the Spurs' head and ripped them apart. Even when the Spurs could keep up, the Lakers made them think they couldn't and there went the series. Pop never was able to make the adjustment to the mental angle of the series, and it was a huge flaw in the Spurs that the Lakers exploited with impressive agility. Brown I think is an even better coach then Jackson, so if Pop couldn't keep up with Phil, Larry would run rings around him. That said, the Spurs are also in a better position defensively to slow down Detroit, with Duncan in the middle, and Parker, Manu, and Bowen on the wings, they're definitely capable of putting the pressure on in a way that LA hasn't maintained. But, this is all on paper. That mental fragility is a huge factor that I think would hurt the Spurs, and already has.

It's all pointless sure, but it is kind of fun to speculate.

 

[Brandon_T]

Hey Guys,

I haven't been able to post lately as I have taken the wife and my newborn on a 1300 mile trip to see my parents and my grandmother whose health is rapidly declining.

I really can't believe that the Pistons are this close, but they must maintain the focus for one more night and win this thing at home. You guys have pretty much covered everything so there isn't to much to say. I think more than anything, from my perspective, the Pistons have just out hussled and outworked the Lakers for the majority of the series.

A couple of points:

One of the oldest bits for the last year has been the stupid Carmello vs. Darko debate. We all have our opinions, I am in Joe D.s corner in supporting the Darko pick, hell I rooted for it on draft night. I think that Scott here is wanted Carmello, to each their own. I do think that should the Pistons win the title, it kind of is a moot point. Everyone says well if the Pistons had Melo, then they would have not had such a hard time against IND. Then it was going into the finals, if the Pistons had Melo, they would be able to score with the Lakers. Well, now does anyone here think that Melo would play the Defense on Kobe that Prince does? Sure, Prince would still be on the team, but for him to play that much d, someone would have to sit, who would that be? I think that should the Pistons win the title, this takes pressure off of and buys a couple of years for Darko to progress and show us what he has.

Couple of story lines from the Pistons. These are all assuming the Pistons win the championship, which I don't.

Elden gets his ring against his old team that he is still very bitter about them getting rid of him.

Lindsey gets a ring with the Pistons after being traded away twice.

Rasheed gets his ring against the team that haunted him so much in the west, and had that melt down against.

Larry Brown, finally gets his, and is the first coach to get a NBA title and a NCAA title.

Mr. Davidson, One of the nicest owners you will come against, and most generous. There was an article here that talked about how he is one of the most generous individuals in the country. He was the first owner to buy the team a plane, built the first of the modern day arenas in the Palace of Auburn Hills. And finally would be the first owner to have two championships the same season, the Lightning and the Pistons.

Since I am down here in Florida, I dont get to watch the games with all my friends like I normally do, and will most likely be watching it alone, not as fun as normal, but I hope they can close it out. I have really enjoyed all the chat, debate and the mature nature in which most of the discussions have taken place.

Brandon

 

[Scott Merryfield]

One of the oldest bits for the last year has been the stupid Carmello vs. Darko debate. We all have our opinions, I am in Joe D.s corner in supporting the Darko pick, hell I rooted for it on draft night. I think that Scott here is wanted Carmello, to each their own. I do think that should the Pistons win the title, it kind of is a moot point.

Yes, I definitely wanted Detroit to take Anthony before the draft, after the draft, and even today. This does not mean that I do not think that Dumars has done a terrific job in rebuilding the Pistons -- he has. I was delighted when Detroit hired him to run the team, and I am still very happy that he's in charge. However (you just knew there would be a "however" ), Joe's track record on draft picks has not been as stellar as his choices in free agent signings and trades. Only two players on this roster (I'm not counting Darko, who contributes nothing right now) were Dumars draft picks -- Prince and Okur.

Dumars brilliance has been in knowing what type of players he wanted, and being able to get them through trades and free agency. He had the courage to trade the team's leading scorer and All-Star, Jerry Stackhouse, for Hamilton. I thought it was a great trade at the time (I always thought Stack was a chucker), but Dumars took a lot of heat when the deal was made.

He stole Ben Wallace from Orlando in the "sign and trade" for Grant Hill. Now, losing Hill was probably the luckiest thing that will ever happen to this team, since Detroit tried very hard to resign him. However, Dumars made the best out of a bad situation in getting both Wallace and Chucky Atkins (who would later be part of the Rasheed trade).

Joe also admitted his mistakes in the draft, and moved bad picks (Mateen Cleaves and Rodney White) while he could still get some value for them.

He also had the courage to change coaches after two consecutive division titles and 50 win seasons. He took a lot of heat for that decision, but nobody is criticizing that move now.

Finally, he stole Rasheed Wallace, giving up almost nothing to obtain him. The only risk was that Rasheed's terrible reputation would be realized in Detroit and he would disrupt team chemistry. That did not happen -- in fact, Wallace fit in perfectly with the team.

Here's hoping the Pistons have another fine game tonight and close this thing out. I do not want to see them give the Lakers any glimmer of hope. That would be a very dangerous thing to do to a team trying to win its fourth title in five years.

GO PISTONS!

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

I've got a lot of thoughts on the whole Kobe and Shaq deal, but I think I'll save those. Let me just say that if Kobe leaves, I won't miss him as much as I would've in the past.

Chris I agree with your post, regarding the different matchups that would've resulted in a Minnesota Detroit or San Antonio Detroit series.

I don't buy this idea that if Detroit wins, that all of a sudden Indiana is better than L.A. and that the East is comparable to the West. The East will have the best team, but the West is far and away the deeper conference with better teams. Its not like Detroit winning proves that Boston should've made the playoffs or anything like that. Its not like L.A. becomes a push over that anyone can beat just because they lose to Detroit...I'd hardly consider Spurs, T-Wolves and Rockets to be weaker just because a team they couldn't beat, lost.

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

I've got a lot of thoughts on the whole Kobe and Shaq deal, but I think I'll save those. Let me just say that if Kobe leaves, I won't miss him as much as I would've in the past.

Chris I agree with your post, regarding the different matchups that would've resulted in a Minnesota Detroit or San Antonio Detroit series.

I don't buy this idea that if Detroit wins, that all of a sudden Indiana is better than L.A. and that the East is comparable to the West. The East will have the best team, but the West is far and away the deeper conference with better teams. Its not like Detroit winning proves that Boston should've made the playoffs or anything like that. Its not like L.A. becomes a push over that anyone can beat just because they lose to Detroit...I'd hardly consider Spurs, T-Wolves and Rockets to be weaker just because a team they couldn't beat, lost.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

While I do not completely agree with Seth on the whole East vs. West debate, I do agree that both Detroit and Indiana are as good as any team in the West right now. I'm not as sure about the Nets, since they had two opportunities to prove themselves vs. the West in the Finals and did not play well either time. However, after those three teams the conference is not very good. It's similar to the ACC in football -- there's Florida State, and then not much else.

In support of Seth, I'm going to figure out a way to show that the University of Michigan football team should have won the national championship in each of the past 30 seasons (okay, maybe not when Demetrius Brown was the starting QB).

 

[Scott Merryfield]

While I do not completely agree with Seth on the whole East vs. West debate, I do agree that both Detroit and Indiana are as good as any team in the West right now. I'm not as sure about the Nets, since they had two opportunities to prove themselves vs. the West in the Finals and did not play well either time. However, after those three teams the conference is not very good. It's similar to the ACC in football -- there's Florida State, and then not much else.

In support of Seth, I'm going to figure out a way to show that the University of Michigan football team should have won the national championship in each of the past 30 seasons (okay, maybe not when Demetrius Brown was the starting QB).

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

Well, they shouldn't have had to share the title with Nebraska that year...of course the fact I love Charles Woodson and loathe Nebraska might factor in to my opinion just a bit.

So guess which member of the Lakers is trying to be Joe Namath now? Yep, Kobe Bryant guaranteed that the Lakers will win game 5 tonight. I actually kind of think they will too, but then I thought he'd have a big game 4 and that didn't happen so I'm not exactly hot with predictions right now.

I saw a headline at ESPN.com besides Kobe's guarantee that siad without Kobe the Lakers wouldn't be in the finals, and I agree with that absolutely. But, lets say you take Kobe off of the Lakers...are the Lakers still a playoff team? Probably they are. If you leave Kobe but take Shaq, are they a playoff team? Uh, that would be a no IMO.

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

Well, they shouldn't have had to share the title with Nebraska that year...of course the fact I love Charles Woodson and loathe Nebraska might factor in to my opinion just a bit.

So guess which member of the Lakers is trying to be Joe Namath now? Yep, Kobe Bryant guaranteed that the Lakers will win game 5 tonight. I actually kind of think they will too, but then I thought he'd have a big game 4 and that didn't happen so I'm not exactly hot with predictions right now.

I saw a headline at ESPN.com besides Kobe's guarantee that siad without Kobe the Lakers wouldn't be in the finals, and I agree with that absolutely. But, lets say you take Kobe off of the Lakers...are the Lakers still a playoff team? Probably they are. If you leave Kobe but take Shaq, are they a playoff team? Uh, that would be a no IMO.

 

[Rob Tomlin]

I don't know if the Lakers would be a playoff team without either Kobe or Shaq.

 

[Rob Tomlin]

I don't know if the Lakers would be a playoff team without either Kobe or Shaq.

 

[Haggai]

I think almost any NBA team would make the playoffs if you added Shaq to the mix. The Lakers with him, and without Kobe, wouldn't get very far in the playoffs, but they'd make it. They would blow very badly without Shaq--IIRC, their record without him when he missed a fairly large number of regular season games a couple of years ago was well under .500.

 

[Haggai]

I think almost any NBA team would make the playoffs if you added Shaq to the mix. The Lakers with him, and without Kobe, wouldn't get very far in the playoffs, but they'd make it. They would blow very badly without Shaq--IIRC, their record without him when he missed a fairly large number of regular season games a couple of years ago was well under .500.

 

[Carlo_M]

While I do not completely agree with Seth on the whole East vs. West debate, I do agree that both Detroit and Indiana are as good as any team in the West right now.

ditto here.

While Indy had the best record it was, IMO, against a lot of East teams (there is no balanced schedule in the NBA). And let's not forget that the 4th seed in the East would *not* have made the playoffs, judging by record, in the West. However, based on how they gave Detroit a run for their money, even while besieged by injuries, I will give them due credit.

As for NJ, yes by their record they would have been seeded 7th in the West, so I do agree with Scott that the jury is out.

So in summation, while I do now consider Detroit and Indy legitimately good teams (with Detroit poised to be crowned the Best in the NBA), I still can't help but think of the East as a JV league ***outside*** of those two teams.

 

[Carlo_M]

While I do not completely agree with Seth on the whole East vs. West debate, I do agree that both Detroit and Indiana are as good as any team in the West right now.

ditto here.

While Indy had the best record it was, IMO, against a lot of East teams (there is no balanced schedule in the NBA). And let's not forget that the 4th seed in the East would *not* have made the playoffs, judging by record, in the West. However, based on how they gave Detroit a run for their money, even while besieged by injuries, I will give them due credit.

As for NJ, yes by their record they would have been seeded 7th in the West, so I do agree with Scott that the jury is out.

So in summation, while I do now consider Detroit and Indy legitimately good teams (with Detroit poised to be crowned the Best in the NBA), I still can't help but think of the East as a JV league ***outside*** of those two teams.

 

[Carlo_M]

I agree w/ Casey re: not missing Kobe as much as in years past if he left...***providing*** the Lakers are able to sign another elite-level player. Not necessarily a Kobe-level, but someone who would threaten to make the All-Star team every year, if not actually make it. If they get *no one* after Kobe leaves, the Lakers will be in sorry shape.