2004 Pistons vs 2014 Spurs

[Myth]

2 well rounded teams that that have a bunch of solid players and stars, but not all-stars. Who wins?

[oh the horror]

I was thinking about this the other day...


What a damn series that would be.

[Foster5k]

04 Pistons. They destroyed a 04 Lakers squad that had Kobe Shaq Payton Malone, etc. They just had the over-all better team. Larry Brown was also a great coach that could make the right adjustments when needed.

[Lebronxrings]

14 spurs. No way that pop loses this series.

[played0ut]

payton and malone were on their last legs.

kobe/shaq were having their chemistry issues, plus RL was ****ing up Kobe's play.

[1987_Lakers]

04 Pistons. They destroyed a 04 Lakers squad that had Kobe Shaq Peyton Malone, etc. They just had the over-all better team. Larry Brown was also a great coach that could make the right adjustments when needed.

If I remember correctly, Karl Malone was injured during the Finals, Payton was never a good fit for LA, and the Lakers had that whole Shaq-Kobe feud. They were far from a dominant team, any Laker team from 00-02 would have beaten '04 Detroit in a series.

I like the 2014 Spurs in a series, they are more balanced.

[played0ut]

gary payton had a lot of trouble picking up the triangle.

[1987_Lakers]

gary payton had a lot of trouble picking up the triangle.

Ya, and his defensive skill diminished greatly by 2004.

[Twiens]

Spurs Offense vs Pistons D

:bowdown:

[Myth]

04 Pistons. They destroyed a 04 Lakers squad that had Kobe Shaq Payton Malone, etc. They just had the over-all better team. Larry Brown was also a great coach that could make the right adjustments when needed.

I respect your opinion and I'm unsure myself, but that post could pretty much apply to the 2014 Spurs:

"14 Spurs. They destroyed a 14 Heat squad that had LeBron Wade Bosh Allen, etc. They just had the over-all better team. Gregg Popovich is also a great coach that could make the right adjustments when needed."

[Rubio2Gasol]

Great Matchups, I favor the Pistons slightly becuase I think what they were capable of defensively is harder to play against than what the Spurs do offensively....if that makes any sense.

When you start relying on small time guys for shots, I tend to favor teams with better defence.

Rip and Chauncey are probably the better shot makers in the series too.

Rules of course make a difference, Rasheed would get thrown out every game :lol

[9erempiree]

Give me these guys. The also set a record in 04, I believe consecutive games holding opponents to 70 points I believe. Something crazy like that.

Also,
http://www.tumblr.com/photo/1280/simplybasketball/1326098882/1/tumblr_labafxnkYr1qdi785

[TrueRob]

I think Parker & Kawhi would have a bad series against the '04 Pistons. I don't see those two getting to the rim much against the two Wallaces. '04 Pistons would win IMO.

[Rodmantheman]

Spurs in 7

[Odinn]

It is a too tough matchup for 2013-14 Spurs.

They wouldn't be able move the ball this well because the Pistons didn't play that many minutes. The Spurs are comfortable against the Heat because the wings can go to painted area whenever they want. That wouldn't be this easy againt Wallaces.

Plus, I can see 38 year-old Duncan struggling against Wallaces.

[Rocketswin2013]

Lol Sheed ALWAYS trashed old man Duncan when they played. A prime SHEED vs. AN OLD DUNCAN? :roll: :roll:

[Bigsmoke]

Um mm...

I dont know. Imma pick tbe 2004pistons because they don't have to worry about Manu like they did in 05. Pistons beat an old and unfocused Lakers team but beating a tired and old Heat team isn't that much of an accomplishment

[Bigsmoke]

Lol Sheed ALWAYS trashed old man Duncan when they played. A prime SHEED vs. AN OLD DUNCAN? :roll: :roll:

Parker is the Spurs best player now. Shutting down Duncan can't stop the spurs anymore like in the past. Ben Wallace would cut a lot of Parkers drives tho

[gin17]

Pistons. the spurs cant move the ball as well as they are doing in this heat series. parker will have to drive through billups, and when does get to pass, the wallaces are waiting.

prime sheed > old duncan

piston can stop all the spurs' positions, may it be PG, SG, SF, PF, C. maybe only kawhi can be the difference maker

[longtime lurker]

2004 Pistons were a deep and stacked team. They had a future all star coming off the bench for christ's sakes.

[ZMonkey11]

The Pistons had too much D for this current version of the Spurs. Shit, the Pistons should have taken a younger Spurs team in 05, except old man Horry pulling some miracle moves out of his ass.

Pistons give the Spurs the D in 6.

[allball]

that 2004 team was much tougher than the Heat defensively and a good ball sharing team. the 2005 team that lost to Spurs (in one of the closest finals ever) was not as good defensively as 2004.

all that said it would be close and Larry Brown on a good day is no Spoelstra.

[lakerstekkenn]

spurs easy sweep

[DFish24]

Pistons in 5

[riseagainst]

I would take the 04 Pistons over any team in NBA history besides the 86 Celtics.

[Straight_Ballin]

I would take the 04 Pistons over any team in NBA history besides the 86 Celtics.

The 04 pistons would get beat by the 96 bulls

[riseagainst]

The 04 pistons would get beat by the 96 bulls

no they wouldn't.

[allball]

they couldn't handle the 89 or 90 Pistons. not playing by 90s rules.

[allball]

I would take the 04 Pistons over any team in NBA history besides the 86 Celtics.

they couldn't handle the 89 or 90 Pistons. not playing by 90s rules.

[inclinerator]

dont think the pistons can score enough against the spurs

[Eye Test]

2004 lakers were HORRIBLE, spurs win in 5

[Artillery]

With modern rules, half the Pistons team would foul out before the 4th quarter. Pre-2005 rules, Pistons have a good chance but it's not like the Spurs are a bad defensive team either. They were a top 3 defense this year.

[RedBlackAttack]

If the Spurs solidify this season with a resounding victory on Sunday, they'll be on a very short list of the best individual teams I have ever seen. The '04 Pistons aren't on that list.

We're talking the gold standard... 1986 Celtics; 1992 & '96 Bulls; 1989-90 Pistons; 2001 Lakers.

Their performances on the biggest stage are approaching that rarefied air.

[6 for 24]

That 2004 Pistons team went from being very underrated to very overrated. We all know the story-- Shaq was unwilling to "pass the torch" to an up and coming Kobe, and refused to run the Kobe system that led to so many victories. True, Kobe managed to put up a respectable 27.6 PER (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=324201")™ in that series, but given that the Pistons had no one who could guard him, he should have been taking 30 or 40 FGA at least. Luckily the Lakers did the right thing and unloaded Shaq in that offseason and Kobe started putting up record numbers immediately following.

So I don't think that team was very good.

Now, these 2014 Spurs on the other hand... I just don't like the way they play. It is very unlike what I'm used to seeing from Kobe & the Lakers AKA "winning basketball". I mean, the series is almost over and we don't even know who the Finals MVP is. Basketball needs a pecking-order where one guy "eats first" and everyone else falls in line. These Spurs are making a mockery of the system.

Worse still, there are three white guys in the regular rotation, which is two over the NBA mandate, I believe. So that just seems like they are being cocky.

I forgot what the question was.

Warmest regards,

Ayotunde Ndiaye

[brantonli]

the easiest comparison is to look at how the 14 spurs matchup with the closest thing to 04 Pistons now, unfortunately the only close comparisons might be the Grizzlies or the Bulls...I didn't watch a lot of Pistons basketball at all, except knowing for their grind it out system. How did the Pistons fair against the Suns for example?

going from 2003 to end of of 2006 as a cut off point:

Pistons were 5-3 against the Suns between 2003-2006. Not a large sample by any means, and the Spurs are far better defensively than the suns then.

[GimmeThat]

2004 lakers were HORRIBLE, spurs win in 5


I might understand this statement more, if it came from the man no other than Steve Nash himself.

[deja vu]

2014 Spurs. It's close though.

Kobe handed the title to the Pistons on a silver platter. :lol

[Rake2204]

As always, it is interesting to see how history treats certain events and occurrences. There was virtually no one, at the time, who felt the 2004 Lakers were awful or horrible. There was acknowledgement that their season had been an interesting one (with Kobe's scandal) but it did not seem to prevent people from believing they were going to steamroll the Pistons in the Finals.

My memory of that Lakers team before the Finals was of Kobe & Shaq both dominating, which led to defenses attempting to double or lockdown, which then led to other guys stepping up (I recall Kareem Rush going off against Minnesota).

Googling "2004 NBA Finals Predictions" can sort of help clarify the prevailing thought at the time (though many articles no longer exist). NBA.com's story captured things pretty well (http://www.nba.com/2013/history/05/17/2004-pistons-win-championship/):


Facing a heavily favored Lakers team, the Pistons were no match for L.A. -- on paper. With All-Stars Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant as well as future Hall of Famers Karl Malone and Gary Payton -- both in the twilight of their careers in search of their first championship -- the Lakers were expected to easily dispatch the Pistons for their fourth title in five years.
It goes both ways though because similarly, the Pistons were not considered star-studded at that time. Their actions in those finals led them to being referred as such in subsequent years. Just interesting to see how perceptions change over time.

Anyhow, on topic, I'm having a difficult time reconciling with how the Pistons' game pace would match that of San Antonio's. It'd be an interesting match. I could see San Antonio's ball movement befuddling the Pistons a little.

[GimmeThat]

I'm guessing no one remembers the fact that Malone was injured for the finals?

with that being said I probably still take the 2004 Pistons over the 2014 Spurs. Tayshuns wingspan on the defensive end, Rip Hamilton's jumper compared to Parker. Billups 3 point shot compared to Manu.

Rasheed on Duncan, then Ben Wallace roaming around.


I think people act as if the Pistons won the finals then disappeared.

They were young and made it to the ECF consistently a few times after.


Pretty sure if Duncan doesn't win the FMVP this year, it "should" prove that I am right. And even if he does, it's just an argument up for grab.

[JohnMax]

So how did the Pistons lose to the 2005 Spurs, 2006 Heat, 2007 Cavaliers?

[Indian guy]

The '04 Pistons have to be the single most overrated team of all time. They won 54 games in a pedestrian EC, were incredible defensively but below average on offense, barely made it out of the EC(even trailed NJ 3-2), and beat a good-but-dysfunctional Laker team on its last legs. Never at any point of that season or even quickly after it was Detroit spoken about in historical terms. But they've become this mythical superpower in recent years. They get favored over EVERY single team that won a ring after them. Why do people turn into such nostalgic morons when it comes to anything from the past? Have they forgotten Detroit's best offensive player was Chauncey freaking Billups? How inefficient everyone on that team was? How they had nothing resembling a superstar? How difficult it was for them to score against any good defensive team? How the moment the East got some genuine good teams(Shaq-Wade Heat, LeBron's emergence, Big 3 Celtics), they never made the Finals again? And only did so in 2005 because of Wade's injury?

They would have no ****ing chance against SA. Yeah, they would guard them well(better than Miami, anyway), but how the **** would they score? Because SA, unlike Detroit, is elite on both ends of the court.

[Rake2204]

So how did the Pistons lose to the 2005 Spurs, 2006 Heat, 2007 Cavaliers?I thought the 2005 Spurs were pretty darn good, with more primed versions of guys we're still watching in 2014 (Duncan, Ginobili, Parker). They nearly won 60 games and rolled through the Western Conference. I think they'd be an interesting comparison to the 2014 squad - of whom likely seems deeper but perhaps features a shallower peak.

From there, I think the 2006 Pistons teams and further were a different beast. Ben Wallace (and maybe Rasheed) were on their way out of their primes (if they weren't already), Larry Brown was out/Flip Saunders is on (resulting in a more offense-based directive), and their depth was markedly weaker and more unreliable (no more Mehmet Okur, Corliss Williamson, and Mike James).

All that said, don't get me wrong, those '06 and later teams were still good, just different than the '04 team.


The '04 Pistons have to be the single most overrated team of all time. They won 54 games in a pedestrian EC, were incredible defensively but below average on offense, barely made it out of the EC(even trailed NJ 3-2), and beat a good-but-dysfunctional Laker team on its last legs. Never at any point of that season or even quickly after it was Detroit spoken about in historical terms. But they've become this mythical superpower in recent years. They get favored over EVERY single team that won a ring after them. Why do people turn into such nostalgic morons when it comes to anything from the past? Have they forgotten Detroit's best offensive player was Chauncey freaking Billups? How inefficient everyone on that team was? How they had nothing resembling a superstar? How difficult it was for them to score against any good defensive team? How the moment the East got some genuine good teams(Shaq-Wade Heat, LeBron's emergence, Big 3 Celtics), they never made the Finals again? And only did so in 2005 because of Wade's injury?

They would have no ****ing chance against SA. Yeah, they would guard them well(better than Miami, anyway), but how the **** would they score? Because SA, unlike Detroit, is elite on both ends of the court.Regarding the Pistons' win total, I think it'd make the most sense to judge them based off their final product (aka post-Rasheed trade). I think they finished something like 22-5 after the Sheed acquisition. That might be a 67-win pace over the course of an entire season, though I'll surely admit cutting and pasting in that manner is hardly reliable. Still, the point is they were a different beast post-deadline. This is also when they embarked on their five-teams-held-below-70 streak.

Also, since we're comparing the '04 Stones to the '14 Spurs, punishing Detroit for having to take back-to-back NBA finalists to a game 7 (New Jersey) would seem to open the door to punishing the Spurs for having to take the Mavericks to seven games in round 1.

All that said, I'm at least a little bit in agreement with you. I think history has treated the 2004 Pistons very, very well. However, at the time, I thought they were getting way, way less due than they deserved, so I guess it has kind of evened out. There were a few folks who tried to alert others of the Pistons dominance that year (the less-than-70 streak helped draw some attention) but most seemed to not want to believe their defense would be good enough to contain any team featuring Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant.

[VIntageNOvel]

the one who pick spurs clearly hasnt overcome the euphoria
both dallas and OKC nearly beat this old duncan spurs

just because they beat a fake ass team who just happened to steamrolling weak ass competition, doesnt make em better than one of the goat defensive team ever

[GimmeThat]

So how did the Pistons lose to the 2005 Spurs, 2006 Heat, 2007 Cavaliers?


We are talking about a general manager who drafted Darko Milicic with the 2nd overall pick in the 2003 draft.

Kawhi Leonard says hi.