Who was more disappointing. Mid 2000 Pistons or Big 3 Celtics?

I didnt think the Celtics would get more than 1 title. aybe cuz I remember the post '95 Rockets too well to know veteran "Big 3's" I think most had them at a 3-4 year window to get 1. Rondo's emergence increased their window another year or 2.

I think the Pistons just got beat by the better team every year, except maybe the '07 Cavs. They were the definition of "contender".

I'd go slightly Celtics though they have nothing to be ashamed about. They can rightfully say injuries cost them

 

Overachieving, then blowing series leads. Then lots of injuries. Seems like some of the T-Mac Magic misfortune is still lingering with Doc Rivers.

 

Neither are disappointing. They may not have lived up to their full potential but they did each get a piece of hardware. The Bills of 20+ years ago were disappointing.

 

You say that about any sport in any decade, especially the NBA.

1. The Philadelphia 76ers were a powerhouse team through 70s and early 80s, went to the Finals, several times. Only won, once in 1983, when they acquired Moses Malone.

2. Portland Trailblazers, pretty much their entire history. Bill Walton enduring many serious injuries, the Sam Bowie draft pick (though that's a little overrated), Aryvdas Sabonis (being unable to play in the NBA until the latter part of his career), the Jailblazers, or the more recent down period. On the contrary, the Blazers are historically a perennial playoff team. Since 1976, they've only missed the playoffs 7 times.

3. Cleveland Cavaliers were ravaged by injuries and increasingly poor management (mid to late 90s). During the late 80s, they probably had the most upcoming young player of any other team in the league - Hot Rod Williams, Daugherty, Price, Harper, Brandon, and they also drafted Kevin Johnson (but he was traded after a year in a deal that brought over Larry Nance).

4. From the tragedies of Len Bias and Reggie Lewis, the Celtics might have had a whole time period of success wiped out on those two players alone.

Though, I have to say why is the teams that fare the worst are typically the ones with poor ownership and mediocre team management -- Washington, Toronto, Cleveland, Golden State, Charlotte, Sacramento (recently), or lately even New York.

How come teams, like Portland, Phoenix, Utah, San Antonio, Denver, and even Indiana are able to stay competitive?

It's the same teams.

 

Shaq,Kobe,Payton,malone.....nobody hated them as hard as Miami today....this was when super teams began formation, I think Dallas was first to try with dirk,Antoine,Jamison and I forget who else but they were

 

Shaq and Kobe only winning 3 titles together was more disappointing.

 

Boston is old and have been injured in damn near every playoff series since the finals.

If anything they have overachieved the last few years.

 

Wrong. Big 3's/ Super Teams have been around forever.
Our very own, albeit disappointing Big 3.

Spoiler

Old School Celtics Big 3, with our very own K Mac.

Spoiler

Old School Lakers.

Spoiler

Mid 90's Bulls.

Spoiler

And the best "Big 3" ever, winning 6 titles together, Russell, Heinsohn, and Cousy

Spoiler

 

I wonder what the Pistons' franchise would have been like, if they took Wade.

And imagine if Miami took Milicic.

 

If Detroit took someone else it would've been Bosh, imo.

 

Seriously though, had the two remained together w/ perhaps a few decent role players...

The league really dodged a bullet there. Imagine a post-prime Shaq capable of shutting down the paintand a prime "mr 81/ 62 in 3" Kobe, w/ drafting a young Bynum as backup.

Man what could have been.

 

Oops, I don't know how I missed this thread. Lock the other one up.

Disappointment, better overall.. same thing.

 

The Rockets with Yao Ming and Tracy.

 

I agree, the Celtics' Big 3 got together right before they started to decline individually. If they were together in 2002-04, I'd feel different. It would've taken the Lakers (Shaq/Kobe) or a really good Spurs or Pistons team to beat them.

Did the Rockets have any players that would be solid #2 or #3 on another team.

 

So, so wrong. Carlisle would have done the same if not better.

I would say Boston was more disappointing. Detroit came out of nowhere - no one expected them to do what they did.

 

I don't know how someone can consider either team disappointing. Winning a championship is an accomplishment that only one out of thirty teams achieves every year, and many quality teams (such as Nash's Suns, the Kings from a few years ago) never win it.

The Pistons were a "blue collar" team with several quality players that were clearly not superstars. The Celtics were a super team of aging stars put together to win the championship that year. People were rightfully saying that they had a limited championship window way back in 2008.