How many people thought the end was when the Pistons lost to Miami or Boston. How many thought it was when Ben Wallace left? I think there’s a decent chance this is the end, but I’m not ready to say for sure.

And to address your specific points:

1. Sell-out streak. I never really bought the legitimacy of the streak. There were too many weekday games, even before this year, that the Palace was pretty empty.

2. 39 wins. Think about what defines the Kevin Garnett era in Minnesota. It’s first-round exits. But the Timberwolves made the conference finals one year. That was an aberration. It didn’t change how people look at that era.

If the Pistons get back on track next year, this year could be viewed as a little blip on the radar. Again, I’m not saying this quick fix will happen. But it certainly could.

3. First-round sweep. OK, this could be a bit of a stretch. But in middle of the Larry Bird era, the Celtics once lost 40 games and were swept in the first round (by the Pistons in 1989). Larry Bird played just six games that year.

The Pistons were counting on Allen Iverson to be their best player, and he didn’t play (mental problmes more than physical ones, but he was till out).

I think this is probably the end of an era. I think there’s a good chance the Pistons either don’t make the playoffs next year or have a completely different style than the last eight years.

But it’s too early to say for sure — even if I’m pretty convinced there will be a lot of roster change.

This piece is very well played. I think it’s brilliant in terms of labeling it as an era of “Pistons success,” but I have to agree with Brgulker in labeling it an era as a whole. It wouldn’t be fair to label it all one big ‘era’ if we have a completely different roster. That 50 win season you spoke of in 2001-2002 I think served more as a bridge between two eras since that was Joe’s first 50-win season as Pistons GM and the roster was completely different. I think the continuity argument is another good way of putting it. However, for this group of guys, this era is over if they’re moved this offseason. Like you said, though; we won’t know until next year. Great work as always.

The only bit of minor disagreement I would have is that, ultimately, I do think the era is over, and here’s why.

1) Sell-out streak ended. Our fans at the Palace defined this era as much as anything. As LBJ put it yesterday, it was always a “hostile building.” Look at yesterday’s MVP chants for LBJ and tell me that era isn’t over.

Not that it can’t be reborn or reincarnated — but the current era died yesterday.

2) 39 wins. The 50-win season era died yesterday. Could it be reborn next season or two years from now? Yes, but the current era died when we won our 39th game.

3) First-round sweep. This one’s pretty self-explanatory, I think. 6 consecutive trips to the ECF vs. a first-round manhandling and sweep by the Cavs.

Not that we can’t get back in a couple years (or maybe even next year if Joe works a small miracle), but for all intents and purposes, this era has ended.

To your closing point about next year’s potential success blending in with the past 6:

I see where you’re coming from, and like I said, I appreciate your informed hopefulness.

But let’s play the what-if game:

What if Sheed doesn’t resign (which seems far more likely than not)? What if Dice doesn’t resign (which for his sake, I hope he goes to chase a ring)?

Along with Ben Wallace, they have been the face of the Detroit frontcourt. Is it fair to say the era continues after their departure? I don’t know, to me that seems like a stretch.

Obviously, CB is already gone. And what if Rip and/or Tay get moved this summer (which seems very possible)?

With Dice, Sheed, CB, and Rip/Tay gone, and this year’s disappointing performance, it’s difficult to find any continuity between the past success and any future success we may have, isn’t it?

Like you, I hope Joe brings in players that will play “Detroit Basketball” (and we all know what that means, efficient, team-oriented offense and suffocating D), and if he does, then at least that type of continuity exists.

But I think the overwhelming sentiment will be — among fans and players alike — is that after almost no one from the championship roster remains, then the era is over.

And maybe that’s a good thing.

I think guys like Max, Amir, and Stuck have all struggled under the pressure that’s been put upon them.

Amir and Max have been expected to be the Wallace Bros. They’re not. Maybe they could be, who knows? But they’re not now, and they’re expected to be. So, when they “underperform” relative to expectations, they get yanked and benched. It’s stunted their growth.

And Stuckey — yeah, he’s improved, and that’s great. But he’s not CB, and he may never be. But he’s had to live in that shadow.

A clean break with the past might be the only way to let this team become who it needs to be collectively and individually — as hard as it is to let go of what has been before.