This year?s NBA Finals were supposed to be a Lakers coronation.  Pre-series, nearly all the analysis wondered if the Pistons could win so much as a single game.  But a funny thing happened ? the Pistons weren?t just better, they were vastly superior, even dominant.  As Kevin Pelton reported in his Hoopsworld column, Detroit?s clinched with a 13-point win ? the biggest margin since the 1987 Lakers.

How the Pistons did it is a fascinating lesson in roster construction, cohesive team play, and first-rate coaching.  The real question, however, is how so many experts were wrong.  How did virtually everyone miss the fact that Pistons were a terrific basketball team?

A variety of factors converged to let Detroit remain underestimated throughout their championship run.  First on the serving platter goes a double helping of conventional wisdom.  Everyone knew that stars win championships, and the Pistons are devoid of megawatt players like Shaquille O?Neal and Kobe Bryant.  Nearly everyone conveniently overlooked the fact that Detroit was home to defensive superstar Ben Wallace.

Next, is a side dish of conventional wisdom.  Everyone just knew the Pistons could have no answers for Shaq.  We just knew the Eastern Conference was the junior varsity and that the eventual champ had to come from the West.  We knew that Detroit?s offense was abysmal ? and had proof from the Eastern Conference Finals.

In fact, we all knew so much, that many analysts apparently forgot to do some actual research.  Those that conducted some research probably ignored relevant data because they just knew the Pistons didn?t have a chance.  Just like I did.

Had I bothered to pay much attention to the information contained in my own spreadsheets, I probably would have concluded Detroit had a decent chance to win.  For example, the Pistons were the second best defensive team in the regular season.  Impressive, right?  But I didn?t account for the fact that they went from very good defensively to great when Joe Dumars traded for Rasheed Wallace.

I use three key measures to determine a team?s relative team strength.  The first of these is average scoring margin.  The Pistons had the league?s second best mark (+5.84) ? nearly two points better than the Lakers?.

The next measure is the difference between points per 100 possessions scored and points per 100 possessions allowed.  Detroit was fourth best (in a near dead-heat for second with Indiana and Minnesota) at +6.42 ? more than 2.5 points better than the Lakers.

Finally, I look at team production differential ? points + rebounds + assists + steals + blocks - missed field goal attempts ? missed free throw attempts ? turnovers ? personal fouls.  This stat typically has a 90-percent or better correlation with winning percentage (96.9 percent this season).  Detroit was fourth best at +16.04.  The Lakers were sixth, but at +11.91, more than four points behind Detroit.

What really should have gotten my attention was the Pistons improvement once they acquired Wallace.  As Pelton noted in an article during the Finals, Detroit went 20-6 after trading for Wallace.  That?s a .769 winning percentage, which translates to 63 wins in an 82-game season.  Detroit?s scoring margin during that stretch was a whopping +12.1.  The 72-10 Chicago Bulls had the best margin in history for a full season at +12.2.  Could the Pistons have sustained that level over a full 82 games?  Probably not, but it should have been viewed as a sign that the Pistons had become a superior team.

Instead of believing what the numbers were saying, I dismissed the data because the Pistons played in what I believed was an inferior conference.

My opinion about the Eastern Conference was largely confirmed once the playoffs began.  The Eastern Conference?s play was ugly and slow, and Western Conference teams grew in comparison.  My estimation of the Lakers soared.  The spreadsheet said the Spurs and Timberwolves were the best teams all season, and LA scorched both of them en route to the championship round.

Meanwhile, the Pistons fought through the playoffs, culminating their solid trip through the Eastern Conference with a repugnant offensive display against the Pacers.  I thought Indiana had exposed Detroit?s offensive flaws.

But once again, the bias against Eastern Conference teams came into play.  Sure, both teams were good defensively, but clearly the real problem was that neither team could play offense.  Had I bothered to check my spreadsheet, I would have found that while the Pistons were the second best regular season defense, the Pacers were third.  The offense was bad because both teams were superior defensively ? not because Detroit and Indiana were poor offensive teams.  In fact, Indiana had an above average offense this season, while Detroit?s was average.

I also blundered by sticking to the basketball tradition of analyzing individual matchups.  Kobe vs. Richard Hamilton ? big advantage for the Lakers.  Shaq vs. Ben Wallace ? big advantage for the Lakers.  But this kind of analysis was rendered pointless by Larry Brown?s team-oriented defensive system.  Individual matchups don?t matter much to the Pistons.  While they play a man-to-man defense, in reality it?s five guys committed to keeping the other team from putting points on the board.

In my pre-series thinking, I couldn?t conceive of Detroit winning without employing a risky junk defense to control Shaq.  Brown had calculated, however, that by guarding Shaq one-on-one most of the time Detroit could limit Kobe ? just as it had limited quality wing scorers all season ? and throttle the role players.  At the same time, the excruciating defensive pressure on the perimeter would likely make it harder to get the ball to Shaq, which would in turn limit Shaq?s production.

Here again, the Wallace acquisition was fundamental.  With Wallace, the Pistons became long and quick at nearly every position, and the one guy who was undersized (Ben Wallace) made up for it with his ferocity.  Rasheed Wallace made the Pistons a deep team, especially in the frontcourt.  And he drove home John Wooden?s maxim that he?d trade off height for quickness.

Finally, everyone picking the Lakers overlooked important issues like Karl Malone?s knee woes, and Gary Payton?s protruding lower lip.  Malone?s inability to play seriously damaged LA?s chances.  They lost an important third option on offense ? one who could knock down mid-range jumpers and create his own shot if needed ? as well as a physical rebounding presence inside.  Instead of a savvy veteran who could hold his own inside, the Lakers made do with an immobile Malone and an overmatched Slava Medvendenko.

Payton?s poor performance was a bewildering display from a formerly great player.  A year ago, Payton averaged 20 points and eight assists.  In the Finals, he was stunningly ineffective; and he looked old and unhappy.

In the end, even a healthy Malone would not have altered the result of this series.  Some have hailed Detroit?s victory as the biggest upset in Finals history, but once again the conventional wisdom is wrong.  The Pistons were a good team all year, and they grew into an outstanding one after trading for Rasheed Wallace.  They were the better team entering the Finals.  And I would have known it if I?d only been paying attention.

Kevin Broom is a Senior Writer with RealGM.com. He can be reached at KevinBroom@RealGM.com