This is a possibility for some types of containers, I suppose, but the vast majority of pottery types were use-at-home things not intended for transport. The Greeks had a dizzying variety of specialized vessels – Kraters, Pyxes, Wine-Mixers, Eye-Cups, Rhytons, etc. – that were used for serving, mixing, and preparing of foods.
Perhaps the difference in containers and cooking methods comes from their primary food staples: the Greeks had olives and the Mesoamericans had maize. I seem to recall that traditional cooking methods for maize, especially tortillas, involve stone cookware: a flat slab of heated rock, rather than a soft clay dish.
Another difference pointed out by 1491 is the use of metal tools. With a stone axe, a tree takes 20 times the effort to chop down compared to a metal axe. The natives were quick enough to adopt the use of metal tools when they were introduced to them, but they didn’t have the advanced metallurgy to create them. The Mesoamericans certainly had metal, but it was primitive by European standards — they had copper-tin alloys, but no steel.
You might consider the lack of suitable metal tools may be one principal factor in the failure to develop the wheel. If, to develop a log-roller, one must spend the better part of 2 days chopping down a tree with a rock, it might not seem as much of a labor-saving device.
But the wheel predates the iron age.
And when were the Americas populated?
How did the Incas move those huge stone blocks? Thos blocks which had mitred joints? Surely wheeled carst would have made the job easier.
Easier than carrying by hand, yes. Easier than a simple sled, or log rollers, no.
The dating varies, but no less than 10,000 years ago and upwards of 20,000. There is also theories that indicate that more than one wave of migrants came over the Bering Straight, so it was not a single migration.
Jim (Please note, these figures are off the top of my head from an article I read about 3 years ago, my answer might be either faulty or superseded)