RealGM

Let put this to a vote on the general board. I'm interested to hear all thoughts and arguments for and against this.

I'm also interested in if you say yes, if you are a Nets or Pacer fan.

I guess I should also clarify that what I mean specifically is if we should add 2 championships to the Nets history and 3 to the Pacers.

Utah has an ABA title... so I'm all for it

No. Just imagine NBA merging with the European league.

Sixers fan here and yes those records and championships should count. Obviously i didn't see ABA but from the looks of it, ABA was a legitimate league with a considerable bit of top level talent.

In the first post-merger season's NBA Finals between the Portland Trail Blazers and the Philadelphia 76ers, five of the ten starting players were former ABA players.[73] (Those five starters from the ABA were Julius Erving, Caldwell Jones, George McGinnis, Dave Twardzik and Maurice Lucas).

Of the 84 players in the ABA at the time of the merger, 63 played in the NBA during the 1976–77 season.

In that first post-merger season, four of the NBA's top ten scorers had come over from the ABA (Billy Knight, David Thompson, Dan Issel and George Gervin).

When the NFL and AFL merged, they kept their championships.

What about the NBL? More of a direct NBA lineage and the Pistons have two of those ships.

The answer is "of course not," because it wasn't the same league.

It's related, and the information is at least somewhat relevant when discussing players who hopped leagues, but it is definitively not "NBA history" because it's not the NBA.

Let's see...

ABA is one league.
NBA is another.


mmmh...no.

why can't we just say the pacers are 3 time ABA champions?

an aba title is probably worth marginally less than an nba title

the closest thing to an nba title is a title in the league that existed just prior to the nba. and the lakers won one of those

They're worth mentioning in a team's history, but the fact that it's a different league (even if one's opinion is that the two leagues were comparable) means it's not an NBA championship, so it doesn't count as NBA history.

we for some reason act like titles won when there were only 8 teams in the league are as meaningful as those won now. we should really move in the other direction and take away those early titles, not give more of them.

Well they're not specifically NBA history, but it's not a conclusive 'no' either.

The history exists, and they are actual championships, and they're part of a team's history.

And although fans like to dismiss them, many ABA titles at the time held as much weight as NBA titles, particularly given the former's relatively good performance against NBA times at the time and post-merger. It would be unfair to dismiss them entirely just because the name ABA no longer exists.

Of course not it counts as ABA history. Two separate leagues with two separate history silly question.

What the OP should mean is, is the ABA a legtimate c aomparison to the NBA? As he was arguing against in another thread.

BlueDawn wrote:What the OP should mean is, is the ABA a legtimate comparison the NBA?

To the same era of the NBA, sure. You want to compare ABA ball to 70s NBA ball, that makes sense. Not to later eras of NBA ball, though.

EDIT: Having said that, given the career paths of guys like Dr. J, Rick Barry and George Gervin, it's clear that at least the top tier of ABA ballers could play at an elite level in the NBA even a decade later, so it's worth acknowledging their abilities. Gilmore, too, and others.

Thank you T. Thats what I meant and believe was thr crux of the dispute in another thread; not that should titles be considered apart of the NBA.

lukekarts wrote:Well they're not specifically NBA history, but it's not a conclusive 'no' either.

The history exists, and they are actual championships, and they're part of a team's history.

And although fans like to dismiss them, many ABA titles at the time held as much weight as NBA titles, particularly given the former's relatively good performance against NBA times at the time and post-merger. It would be unfair to dismiss them entirely just because the name ABA no longer exists.

I agree 100 percent

BlueDawn wrote:Thank you T. Thats what I meant and believe was thr crux of the dispute in another thread; not that should titles be considered apart of the NBA.

Exactly

I mean the NFL remembers their championships before the Super Bowl as NFL Championships and AFL Championships. My team the Titans, they list their Houston Oilers championships as AFL Championships. So yes, I think ABA Championships should count but as "ABA Championships" because they're not NBA Championships but it doesn't diminish the fact they were champions in that league.