Okay, let's consider some other tidbits:
For those in more doubt about the ABA, be aware that the NBA & ABA played exhibition games against each other for much of the time they both existed. The NBA dominated in early years when there was no doubt they were the superior league, however the ABA kept getting better and better and in the last 3 seasons the ABA won more than the NBA did.
http://www.remembertheaba.com/abastatis ... tions.htmlSome have tried to argue that the NBA didn't really try in those games, but that's just silly. Can you imagine a scenario where you play games against a rival organization competing for the same dollars you are, and you throw the games? In doing so, you'd only legitimize your competitor more and more. The NBA would never do this.
What about the NBA players? Maybe they didn't care since it was just an exhibition? Well, if they weren't trying it was sure hard to tell. We're seeing star players from each league play big minutes, put up big numbers, and sometimes getting thrown out of games. That sound like they were taking it easy?
Okay, now what about the ABA's lack of defense. The ABA was known for being an offense-only league, right? Yes, but in retrospect, we now see how inaccurate that was.
Yes, offenses in the ABA were more successful than offenses in the NBA. However, when the league's merged, guess who dominated the league on the defensive side of the ball? That's right ABA alumni.
In the '76-77 NBA:
#1 defense was the Denver Nuggets who had been only the #3 defense in the ABA in '75-76.
#2 defense was the Chicago Bulls who had been lucky enough to get a new defensive superstar that year - Artis Gilmore. Actually it wasn't luck. The Bulls owned the NBA rights to Gilmore, and refused to agree to the merger unless his ABA (the extremely successful Kentucky Colonels) were not allowed to join the NBA thereby giving them the excuse that Gilmore was theres. Incidentally, the Colonels were the #2 defense in the NBA the previous year.
The #4 & #5 NBA defenses were also related to this new version of the NBA. #4 was Erving's 76ers, #5 was the aforementioned Blazers.
Now, hopefully you've been paying attention and are wondering, "Wait, so who ran the best defense in the ABA the previous year?". That would be the Erving's Nets. With a defense with Erving taking the primary role on all sides, they were the best in the league, and there's every reason to think that would have continued in the NBA given that the other top ABA teams excelled defensively in the NBA.
Okay, so this feeds into another question: How good was Erving's defense? He didn't get defensive awards despite putting up numbers that typically guarantee such love nowadays, so what's the explanation? I've come to the conclusion that there is no good explanation in terms of a justification for this. We know that even nowadays defensive accolades are oftentimes far off the mark and based on reputation. And here's what else we know:
-As mentioned, the Nets were elite on defense in '75-76 with Erving, and fell off without him '76-77. (Though they didn't become hideous on that front. They were mediocre on defense, but utterly inept on offense as you'd expect when you lose Erving.)
-Erving joined the Nets in '73-74. The previous year they had had a below average defense, but with Erving they zoomed up to #1 in the league on defense on their way to winning the title.
-The narrative being painted that the ABA was an offense only league was a massive blitz campaigned BY the NBA in order to make the razzle dazzle of the ABA seem illegitimate. The face of that razzle dazzle was Erving. He was the player making basketball exciting, and so before they finally agreed to a merger, they first did quite a lot to try to demean what he represented.
-You can't really find articles specifically taking Erving to task for loafing around on defense or hurting his team by gambling ridiculously. By contrast you can find articles praising his defense especially from those familiar with the ABA.
-I will acknowledge that even in the ABA it's not like he was a lock every year for defensive accolades (he only made it in annus mirabilis '75-76), and I don't have a complete explanation for that. It's possible they bought into Erving to some degree as an offensive player as well. Certainly the fact that there was no 2nd team for All-Defense was a potential issue. It's also noteworthy that in that '73-74 season where Erving joins the Nets and they rocket up to the best defense in the league, the only Net on the All-Defensive team is one who was there less than half of the season and who had been on the All-Defensive team the previous year. One more case where it seems like people back then seemed to be struggling to identify even which teams were succeeding on defense.
I imagine all that is enough for people to say, "Okay, Erving was a solid defender who maybe could have gotten an All-Defensive team or two".
Actually, I think the underestimation of Erving was probably far more severe than that. Guys who flirt with 2 blocks & 2 steals, like Erving continued to do long after he joined the NBA, are doing something extremely unusual. Only 5 guys have ever done that (since they started tracking the star 40 years ago), and Erving managed to go for 1.8 & 1.8 at age 33, something no one else in history has done.
A player only does this by being extremely active, and covering large swaths of court space. And if he's doing that, either he's leaving his team's defense ready to get slaughtered by his gambles, or he's doing it in a smart way that let's the team thrive. Granted that everything is a bit of a grayscale. A sample gamble is still a gamble that fails sometimes, and it's possible that was a smart gamble at one point in a player's career because a dumb one later on when his athleticism wanes.
With Erving though, people don't talk about him as a stupid gambler, and his prime is filled with example of great defensive teams including examples where the greatness came with his presence.
Suffice to say, Erving probably should have been a lock for All-Defensive honors, and a dark horse DPOY contender in some years, much like LeBron is now.
