RealGM

1970s basketball saw its share of shall-we-say surprise champions. Arguably, the best team doesn’t always win and a case could be made that was what happened when in 1974–75 when the Warriors won, 1977-78 when the Bullets took it, etc.
It also was a good decade for New York Teams. The Knicks had a good solid team at 57 -25 in their 2nd championship season but I’m not convinced that they didn’t play over their heads that year. The Nets in the last ABA season? Diehard Nets fan that I still am, I don’t consider them better than the Nuggets with Issel, David Thomson, Bobby Jones. But you-know-what-happens sometimes.
The Knicks imho did have an absolutely amazing team in 1970 and the Nets peaked in 1973-74. Now, I’m not about to compare these two squads. I think its fair to say that the 70 Knicks take it.

But….what about comparing the 1972-73 Knicks with the 73-74 Nets?

Center
Knicks: Willis Reed, Jerry Lucas / Nets: Billy Paultz, Willie Sojourner
Despite Reed’s ability to rise to the occasion at times that year, he was not the player he once was. Same with Lucas. To compare Paultz prime-for-prime with either HOFer would be a sacrilege. However, Paultz (despite his awkward style) was not a complete slouch (3-time ABA All-Star and led the ABA in blocks in 1976. top 30 in votes All-ABA Team, long NBA career). I’m thinking that he holds down the fort. The real problem is the Nets’ backup C. Big question here is how many minutes could Paultz play?

Guards
Knicks: Walt Frazier, Earl Monroe, Dean Meminger, Henry Bibby / Nets: Brian Taylor, John Williamson, Mike Gale, Bill Melchionni
Two more HOFers for the Knicks.
OK I do recall Frazier playing less and less tenacious defense as the years went by… where he was at this year, well, it’s honestly hard to recall. Monroe (he of the bad knees) was not the player that he had been with the Bullets. Still, they likely top the Net starters but by how much? Brian Taylor (somewhat like Frazier) was a complete player. He scored when needed (his scoring essentially improved slightly upon entering the NBA), he received All-League Defensive mention in both leagues, All-ABA, could hit the 3-pointer and was very athletic. Taylor was good enough to beat out Melchionni who had been all-ABA (in admittedly not fully evolved league). Super John could probably score as well as the Pearl but at least the Pearl tried on defense. Since Frazier and Monroe were likely the closest thing to a go-to guy on the Knicks’ offense, I’d likely play Gale (All ABA defense) against Monroe quite a bit. Melchionni? Good to steady things down from time to time. Meminger? Bibby? Serviceable imho but neither lived up to college expectations. Knicks but this one is closer than you might think.

Forwards
Knicks: Dave DeBusschere, Bill Bradley, Phil Jackson / Nets: Julius Erving, Larry Kenon, Wendell Ladner
This is where things get interesting. Erving could cover Bradley easily & Kenon could play DeBusschere o.k. Both Dollar Bill and Dave were once guards in their early days and could handle the ball just fine and shoot when open. I’ll give them that. But they lacked the athleticism of their counterparts. On the other end? DeBusschere might slow down the Doctor (playing Bradley on him would simply not work) but the Doctor was not stopped by guys like Willie Wise and Bobby Jones. Plus, I think Dave D was better on D against the bruisers like Bill Bridges than an athletic guy like Erving. And then what? Who covers Kenon? Bradley didn’t have the size or hops. You could bring in Jackson or even Lucas into a bigger sub forward role but then the Knicks are playing to the Nets strengths and not their own. And then there’s Wendell Ladner… looking him up he was a 2-time ABA all-star in the early 70s. I can’t tell you why and that this should be taken as some kind of ringing endorsement but the guy did bring hustle and grit. I’d imagine he’d give DeBusschere and/or Bradley a whack or two!
Clear advantage: Nets

Conclusion: None really other than it would be close, I suppose. A lot would depend on how the games were scheduled. Paultz playing a lot of minutes bothers me for the Nets. The rules would also be a factor .. do we use a three pointer or not? Etc.

Wendall Ladner was a hustle player who rebounded well and shot poorly. Not the highest BBIQ either from what I have read. Best known for his effect on female fans who thought he looked like a muscular Bert Reynolds, sort of the ABA version of T.R. Dunn.

Not as high on Kenon as you are; he just didn't have the ability to take the ball and dominate anyone though he was a terrific finisher and floor runner. On the other hand, Bill Bradley competes with Pete Maravich in my memory as the most overrated player of all time. The key is how much the Knicks guards have lost as their knees and desire deteriorated as they are far more talented than the Nets pair. Taylor was very solid but Williamson was not a very good player; more a low IQ chucker.

penbeast0 wrote:Wendall Ladner was a hustle player who rebounded well and shot poorly. Not the highest BBIQ either from what I have read. Best known for his effect on female fans who thought he looked like a muscular Bert Reynolds, sort of the ABA version of T.R. Dunn.

Not as high on Kenon as you are; he just didn't have the ability to take the ball and dominate anyone though he was a terrific finisher and floor runner. On the other hand, Bill Bradley competes with Pete Maravich in my memory as the most overrated player of all time. The key is how much the Knicks guards have lost as their knees and desire deteriorated as they are far more talented than the Nets pair. Taylor was very solid but Williamson was not a very good player; more a low IQ chucker.

Don't really disagree with your analysis. At the forward position, I'm giving the Nets the considerable edge because of (1) Erving and (2) the match-ups. Talent-wise but for Erving things are more or less a toss-up imho.

penbeast0 wrote:Wendall Ladner was a hustle player who rebounded well and shot poorly. Not the highest BBIQ either from what I have read. Best known for his effect on female fans who thought he looked like a muscular Bert Reynolds, sort of the ABA version of T.R. Dunn.

Not as high on Kenon as you are; he just didn't have the ability to take the ball and dominate anyone though he was a terrific finisher and floor runner. On the other hand, Bill Bradley competes with Pete Maravich in my memory as the most overrated player of all time. The key is how much the Knicks guards have lost as their knees and desire deteriorated as they are far more talented than the Nets pair. Taylor was very solid but Williamson was not a very good player; more a low IQ chucker.

I think I agree with you how did Bradley make the HOF I never understood.

dooki667 wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:Wendall Ladner was a hustle player who rebounded well and shot poorly. Not the highest BBIQ either from what I have read. Best known for his effect on female fans who thought he looked like a muscular Bert Reynolds, sort of the ABA version of T.R. Dunn.

Not as high on Kenon as you are; he just didn't have the ability to take the ball and dominate anyone though he was a terrific finisher and floor runner. On the other hand, Bill Bradley competes with Pete Maravich in my memory as the most overrated player of all time. The key is how much the Knicks guards have lost as their knees and desire deteriorated as they are far more talented than the Nets pair. Taylor was very solid but Williamson was not a very good player; more a low IQ chucker.

I think I agree with you how did Bradley make the HOF I never understood.

I'm assuming it was for his college career at Princeton and for being the NBA's token intellectual; he was a Rhodes scholar and later a U.S. Senator.

penbeast0 wrote:

dooki667 wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:Wendall Ladner was a hustle player who rebounded well and shot poorly. Not the highest BBIQ either from what I have read. Best known for his effect on female fans who thought he looked like a muscular Bert Reynolds, sort of the ABA version of T.R. Dunn.

Not as high on Kenon as you are; he just didn't have the ability to take the ball and dominate anyone though he was a terrific finisher and floor runner. On the other hand, Bill Bradley competes with Pete Maravich in my memory as the most overrated player of all time. The key is how much the Knicks guards have lost as their knees and desire deteriorated as they are far more talented than the Nets pair. Taylor was very solid but Williamson was not a very good player; more a low IQ chucker.

I think I agree with you how did Bradley make the HOF I never understood.

I'm assuming it was for his college career at Princeton and for being the NBA's token intellectual; he was a Rhodes scholar and later a U.S. Senator.

Bill Bradley is rated as one of the top 20-30 college players of all-time.
He won an Olympic Gold Medal as 2nd best scorer.
He won a EuroLeague championship, I believe first American to do so.

His pro career would rank 3rd behind his college career and International career as far as making HOF, and either of those would be enough for him to qualify for the HOF.

DQuinn1575 wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:

dooki667 wrote:I think I agree with you how did Bradley make the HOF I never understood.

I'm assuming it was for his college career at Princeton and for being the NBA's token intellectual; he was a Rhodes scholar and later a U.S. Senator.

Bill Bradley is rated as one of the top 20-30 college players of all-time.
He won an Olympic Gold Medal as 2nd best scorer.
He won a EuroLeague championship, I believe first American to do so.

His pro career would rank 3rd behind his college career and International career as far as making HOF, and either of those would be enough for him to qualify for the HOF.

Thank you guys. I never been a college sport fan know next to nothing about it never knew he was that highly regarded nor did I know he won euro so ty for the education