PDA

View Full Version : Should Dennis Rodman be in the hall of fame?



Kstat
05-16-2005, 06:58 PM
I figured I'd bring this up here, with people that have no attachement to rodman, pro or con.

I compare him a lot to reggie miller, in this respect: they were both GREAT at one thing, and average in a lot of other catagories.

Reggie was the greatest shooter of his era, bar none.

Rodman was the greatest rebounder of his era, bar none.

Unless you put more stock into shooting than rebounding, I think if Reggie gets to the hall (which I think he will), so should dennis. I don't think there's a "character" clause in the hall, and even if there was, I don't think being wierd should be considered an offense.

And if thats not enough to get Dennis in, he played on two of the greatest teams in NBA history, and he was a top-3 player on both of them.

All that considered, I still have my doubts Rodman will get in.

Hicks
05-16-2005, 07:13 PM
I think he has a legit case to be for the reasons you've mentioned.

However I think all of his side-show acts will keep him from ever being strongly considered by the men who vote on these things.

Peck
05-16-2005, 07:16 PM
I don't think it should even be a question. If Rodman isn't in on the first ballot then there shouldn't be a hall of fame.

Multiple championships, multiple rebound titles, multiple D.P.O.Y., this guy is a must.

Also I disagree about him being a one trick poney, he played superb defense as well as rebound.

Kstat
05-16-2005, 07:24 PM
I don't think it should even be a question. If Rodman isn't in on the first ballot then there shouldn't be a hall of fame.

Multiple championships, multiple rebound titles, multiple D.P.O.Y., this guy is a must.

Also I disagree about him being a one trick poney, he played superb defense as well as rebound.

Well, after he left the Pistons, I thought he became less of a stopper and more of a rebounder. If you look on what he did with the Spurs and the Bulls, he never really frustrated guys like he did in Detroit. In the 1996 finals, he got eaten alive by Shawn Kemp. But nobody noticed that, because he was grabbing 20 rebounds a night.

On the Pistons, he was in an excellent defensive system, and he benefitted from that in a lot of ways. He could concentrate on stopping his man, because the rest of the team was chock full of good rebounders. He didn't even break 10 rebounds per game on either title team.

DisplacedKnick
05-16-2005, 07:34 PM
I dunno - 18th on the all-time rebounding list and 2-time DPOY are pretty good. But he only played on 2 all-star games and was he ever on an all-NBA team?

I don't see it as cut-and-dried either way - if he gets in then IMO Mutombo gets in. But I have a hard time seeing those guys in and not Dantley or Nique.

A lot will depend on who's on the ballot with him.

Kstat
05-16-2005, 07:38 PM
I dunno - 18th on the all-time rebounding list and 2-time DPOY are pretty good. But he only played on 2 all-star games and was he ever on an all-NBA team?

A lot will depend on who's on the ballot with him.

1st of all-Mutombo was not clearly the best shot blocker of his era. Hakeem has a lot to say about that.

And he was one of the top 5 rebounders of all time. Dont look at his comparison to players of the 60's, which had incredibly inflated rebounding numbers. COmpare Rodman to the rest of the players in HIS era. Its not even close.

ChicagoJ
05-16-2005, 08:06 PM
I'd like to have a good argument for why he won't/ shouldn't get in. But I don;t have one. :shrug:

Arcadian
05-16-2005, 08:12 PM
Based on talent I have always thought that he should. Based on intagibles I don't think he will even though I would vote for him.

Stats aside here is how he is different from Reggie and why he won't make the Hall.

1) Not only was he wierd he got into a lot of trouble with the league and was seen by teams he was on (with the exception of the Bulls and winning years with the Pistons) as a locker room cancer. Why else would teams pass up on a hall of famer after the Bulls broke up?

2) He things he did well are still called the little things. Voters are idiots enough to believe that little things are little. Also this league historically favors little guys over bigs when it comes to popularity.

3) He never was a franchise player. No team was built around him and no franchise really embraced him. What owner is going to push for him to get in?

4) His last years with were he got kicked off the Lakers and Mavs he became a joke. His last impression was a strung out, barely coherent oddity past his prime.

Arcadian
05-16-2005, 08:27 PM
I don't think it should even be a question. If Rodman isn't in on the first ballot then there shouldn't be a hall of fame.

Multiple championships, multiple rebound titles, multiple D.P.O.Y., this guy is a must.

Also I disagree about him being a one trick poney, he played superb defense as well as rebound.

Minus the multiple titles for now...and this is why I think Ben Wallace is going to be considered a sure fire Hall of Famer at the end of his career.

NewType
05-16-2005, 08:45 PM
Based on what he has achieved - stats, accolades, and rings, he should be. However, voters may not vote for him because of his other stuffs. I think he's a very interlligent player. Judging by talent alone, he's definitely a HOF.

Side note: in the States, he might not have been thought highly of due his bad reputation, but in overseas, he was huge since we didn't get all those negative news about him. In Hong Kong, where I grew up, many bought his jerseys and his shoes were extremely hot items. In Japan, there was an extremely popular basketball comic in the late 90s called Slam Dunk that featured the main character that closely resembled him - a bright red head and a rebounding machine. If internet voting for all stars was available back then, he might have a couple more all star occurence.

Kegboy
05-16-2005, 09:05 PM
Even after he went crazy, he was still an excellent defender. Sure, he didn't do jack on offense, but there are more than a couple HOF'ers that didn't do jack on defense.

If the voters know **** about the NBA, he's a first-ballot lock. Problem is, the Wilkens snub showed they don't. :shrug:

Stryder
05-16-2005, 09:08 PM
Yes, Dennis Rodman deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.

I didn't like his sideshow antics in the latter part of his career, but he NEEDS to be in the HOF. Period.

Kegboy
05-16-2005, 09:13 PM
Maybe you can get Sassan to tell the voters, "If you don't vote for Dennis Rodman, than you're not a real basketball fan."

Kstat
05-16-2005, 09:18 PM
Based on talent I have always thought that he should. Based on intagibles I don't think he will even though I would vote for him.

Stats aside here is how he is different from Reggie and why he won't make the Hall.

1) Not only was he wierd he got into a lot of trouble with the league and was seen by teams he was on (with the exception of the Bulls and winning years with the Pistons) as a locker room cancer. Why else would teams pass up on a hall of famer after the Bulls broke up?

....because he was going on 38 years old when the Bulls broke up?


4) His last years with were he got kicked off the Lakers and Mavs he became a joke. His last impression was a strung out, barely coherent oddity past his prime.

Both the Lakers and Mavs were a joke WITHOUT Rodman, in those years. He was an oddity to be sure, but he STILL averaged 11 boards on the '99 Lakers and 14 boards on the '00 Mavs. Not bad for a "strung out oddity past his prime."

I can recall MANY worse falls from glory, as far as play is concerned. Try Moses Malone, or Patrick Ewing.

Tim
05-16-2005, 09:21 PM
He is going to get in, although people may make him wait a bit. If people even think about leaving him out then that will put him back in the media spot light and the NBA really doesn't want to be reconnected with him again.

Grey
05-16-2005, 09:25 PM
I don't think there's a place for him in the Hall of Fame. Aside from 4 or 5 productive years in the NBA, he hurt his teams as much as he helped them.

And if the Pistons ever retire #10, it'll have Hunter's name on the banner - not Rodman's.

Kstat
05-16-2005, 09:31 PM
I don't think there's a place for him in the Hall of Fame. Aside from 4 or 5 productive years in the NBA, he hurt his teams as much as he helped them.

And if the Pistons ever retire #10, it'll have Hunter's name on the banner - not Rodman's.

You're right. Aside from those 8 years with the bulls and Pistons where he got to the conference finals 8 times, got to the finals 6 times, and won the championship 5 times, he was generally a cancer.

And if the Pistons retire Hunter's #10, I will personally burn it to the ground. Rodman burned a lot of bridges here, but that was due to a lot of mental immaturity. He was the best defensive player on the best defensive team in league history. If thats not grounds for honoring him I don't know what is.

If Vinnie Johnson and Laimbeer get their numbers retired, dennis better be eventually.

aceace
05-16-2005, 09:33 PM
I don't think Rodman had the career Reggie did. His stats don't compare. He was a distraction so many times that like someone else said he hurt teams. He was great rebounder (no doubt) but he didn't lead teams. He didn't take the big shot. He didn't cause teams to change their defense when he entered the game. He didn't do alot things. He was a role player, would you put Jeff Foster or Dale Davis in the Hall.

Winning a ring is sometimes about being on the right team. Look at what Shaq has done for Wades career. Not that Wade isn't a great player but he's opened things up for him. Look at Kobe this year without ShaqDaddy.....

Kegboy
05-16-2005, 09:34 PM
You're right. Aside from those 8 years with the bulls and Pistons where he got to the conference finals 8 times, got to the finals 6 times, and won the championship 5 times, he was generally a cancer.

And if the Pistons retire Hunter's #10, I will personally burn it to the ground. Rodman burned a lot of bridges here, but that was due to a lot of mental immaturity. He was the best defensive player on the best defensive team in league history. If thats not grounds for honoring him I don't know what is.

If Vinnie Johnson and Laimbeer get their numbers retired, dennis better be eventually.

I completely agree.

(runs off to clean myself, EWWW!)

:tongue:

Arcadian
05-16-2005, 09:36 PM
....because he was going on 38 years old when the Bulls broke up?



Both the Lakers and Mavs were a joke WITHOUT Rodman, in those years. He was an oddity to be sure, but he STILL averaged 11 boards on the '99 Lakers and 14 boards on the '00 Mavs. Not bad for a "strung out oddity past his prime."

I can recall MANY worse falls from glory, as far as play is concerned. Try Moses Malone, or Patrick Ewing.

So no team was willing to pick him up after the Bulls run because he was able to average 11 boards and later 14 rebounds? Which was it was he wash up or not?

I wasn't considering his play when I was speaking of his decline. I was thinking that two teams dropped him rather than have him on thier rosters.

If these weren't real concerns why else would there be a question about his going into the hall of fame?

Kegboy
05-16-2005, 09:37 PM
I don't think Rodman had the career Reggie did. His stats don't compare. He was a distraction so many times that like someone else said he hurt teams. He was great rebounder (no doubt) but he didn't lead teams. He didn't take the big shot. He didn't cause teams to change their defense when he entered the game. He didn't do alot things. He was a role player, would you put Jeff Foster or Dale Davis in the Hall.

Role players don't win DPOY multiple times. If Dale had half the career Rodman did, he damn well better be in the HOF.

Kegboy
05-16-2005, 09:38 PM
If these weren't real concerns why else would there be a question about his going into the hall of fame?

I wouldn't go there. Up to and including last season, there were still respected journalists that questioned why Reggie should make the Hall.

Arcadian
05-16-2005, 09:55 PM
I wouldn't go there. Up to and including last season, there were still respected journalists that questioned why Reggie should make the Hall.

That's not what I am saying. People questioning whether Reggie should be in the hall was based on on-the-court play.

Here people are asking does Rodman's character issues factor into the voting. Most have said it shouldn't which I agree with. However, if the character issues don't factor in why would people seem to think they will? My answer is that they do and will matter in the minds of voters.

Kstat
05-16-2005, 09:56 PM
I don't know many role players that managed to average 17 rebounds per game over a 7-year span.

How dominant is that? The average margin in rebounds per game between rodman and the #2 rebounder in the NBA each of those 7 seasons, was 3.5

For seven season, rodman was nearly 4 rebounds per game better than any other player in the NBA, and he was only 6'8." If thats a role player, what exactly is a superstar?

canyoufeelit
05-16-2005, 10:08 PM
Kstat, Rodman's numbers are somewhat skewed because he padded his rebounding stats like no other. If you recall back to his playing days, remember the way he used to tip the ball up into the air until only he had possession...? Ah yes, but that's not the worst example of this. A lot of bigmen in this league camp out in the paint rather than stepping out to challenge the pick and roll. People complain about Shaq doing this, but Rodman was perhaps the most egregious example of a defensive 3 seconds violater once he left Detroit. In San Antonio, I recall him costing his team a crucial playoff game because he was camping under the basket for rebounds, didn't step out to guard his man - Robert Horry - and thus the legend of Big shot Rob was born as he drilled the game winner.

Don't get me wrong, he was a tremendous player and rebounder, but in those years specifically he sacrificed the good of the team for his rebounding titles. Truth is he was closer to a 12 or 13 rpg player than he was a 16 or 18 rpg player. Still excellent for his size. Bob Hill was no Chuck Daly and certainly no Phil Jackson, it took a hall of fame coach to rein him in and get him to fit a team, and when he did usually those teams were downright dominating.

3ptmiller
05-16-2005, 10:17 PM
Dennis Rodman + Offense + Defense = Shawn Kemp
We should ask ourselves about Shawn Kemp instead to be in the hall of fame.

King Mob
05-16-2005, 10:19 PM
I just can't believe someone compared Rodman's play to that of Jeff Foster and Dale Davis.

King Mob
05-16-2005, 10:21 PM
I'm going to try and find the article, but someone at ESPN proved statistically that DRod was the greatest rebounder of all time...

canyoufeelit
05-16-2005, 10:24 PM
I'm going to try and find the article, but someone at ESPN proved statistically that DRod was the greatest rebounder of all time...

Does it take pace/size factors into account? Otherwise I am invoking the name Wilt Chamberlain all over this thread

3ptmiller
05-16-2005, 10:29 PM
One more thing, Rodman literally could not play basketball, he didnt even touch the ball as a teenager... he could ONLY Rebound and yes that is "one dimensional".

Cant believe you compare him to Reggie...so u mean Reggie is one dimensional to? This proofs to me how underrated he is on doing other things... So hee could only shoot 3PT shots but couldnt do a layup? but couldnt dunk? but couldnt play defense? but couldnt be clutch? but couldnt be the best player ever to use the screens and move the best without the ball? but couldnt be one of the best scorers in history? Comon........... so Shaq is also "one dimensional", he can only Dunk? :confused:

Kstat
05-16-2005, 10:29 PM
Dennis Rodman + Offense + Defense = Shawn Kemp
We should ask ourselves about Shawn Kemp instead to be in the hall of fame.

Yes, because Shawn Kemp was defensively comparable to Dennis Rodman :rotflmao:

A guy who made 8 all-defensive teams, vs a guy that never made one.....

King Mob
05-16-2005, 10:29 PM
This isn't it, but it rehashes the reasoning behind the claim. Take it for what it's worth...

http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&id=2007347

Care to guess who's having one of the best rebounding seasons in history?

Your first instinct might be to say Kevin Garnett, who's running away with the rebounding title. He's averaging 13.7 boards a game, which is nearly two more than his closest competitor. Considering his sizable lead, it seems heretical to suggest somebody else is the league's best rebounder. But it's true. Though hardly a household name, the Seattle SuperSonics' Reggie Evans is putting Garnett to shame with his rebounding exploits.



Garnett

EvansHow did I arrive at this conclusion? It all starts with a simple premise: A player can't get a rebound unless somebody misses a shot. Following from that logic, the best way to rate rebounders is by the percentage of missed shots they reel in, not by the amount they pull down per game or even per minute.

Consider the following example.

Player A gets 10 rebounds in a game with 20 missed shots, while Player B nabs 20 in a game with 100 missed shots. Player B has twice as many rebounds, but is he really better? Player A grabbed a Herculean 50 percent of all the missed shots in his game, while Player B took in only 20 percent. We shouldn't hold it against Player A that there were so few missed shots for him to rebound.

This is where my tool called Rebound Rate comes in. By measuring the percentage of available rebounds that a player gets while he's on the floor, Rebound Rate makes Player A's superiority obvious.

To calculate a player's Rebound Rate, start by adding all the rebounds and opponents' rebounds in his team's games. Multiply that result by the percentage of the team's minutes that player has played. This gives you the approximate number of rebounds available while he was on the court. Finally, take his total rebounds, divide it by the available rebounds, and multiply by 100.

And there you have it a player's Rebound Rate.

Using this calculation, Garnett's Rebound Rate is exceptional. Since there are 10 players on the court at any time, an average Rebound Rate is 10.0, but Garnett pulls in 20.3 percent of the available rebounds when he's on the court. Basically, he's doing the work of two people. The reigning MVP's effort is doubly amazing considering how much time he spends playing on the perimeter on both offense and defense.

However, a few players have been even more exceptional than Garnett, most notably Evans.

He has yanked down nearly a quarter of the missed shots when he's been on the court, making him the runaway winner in Rebound Rate. Two spots behind him is teammate Danny Fortson, who led the league in this category in 2001-02 and again last season (Garnett was third) and is in the running this year. Seattle's dynamic duo doesn't possess glitzy per-game averages 9.3 for Evans and 6.1 for Fortson. But once you consider that each averages fewer than 25 minutes per game, it becomes easy to see how they can rank at the top.

Rebound Rate Top 10
Min. 500 minutes (through 3/6)
Player Team Rate
Reggie Evans SuperSonics 24.5
Dan Gadzuric Bucks 21.3
Danny Fortson SuperSonics 21.2
Jeff Foster Pacers 20.8
Kevin Garnett Timberwolves 20.3
Tim Duncan Spurs 19.8
Joel Przybilla Trail Blazers 19.2
Tyson Chandler Bulls 19.1
Troy Murphy Warriors 19.0
Ben Wallace Pistons 19.0
For further evidence of the Seattle duo's impact, just look at the Sonics' overall Rebound Rate.

They grab 52.1 percent of missed shots, the fifth-best mark in the league, and that's almost entirely due to the efforts of Evans and Fortson. Nick Collison is the only other Sonic regular with a Rebound Rate above 12, while the five Sonics who play the most minutes Ray Allen, Rashard Lewis, Luke Ridnour, Vladimir Radmanovic and Antonio Daniels all are in single digits. With so few teammates pulling their own weight, it's extraordinary that Evans and Fortson can more than make up for them in their limited minutes.

Garnett, meanwhile, is fifth, right behind Indiana's Jeff Foster. Garnett's Rebound Rate is still amazing, especially since he can't focus single-mindedly on rebounding as the four players ahead of him do. But for pure rebounding excellence, the two Sonics are a cut above right now.

As a matter of fact, let's get some historical perspective on Evans's extraordinary rebounding performance. Based on the Rebound Rates for every player since 1970-71 when the NBA started tracking opponents' rebounds, Evans is moving into the exalted territory previously occupied by only one man: Dennis Rodman.

Best Rebound Rates
Since 1970-71
(min. 500 minutes)
Player Year Rate
Dennis Rodman 1994-95 29.7
Dennis Rodman 1993-94 29.6
Dennis Rodman 1995-96 26.6
Dennis Rodman 1991-92 26.2
Dennis Rodman 1992-93 26.0
Dennis Rodman 1996-97 25.7
Reggie Evans 2004-05 24.5
Dennis Rodman 1997-98 24.0
Ben Wallace 2002-03 23.2
Moses Malone 1979-80 23.2

The seven best Rebound Rates since 1970-71 all belong to the Worm during seven consecutive seasons from 1991-92 to 1997-98.

In six of them, he grabbed more than a quarter of the available rebounds, the only player in the last 35 years to do so. But with just a slight increase in the season's final 25 games, Evans could be joining Rodman. He's already broken into the bottom layer of Rodman's era of dominance, eclipsing the former Mr. Electra's 1997-98 campaign. Except for the Ruthian exploits of the Worm, Evans is having the best rebounding season in the past four decades.

Understanding Rebound Rate also makes it easier to comprehend the Sonics' staggering improvement this year. With Evans and Fortson making up for their teammates' biggest shortcomings, the Sonics have gone from being one of the league's worst rebounding teams to one of its best.

Thus, while Garnett's gaping lead in rebounding average garners the spotlight, a much more amazing feat is being accomplished in relative obscurity. Reggie Evans cleans up on KG and everybody else.

canyoufeelit
05-16-2005, 10:33 PM
Reggie Evans is a scrub and no Dennis Rodman. I like that rebounding rate stat, but it only dates back to 1970, when Wilt's rebound numbers were down nearly 10 a game from early in his career

Kstat
05-16-2005, 10:36 PM
One more thing, Rodman literally could not play basketball, he didnt even touch the ball as a teenager... he could ONLY Rebound and yes that is "one dimensional".

.....wheras Reggie was the epitome of versatility?


So hee could only shoot 3PT shots but couldnt do a layup?

I dunno..I'll have to ask Prince about that one.... ;)

ok, ok, low blow. But being able to make a layup does not mean you have an added dimension :laugh:


but couldnt dunk?

A 6'8" player that can dunk? No way!


but couldnt play defense?

Reggie was about as good a defender as Rodman was a scorer. Both were very opportunistic. Rodman once led the NBA in FG%.


but couldnt be clutch?

One would think that being the greatest shooter of your generation would just go along with this...

Rodman has won more games simply by grabbing key offensive rebounds than any player Ive ever seen in my life.


but couldnt be the best player ever to use the screens and move the best without the ball? but couldnt be one of the best scorers in history?

Ok, I'll give you the screens bit.....

and isnt reggie already one of the best scorers ever?

3ptmiller
05-16-2005, 10:43 PM
Bahh, but no way that Reggie is "one dimensional"... i refuse to believe that! (since i have the same game style :)) ... But honestly, comparing him to Rodman :puke:

canyoufeelit
05-16-2005, 10:43 PM
Ok, I'll give you the screens bit.....

and isnt reggie already one of the best scorers ever?

Not even close. Best shooters, yeah, but scoring isn't just shooting.

Kstat
05-16-2005, 10:46 PM
Not even close. Best shooters, yeah, but scoring isn't just shooting.

Point being, he's top-20 all time in scoring, right?

3ptmiller
05-16-2005, 10:46 PM
But i do think that Rodman is a Hall Of Fame material... no doubt

canyoufeelit
05-16-2005, 10:48 PM
Point being, he's top-20 all time in scoring, right?

Yeah, but nobody's sleeping with the prom queen for being #15

Grey
05-16-2005, 10:48 PM
You're right. Aside from those 8 years with the bulls and Pistons where he got to the conference finals 8 times, got to the finals 6 times, and won the championship 5 times, he was generally a cancer.

I'll give Rodman credit for what he did with the Pistons, but I think the Bulls would've been successful without him.

There's a reason why the Pistons let him go for what turned out to be Bill Curley, and Spurs let him go for Will Perdue.


If Vinnie Johnson and Laimbeer get their numbers retired, dennis better be eventually.

Don't you think they would've done it by now? Do you think they'd let Hunter have it if there were any plans to do so?

Kstat
05-16-2005, 10:55 PM
I'll give Rodman credit for what he did with the Pistons, but I think the Bulls would've been successful without him.

Successful? Yes.

Would they have won any titles? No.

Take Rodman off the 1996-1998 Bulls, and they're the 1995 Bulls. The softest team in the NBA that got taken apart by Orlando in round 2.


[There's a reason why the Pistons let him go for what turned out to be Bill Curley, and Spurs let him go for Will Perdue.

He got traded from Detroit because he was suicidal.

And we STILL traded Dennis for an all-star. Don't blame Dennis because the guy we got decided to tank the season rather than play here. Management was very poor back then, too.


Don't you think they would've done it by now? Do you think they'd let Hunter have it if there were any plans to do so?

The Pistons were too busy traying to save themselves from Clipperdom to think about retiring the number of a drag-queen.

Remember, it took Kansas 40 years to retire Wilt's #13. Sometimes, there are just personality conflicts that take time to heal.

ChicagoJ
05-16-2005, 11:03 PM
Successful? Yes.

Would they have won any titles? No.

Take Rodman off the 1996-1998 Bulls, and they're the 1995 Bulls. The softest team in the NBA that got taken apart by Orlando in round 2.

You don't believe that for a second, and neither do I.

Sir-shoots-a-lot would've picked that team up with or without Dennis. Krause would've found somebody to fill that role.

Maybe they wouldn't have won 72, and three straight titles, but they were going to be the cream-of-the-crop.

SoupIsGood
05-16-2005, 11:07 PM
Yeah, but nobody's sleeping with the prom queen for being #15

Twelve.:-p

Kstat
05-16-2005, 11:36 PM
You don't believe that for a second, and neither do I.

Sir-shoots-a-lot would've picked that team up with or without Dennis. Krause would've found somebody to fill that role.

Maybe they wouldn't have won 72, and three straight titles, but they were going to be the cream-of-the-crop.


At the risk of redundancy, i'll ask the same question twice.

What's the difference between the 1995 Bulls, who couldn't rebound or defend in the paint worth a damn, and the 1996-1998 Bulls?

Shade
05-16-2005, 11:47 PM
Rodman is a HOFer, hands down.

NewType
05-16-2005, 11:57 PM
At the risk of redundancy, i'll ask the same question twice.

What's the difference between the 1995 Bulls, who couldn't rebound or defend in the paint worth a damn, and the 1996-1998 Bulls?

In general, I agree. Without Rodman, the Bulls wouldn't be able to slow down/stop Kemp or Malone. On the other hand, it was a matter of Jordan getting back into form, Kukoc matured as a player, and other factors. But the bottom line is I agree with you that the Bulls wouldn't fair as well without Rodman.




Sir-shoots-a-lot would've picked that team up with or without Dennis. Krause would've found somebody to fill that role.


Off cource some of you could say if the the Bulls had a different PF of C, they would still win championships. But then, it's just implying that Rodman would be equivalent to whoever PF or C you pick for the Bulls. That wouldn't undermine the importance of Rodman to the team.

ChicagoJ
05-16-2005, 11:58 PM
At the risk of redundancy, i'll ask the same question twice.

What's the difference between the 1995 Bulls, who couldn't rebound or defend in the paint worth a damn, and the 1996-1998 Bulls?

Jordan was back in 'game shape' after getting embarassed by Nick Anderson and Penny Hardaway.

The designated rebounder could've been Will Perdue and they would've cruised in 1995-96 and 1996-97. And Rodman wasn't the difference for the 1997-98 team, either. Kukoc was, since neither Dale nor Tony would step out on the floor and guard him, especially in the fourth quarter of Game #7, while Rodman watched from the bench.

ChicagoJ
05-17-2005, 12:06 AM
In general, I agree. Without Rodman, the Bulls wouldn't be able to slow down/stop Kemp or Malone. On the other hand, it was a matter of Jordan getting back into form, Kukoc matured as a player, and other factors. But the bottom line is I agree with you that the Bulls wouldn't fair as well without Rodman.


Off cource some of you could say if the the Bulls had a different PF of C, they would still win championships. But then, it's just implying that Rodman would be equivalent to whoever PF or C you pick for the Bulls. That wouldn't undermine the importance of Rodman to the team.

That's Kstat's point. Grey said the Bulls would've been successful without him. Kstat said,


Successful? Yes.

Would they have won any titles? No.

I called "bull****."

Did Rodman make them tougher? Yes, duh.

Would they have won without him? IMO, at least two of the three, and Rodman didn't contribute much in 1998 so probably all three.

shags
05-17-2005, 12:08 AM
Jordan was back in 'game shape' after getting embarassed by Nick Anderson and Penny Hardaway.

The designated rebounder could've been Will Perdue and they would've cruised in 1995-96 and 1996-97. And Rodman wasn't the difference for the 1997-98 team, either. Kukoc was, since neither Dale nor Tony would step out on the floor and guard him, especially in the fourth quarter of Game #7, while Rodman watched from the bench.

I thought I remembered Kukoc starting for the Bulls in the Finals in 98. Rodman definitely slipped defensively in his last year with the Pistons, & then with the Spurs & Bulls. I think Horace Grant was more effective for the Bulls in their first three-peat than Rodman was in their second run. Of course the 95 Jordan and the 96 Jordan were two different players, which was the main reason they won (along with Pippen's emergence as a top 5 player).

But I think Rodman deserves to be in the HOF, but I doubt it happens. I also think the Pistons should retire his number, but that will never happen as well.

Kstat
05-17-2005, 12:20 AM
First of all, Pippen was a top-5 player going back to 1993.

Secondly, if you think the Bulls would ahve won three titles WITHOUT Rodman, you're fooling yourself.

Or do you think thair ability to stop Grant and Shaq in the 1996 ECF had ANYTHIGN whatsoever to do with Jordan being in better shape.....

As for Kucoc, he was better because he was COMING OFF THE BENCH. Kucoc has never and will never be a quality starting PF in the NBA.

And after the absolute disappearing act Kucoc pulled in the 1996 playoffs, don't even begin to call him a tough frontcourt player. Horace Grant made him his own personal toy in 1995. Thats why they went out and got Rodman.

The Bulls going from the worst-rebounding team in the NBA to the best had VERY LITTLE to do with Kucoc, Jordan, Pippen, or any of their semi-useless centers.

ChicagoJ
05-17-2005, 12:33 AM
God knows I've spend more time defending Jordan in this thread than in the previous 35 years of my life combined. I feel so dirty.

Believe what you want to believe, I'm walking away from this one.

NewType
05-17-2005, 12:35 AM
The Bulls going from the worst-rebounding team in the NBA to the best had VERY LITTLE to do with Kucoc, Jordan, Pippen, or any of their semi-useless centers.

Exactly. All Bulls' centers were pretty much useless. They were soft, probably except for the Chief, but he was old. Without Rodman, their team would be extremely soft. They need a stronger defensive and rebounding presence down low to face Kemp or Malone and Rodman was exactly what they needed.

Kstat
05-17-2005, 12:36 AM
God knows I've spend more time defending Jordan in this thread than in the previous 35 years of my life combined. I feel so dirty.

Believe what you want to believe, I'm walking away from this one.

Much as I believe Jordan is the greatest player of all time......

....he still can't play power forward.

Unclebuck
05-17-2005, 10:14 AM
I don't really pay much attention to the Hall of Fame. Just never had much interest in it. So I don't know the criteria.

Rodman was one of my favorite players in the league while he was on the Pistons, I loved the guy, but then he wigged out. But more than that he became selfish and often sacrificed good defense so he could get rebounds. He became a selfish rebounder. I know he was when he was on the Spurs.

Mushmouth
05-17-2005, 10:28 AM
I figured I'd bring this up here, with people that have no attachement to rodman, pro or con.

I compare him a lot to reggie miller, in this respect: they were both GREAT at one thing, and average in a lot of other catagories.

Reggie was the greatest shooter of his era, bar none.

Rodman was the greatest rebounder of his era, bar none.

Unless you put more stock into shooting than rebounding, I think if Reggie gets to the hall (which I think he will), so should dennis. I don't think there's a "character" clause in the hall, and even if there was, I don't think being wierd should be considered an offense.

And if thats not enough to get Dennis in, he played on two of the greatest teams in NBA history, and he was a top-3 player on both of them.

All that considered, I still have my doubts Rodman will get in.

I think by nature of being a great shooter, Reggie inherently is great at other things. Like scoring efficiency, free throw shooting, points per shot... things that make great print when discussing HOF merits. In fact, this is a good time to bring up "Player Wins" and "Win Shares" from Basketball-reference.com (definitions to follow). I think just taking a look at this list shows how scoring automatically vaults Reggie above Rodman, despite the fact that I agree with your premise:

Note: Player Wins available since 1978.

Total

<table class="smallTable" border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"> <tbody><tr class="topRow"><td align="right">
</td><td>Name</td><td align="right">PW</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">1</td><td>Karl Malone (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonka01.html)</td><td align="right">226.04</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">2</td><td>Hakeem Olajuwon (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/olajuha01.html)</td><td align="right">186.79</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">3</td><td>Michael Jordan (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html)</td><td align="right">184.44</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">4</td><td>John Stockton (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/stockjo01.html)</td><td align="right">182.11</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">5</td><td>David Robinson (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/robinda01.html)</td><td align="right">167.79</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">6</td><td>Charles Barkley (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/barklch01.html)</td><td align="right">166.17</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">7</td><td>Moses Malone (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonmo01.html)*</td><td align="right">154.42</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">8</td><td>Reggie Miller (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/millere01.html)</td><td align="right">152.22</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">9</td><td>Robert Parish (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/parisro01.html)*</td><td align="right">148.70</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">10</td><td>Shaquille O'Neal (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html)</td><td align="right">148.10</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">11</td><td>Patrick Ewing (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/e/ewingpa01.html)</td><td align="right">143.88</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">12</td><td>Larry Bird (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/birdla01.html)*</td><td align="right">143.10</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">13</td><td>Magic Johnson (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsma02.html)*</td><td align="right">137.95</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">14</td><td>Clyde Drexler (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/drexlcl01.html)*</td><td align="right">131.61</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">15</td><td>Gary Payton (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/paytoga01.html)</td><td align="right">131.35</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">16</td><td>Scottie Pippen (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html)</td><td align="right">128.46</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">17</td><td>Buck Williams (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/willibu01.html)</td><td align="right">123.62</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">18</td><td>Jack Sikma (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/sikmaja01.html)</td><td align="right">120.49</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">19</td><td>Horace Grant (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/grantho01.html)</td><td align="right">117.63</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">20</td><td>Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html)*</td><td align="right">117.61</td></tr></tbody> </table>
Player wins; the formula is PGm (http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/glossary.html#PGm)*PW% (http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/glossary.html#PWP). Player wins is an estimate of the number of wins produced by a player for his team.

Note: Win Shares available since 1978.

Total

<table class="smallTable" border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"> <tbody><tr class="topRow"><td align="right">
</td><td>Name</td><td align="right">WS</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">1</td><td>Karl Malone (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonka01.html)</td><td align="right"> 660</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">2</td><td>John Stockton (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/stockjo01.html)</td><td align="right"> 589</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">3</td><td>Michael Jordan (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html)</td><td align="right"> 588</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">4</td><td>Reggie Miller (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/millere01.html)</td><td align="right"> 508</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">5</td><td>Charles Barkley (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/barklch01.html)</td><td align="right"> 495</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">6</td><td>David Robinson (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/robinda01.html)</td><td align="right"> 484</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">7</td><td>Magic Johnson (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsma02.html)*</td><td align="right"> 472</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">8</td><td>Moses Malone (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonmo01.html)*</td><td align="right"> 455</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">9</td><td>Shaquille O'Neal (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html)</td><td align="right"> 447</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">10</td><td>Hakeem Olajuwon (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/olajuha01.html)</td><td align="right"> 439</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">11</td><td>Larry Bird (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/birdla01.html)*</td><td align="right"> 435</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">12</td><td>Gary Payton (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/paytoga01.html)</td><td align="right"> 410</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">13</td><td>Robert Parish (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/parisro01.html)*</td><td align="right"> 409</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">14</td><td>Clyde Drexler (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/drexlcl01.html)*</td><td align="right"> 380</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">15</td><td>Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html)*</td><td align="right"> 370</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">16</td><td>Horace Grant (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/grantho01.html)</td><td align="right"> 351</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">17</td><td>Kevin McHale (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/mchalke01.html)*</td><td align="right"> 350</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">18</td><td>Adrian Dantley (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/dantlad01.html)</td><td align="right"> 348</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">
</td><td>Dominique Wilkins (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wilkido01.html)</td><td align="right"> 348</td></tr> <tr><td align="right">20</td><td>Scottie Pippen (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html)</td><td align="right"> 346</td></tr></tbody> </table>
more complicated win share explanation: http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html


These stats are far from perfect, but it illustrates my point about scoring/shooting being more sexy than rebounding. It also speaks to the idea that Reggie was a bigger reason for Pacers success than Rodman for the awesome success he had in his career.

That said, Rodman is the best modern-era rebounder and was one of the best defenders in the league for years, wears 5 rings, colored hair and fur. I think he deserves to be in the HOF.




Just for kicks, I'll throw out another great Reggie Stat or two.

His career TS%- True shooting percentage [the formula is PTS (http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/glossary.html#PTS) / (2*(FGA (http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/glossary.html#FGA) + (0.44*FTA (http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/glossary.html#FTA)))] is .614. Pick a player and compare it... here are a SG and SF comparisons:

MJ: .569
Bird: .564
Drexler: .547
West: .550

Even great accurate shooters who didn't shoot as much as Reg, like Hornacek (.582) and Mark Price (.586) aren't even close.

Pretty telling stat.

Also, for kicks, I'll add that Reggie is 30th all-time in steals :D

travmil
05-17-2005, 11:30 AM
Everyone, the only way you're going to get him to shut up is to say "Pi$$ on Reggie, Dennis Rodman is the better player and is more deserving of the HOF". That's the only thing that will do it, even if you don't believe it. All hail 2005 most argumentative poster.