Dennis Rodman is underrated.

[no pun intended]

Dennis Rodman is one of the most undeserved player ever. His defensive presence of Rodman is underrated. He is a 6'7 guy who manages to put up a career avg of 14 rpg. Moreover, he has averaged 18.7, 18.3, 17.3, and 16.8 rpg in four consecutive seasons. And he is capable of shooting threes at a decent percentage.

[Tito Beasley]

Dennis Rodman is one of the most undeserved player ever. His defensive presence of Rodman is underrated. He is a 6'7 guy who manages to put up a career avg of 14 rpg. Moreover, he has averaged 18.7, 18.3, 17.3, and 16.8 rpg in four consecutive seasons. And he is capable of shooting threes at a decent percentage.


Of course he is underrated.

Giving him credit would take away from the idea that "Jordan was superhuman and did it all by himseflfffff!!!!"

Average dummies don't think rebounding and defense are important, only athleticism and high-difficulty turnaround fadeaway jumpers. whoever does those the best is obviously the best playerrrzzduhduhduhduh

[Cangri]

Dennis Rodman is one of the most undeserved player ever. His defensive presence of Rodman is underrated. He is a 6'7 guy who manages to put up a career avg of 14 rpg. Moreover, he has averaged 18.7, 18.3, 17.3, and 16.8 rpg in four consecutive seasons. And he is capable of shooting threes at a decent percentage.
:oldlol: :oldlol:

But seriously, I don't see how he's underrated. He's basically labeled as one of the best defensive players and rebounders of the NBA.

[(e)]

Definitely is underrated, hell even Pip is underrated. That trio was something else.

[bdreason]

Hardly underrated.

Fantastic rebounder and great defender, but a complete liability on the offensive end. We're talking about a guy who averaged under 6ppg on ~44%, and shot ~55% from the FT line in his 3 year tenure with the Bulls.

[no pun intended]

Hardly underrated.

Fantastic rebounder and great defender, but a complete liability on the offensive end. We're talking about a guy who averaged under 6ppg on ~44%, and shot ~55% from the FT line in his 3 year tenure with the Bulls.
Then Ben Wallace must be overrated.

[TrueRob]

Of course he is underrated.

Giving him credit would take away from the idea that "Jordan was superhuman and did it all by himseflfffff!!!!"

Average dummies don't think rebounding and defense are important, only athleticism and high-difficulty turnaround fadeaway jumpers. whoever does those the best is obviously the best playerrrzzduhduhduhduh

Yeah, scorers always get the credit. A guy could average 10/20 in the Finals and still lose Finals MVP to a 21/5 guy if he's the highest scorer on the team.

[bdreason]

Then Ben Wallace must be overrated.


Both guys are rated accurately. Great defenders who were offensive liabilities.


Now, that being said, there are HUNDREDS of players in the NBA who are OVERRATED because of their offensive numbers.

A guy like Steve Nash winning 2 MVP's without playing a lick of defense comes to mind. I hate to pick on Nash, because he's great at what he does... but winning 2 NBA MVP's is laughable.

[niko]

Hardly underrated.

Fantastic rebounder and great defender, but a complete liability on the offensive end. We're talking about a guy who averaged under 6ppg on ~44%, and shot ~55% from the FT line in his 3 year tenure with the Bulls.

and he hardly was focused and playing hard all the time. Did people actually see the players play that they are talking about? there was a year with SA where he actively destroyed their playoffs.

btw, is the new thing on this board going to be to try to discredit Jordan to give lebron props?

[Tito Beasley]

btw, is the new thing on this board going to be to try to discredit Jordan to give lebron props?


yeah, it's gonna replace the old thing of doing it to give Kobe props.

[Fatal9]

cool fact: Rodman averaged more ppg in the '96 playoff run than Bynum did in the '09 run.

[Batz]

cool fact: Rodman averaged more ppg in the '96 playoff run than Bynum did in the '09 run.
Irrelevant like crazy...

[Sarcastic]

Underrated in what sense? He is regarded as one of the best rebounders and defenders of all time. His offense was poor in the NBA, even though he put up good numbers in college.

[VIP2000]

I would say he is underrated in that he probably won't be inducted in the Hall of Fame.

However, most basketball fans would say he was an absolute monster on defense and the boards.

[DOUBLE DRIBBLE]

Both guys are rated accurately. Great defenders who were offensive liabilities.


Now, that being said, there are HUNDREDS of players in the NBA who are OVERRATED because of their offensive numbers.

A guy like Steve Nash winning 2 MVP's without playing a lick of defense comes to mind. I hate to pick on Nash, because he's great at what he does... but winning 2 NBA MVP's is laughable.
You got take for account the system Nash played in... they didn't rely on defense. Nash isn't as bad defensively as it appears. Don't get me wrong... Not saying he is good on D because he isn't but playing in that system doesn't help either. There have been other MVP's that weren't good defenders too. You do know it's called "most valuable player" right? Not best player.

[97 bulls]

You got take for account the system Nash played in... they didn't rely on defense. Nash isn't as bad defensively as it appears. Don't get me wrong... Not saying he is good on D because he isn't but playing in that system doesn't help either. There have been other MVP's that weren't good defenders too. You do know it's called "most valuable player" right? Not best player.
There is no offense in any sport that allows a team to negate defense.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Then Ben Wallace must be overrated.

Ben Wallace was a shotblocking/intimidating presence inside (3.3 bpg average over his 3 year prime). Rodman provided none of that.

[OldSchoolBBall]

cool fact: Rodman averaged more ppg in the '96 playoff run than Bynum did in the '09 run.

Rodman also played twice as many mpg (34 vs. 17).

[godofgods]

Wrong. He is one of the most overrated PFs of all time and does not belong anywhere near the HOF.

[bdreason]

You got take for account the system Nash played in... they didn't rely on defense. Nash isn't as bad defensively as it appears. Don't get me wrong... Not saying he is good on D because he isn't but playing in that system doesn't help either. There have been other MVP's that weren't good defenders too. You do know it's called "most valuable player" right? Not best player.


I really don't want to turn this into a Nash debate (he's actually one of my fav players to watch), or a debate over what the MVP means. I just find it hard to believe that a guy who doesn't play a lick of D is the most valuable player in the NBA... and Nash isn't the first to win MVP predominately because of his offensive display.

Ultimately, the game is played on two sides of the court. Offense will always get more accolades, but defense at least has to be a consideration.

[SoCalMike]

Hardly underrated.

Fantastic rebounder and great defender, but a complete liability on the offensive end. We're talking about a guy who averaged under 6ppg on ~44%, and shot ~55% from the FT line in his 3 year tenure with the Bulls.

this...

what is underrated about him? he constantly gets due credit for his defense and rebounding so i am not sure why this thread even exists. he was a fantastic role player, plain and simple.

the worm definitely rocks.


:pimp:

[97 bulls]

Actually, rodman was a very good offensesive player. He was never asked to score in chicago. And id say his low fg% was more a case of shooting jumpers and taking multiple tip in shots while battling the greatest collection of centers and pfs the league has ever had in an era. And on those nights that teams tried to double off him, he'd get 20 plus boards with half of them being on th OFFENSIVE end.

He should be in the hall.

[DOUBLE DRIBBLE]

There is no offense in any sport that allows a team to negate defense.Some teams put more of an emphasis on offense than defense.... and when that happens their defense suffers. Am I being clear, do you understand what I'm trying to say? lol

[97 bulls]

Ben Wallace was a shotblocking/intimidating presence inside (3.3 bpg average over his 3 year prime). Rodman provided none of that.
Wow, I don't know who you hate more kobe or any bull that played from 85 to 98 not named jordan. Ben wallace would've never done what he did in the early 2000s had he played in the 90s and 80s. Rodman is wayyyyyy better than him. I hate when you post cuz you make jordan fans look bad.

[97 bulls]

Some teams put more of an emphasis on offense than defense.... and when that happens their defense suffers. Am I being clear, do you understand what I'm trying to say? lol
You mean bend but don't break. Even if nash played in another system, he's not a good/on the ball defender. He gets beat far too often, is always out of position, is too slow, not quick enough, can't jump etc. Other than that, hes a good defender

[OldSchoolBBall]

Wow, I don't know who you hate more kobe or any bull that played from 85 to 98 not named jordan. Ben wallace would've never done what he did in the early 2000s had he played in the 90s and 80s. Rodman is wayyyyyy better than him. I hate when you post cuz you make jordan fans look bad.

Explain to me how an 8 pt/13 reb/3+ blk current DPOY player (during his 3 year prime) is WAAAAAAAAY worse than a 5 pt/15 reb/0.5 blk former DPOY player? Your assertion is laughable. Wallace may be worse (I don't believe he is), but LMAO @ "waaaaay" worse. :oldlol:

[SinJackal]

and he hardly was focused and playing hard all the time. Did people actually see the players play that they are talking about? there was a year with SA where he actively destroyed their playoffs.

btw, is the new thing on this board going to be to try to discredit Jordan to give lebron props?

Exactly. I'm glad somebody else around here has ACTUALLY watched the guy play. He was a serious liability when he played with SA, and every so often he decides to just quit during games even with the Bulls, committing stupid fouls, letting the guy he's on have better defensive position so he can try and pump up his rebounding numbers.

He was an ass with a ton of baggage. His defense is overrated because he "decides" when he "feels like it", and does not defense well all the time. He's like Tyrus Thomas now. Looks great at time, and other times it's like dude are you even trying? Wtf?



Actually, rodman was a very good offensesive player. He was never asked to score in chicago. And id say his low fg% was more a case of shooting jumpers and taking multiple tip in shots while battling the greatest collection of centers and pfs the league has ever had in an era. And on those nights that teams tried to double off him, he'd get 20 plus boards with half of them being on th OFFENSIVE end.

He should be in the hall.

He bricked wide open point blank layups, and barely shot 50% from the free throw line. He was not a good offensive player. In fact, this clown is known for bricking his own shot and catching his own rebound to pump up his rebounding numbers.

He was a clown who ruined team chemistry and quit randomly. He played defense in spots, and did little else but rebound the ball. I would gladly tae a 9-10 boards a game guy who plays D' ALL the time at an above average but not great rate, and does not brick open layups over Rodman. Assuming the other guy isn't a cancer in the locker room who quits randomly during the playoffs.

[DOUBLE DRIBBLE]

You mean bend but don't break. Even if nash played in another system, he's not a good/on the ball defender. He gets beat far too often, is always out of position, is too slow, not quick enough, can't jump etc. Other than that, hes a good defenderWow... Are u just throwing theseout there? Show me any footage of this happening while he wore a Mavs jeresy. You're exaggerating abut brotha...too slow, not quick enough? Out of position? Are you serious?

[Bigsmoke]

i grew up watching him play and i think he's overrated. I didnt really think his defense was that great but i cant hate on all those crazy rebounding games he had.

[97 bulls]

Exactly. I'm glad somebody else around here has ACTUALLY watched the guy play. He was a serious liability when he played with SA, and every so often he decides to just quit during games even with the Bulls, committing stupid fouls, letting the guy he's on have better defensive position so he can try and pump up his rebounding numbers.

He was an ass with a ton of baggage. His defense is overrated because he "decides" when he "feels like it", and does not defense well all the time. He's like Tyrus Thomas now. Looks great at time, and other times it's like dude are you even trying? Wtf?




He bricked wide open point blank layups, and barely shot 50% from the free throw line. He was not a good offensive player. In fact, this clown is known for bricking his own shot and catching his own rebound to pump up his rebounding numbers.

He was a clown who ruined team chemistry and quit randomly. He played defense in spots, and did little else but rebound the ball. I would gladly tae a 9-10 boards a game guy who plays D' ALL the time at an above average but not great rate, and does not brick open layups over Rodman. Assuming the other guy isn't a cancer in the locker room who quits randomly during the playoffs.
Lol he never quit on a team. In fact, he gave 110 per every night. He called out the spurs and questioned robinsons will and dedication to winning. I remember him reffering to how it bothered him that when the spurs were loosing, they'd be on the sideline joking around. And he never quit as a piston or a bull.

[97 bulls]

Wow... Are u just throwing theseout there? Show me any footage of this happening while he wore a Mavs jeresy. You're exaggerating abut brotha...too slow, not quick enough? Out of position? Are you serious?
Lol he doesn't have a reputation for being a bad defender for no reason. Show me who he's shut down.

[godofgods]

Then Ben Wallace must be overrated.

Very much so.

[Turkododo]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_HHDsS7my1oc/Rh0n2BQ7O4I/AAAAAAAAANU/1baz2na5DSM/s400/taylorwithshirt.jpg

[Tito Beasley]

what is underrated about him? he constantly gets due credit for his defense and rebounding so i am not sure why this thread even exists.


it's the fact that people underrate exactly how important those things are to winning championships.

everyone pays brief lipservice saying rodman was a great defender and rebounder. but nobody ever says "rings!" when talking about him like they do with other players because they think he didnt do enough to contribute to them to use that as a barometer.

of course if you bring up jordan, it's "SIX RINGS, SIX RINGS!!!!!" as if he earned six rings by beating teams 1 on 5.

and then of course kobe stans are following in those same footsteps, as if the rest of the laker team isnt loaded.

[SinJackal]

Lol he never quit on a team. In fact, he gave 110 per every night. He called out the spurs and questioned robinsons will and dedication to winning. I remember him reffering to how it bothered him that when the spurs were loosing, they'd be on the sideline joking around. And he never quit as a piston or a bull.

Kid, I have watched nearly every single Spurs AND Bulls game since the early 90s. I personally guarantee you that Rodman quit while playing for both teams MULTIPLE times. And I could not care less that that ass clown said about SA. Anybody who watched him in the playoffs know he would constantly quit mid play and just stand still and slap at people's wrists (like Sam Cassell) as he's dribbling up court because he was bored with playing basketball.

He's a disgrace to the NBA. Extremley overrated. And dude, I have been a fan of both SA and Chicago for 20 years. I think he sucks. Who else's opinion would mean more than mine? Besides someone who liked Detroit, SA, and Chicago for 20 years?

He quit all the time. He just makes 2-3 stupid fouls in a row when he wants to be taken out of the game. And he was always letting people take borderline uncontested jumpers so he could try and get a rebound.

[NinjaSeal]

You mean bend but don't break. Even if nash played in another system, he's not a good/on the ball defender. He gets beat far too often, is always out of position, is too slow, not quick enough, can't jump etc. Other than that, hes a good defender

so rodman is just as athletic as jordan was.. in terms of speed , not acceleration (lateral movement), but speed

son rodman was athletic

[mattevans11]

You got take for account the system Nash played in... they didn't rely on defense. Nash isn't as bad defensively as it appears. Don't get me wrong... Not saying he is good on D because he isn't but playing in that system doesn't help either. There have been other MVP's that weren't good defenders too. You do know it's called "most valuable player" right? Not best player.


maybe the team has bad defense becuase of the liability of the pg position? nash is a bad defensive player..... not an "okay" one.

[mattevans11]

Kid, I have watched nearly every single Spurs AND Bulls game since the early 90s. I personally guarantee you that Rodman quit while playing for both teams MULTIPLE times. And I could not care less that that ass clown said about SA. Anybody who watched him in the playoffs know he would constantly quit mid play and just stand still and slap at people's wrists (like Sam Cassell) as he's dribbling up court because he was bored with playing basketball.

He's a disgrace to the NBA. Extremley overrated. And dude, I have been a fan of both SA and Chicago for 20 years. I think he sucks. Who else's opinion would mean more than mine? Besides someone who liked Detroit, SA, and Chicago for 20 years?

He quit all the time. He just makes 2-3 stupid fouls in a row when he wants to be taken out of the game. And he was always letting people take borderline uncontested jumpers so he could try and get a rebound.



another ego maniac in the forum... disregard my last post..... he was not being sarcastic at all..... good god..... but he is the expert here..... he said it himself...

[Roundball_Rock]

Wow, I don't know who you hate more kobe or any bull that played from 85 to 98 not named jordan.

His hate list goes like this:

1) Scottie Pippen
2) Kobe Bryant
3) Any other Bulls from 1985-1998

The Bulls lost in the second round to Orlando. They actually added Jordan and were less competitive in the playoffs than the previous year (3-0 sweep in the first round in 94' versus a 3-1 win, a 3-4 defeat based on arguably the worst call in NBA playoff history versus a convincing 2-4 defeat based on simply being the inferior team in 95'). Why? The Bulls were a joke rebounding the ball. Their best rebounders in 95' were the SF and SG! :roll: In 94' they had a 15/11 PF. Enter Dennis Rodman, the best rebounder in the league. The result? 72-10. Obviously it was not all Rodman. Jordan improved and the chemistry was better in 96' while Pippen remained a top 3-4 player but without Rodman the arguable GOAT team would not have won a ring that year.

[97 bulls]

Explain to me how an 8 pt/13 reb/3+ blk current DPOY player (during his 3 year prime) is WAAAAAAAAY worse than a 5 pt/15 reb/0.5 blk former DPOY player? Your assertion is laughable. Wallace may be worse (I don't believe he is), but LMAO @ "waaaaay" worse. :oldlol:
Because rodman played against far better competition. Hell wallace wasn't even good enough to make a team in the late 90s.

[97 bulls]

Kid, I have watched nearly every single Spurs AND Bulls game since the early 90s. I personally guarantee you that Rodman quit while playing for both teams MULTIPLE times. And I could not care less that that ass clown said about SA. Anybody who watched him in the playoffs know he would constantly quit mid play and just stand still and slap at people's wrists (like Sam Cassell) as he's dribbling up court because he was bored with playing basketball.

He's a disgrace to the NBA. Extremley overrated. And dude, I have been a fan of both SA and Chicago for 20 years. I think he sucks. Who else's opinion would mean more than mine? Besides someone who liked Detroit, SA, and Chicago for 20 years?

He quit all the time. He just makes 2-3 stupid fouls in a row when he wants to be taken out of the game. And he was always letting people take borderline uncontested jumpers so he could try and get a rebound.
First of all, I'm not a kid. I'm 36. Rodman made a living on hustle and defense. The man would ride a stationary bike when phil gave him a "rest". There's multiple pic and video of him diving head first for loose balls. That's not a quiter in my book.

[97 bulls]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_HHDsS7my1oc/Rh0n2BQ7O4I/AAAAAAAAANU/1baz2na5DSM/s400/taylorwithshirt.jpg
Its dumb shit like this that will keep him out of the hall

[whoartthou]

rodman was a great rebounder, and pretty good defender (when he wanted to defend that is). The only problem with rodman is that he seemed to be very bipolar on the court. One game he is playing great, another game he seems completely checked and disinterested.

[AK47DR91]

He's the greatest rebounder and defender of the last 25 years.

[BlueandGold]

first ballot hall of famer for sure. Great example of how the media controls hall of fame voting.

[97 bulls]

His hate list goes like this:

1) Scottie Pippen
2) Kobe Bryant
3) Any other Bulls from 1985-1998

The Bulls lost in the second round to Orlando. They actually added Jordan and were less competitive in the playoffs than the previous year (3-0 sweep in the first round in 94' versus a 3-1 win, a 3-4 defeat based on arguably the worst call in NBA playoff history versus a convincing 2-4 defeat based on simply being the inferior team in 95'). Why? The Bulls were a joke rebounding the ball. Their best rebounders in 95' were the SF and SG! :roll: In 94' they had a 15/11 PF. Enter Dennis Rodman, the best rebounder in the league. The result? 72-10. Obviously it was not all Rodman. Jordan improved and the chemistry was better in 96' while Pippen remained a top 3-4 player but without Rodman the arguable GOAT team would not have won a ring that year.
What's up rock? How's it goin bro? Long time no chat. And I agree with everything you said

[SinJackal]

another ego maniac in the forum... disregard my last post..... he was not being sarcastic at all..... good god..... but he is the expert here..... he said it himself...

Did you read what I even said? Seriously. Nearly everyone who posts on this forum about players from more than 10 years ago have only seen him play only in highlight videos or a handful of select games. I have seen hundreds of Rodman games from 93-98. So tell me genius, why would what I have to say about it mean equal to or less than someone who has only seen him play in highlight vids or a handful of games?

Get your head out of your ass. You're just being an annoying clown at this point.



First of all, I'm not a kid. I'm 36. Rodman made a living on hustle and defense. The man would ride a stationary bike when phil gave him a "rest". There's multiple pic and video of him diving head first for loose balls. That's not a quiter in my book.

Highlight videos don't mean shit. They only show positive plays. Automatic fail argument. Again, I have seen hundreds of Rodman games, nearly every single game he played from 93-98, and every playoff game and reg season game vs SA or Chicago the 5 years prior to that. He quit constantly, threw fits constantly. Commited stupid fouls consecutively because he didn't feel like playing constantly. Stories of his cancerous locker room presence were rampant. The guy was a bastard. Maybe he wasn't so much of a bastard with Detroit, but he certainly was with SA and Chicago.

[Cyclone112]

Dennis Rodman is one of the most undeserved player ever. His defensive presence of Rodman is underrated. He is a 6'7 guy who manages to put up a career avg of 14 rpg. Moreover, he has averaged 18.7, 18.3, 17.3, and 16.8 rpg in four consecutive seasons. And he is capable of shooting threes at a decent percentage.

:wtf: are you talking about?

[SGK_81]

unless 0.231 is a decent percentage...

[cotdt]

Jordan/Pippen/Rodman was such a powerful trio, but the new one on the Heat may be even better

[Rake2204]

I feel Rodman is rated accurately. Most people are very quick to give praise for his awesome rebounding and his great defense. Unfortunately, his on and off-court rap sheet was so lengthy that it frequently disrupted his playing career.

I've been a huge Pistons fan since the time Dennis was there and I was a monster Spurs fan while he was in San Antonio which is not to say I'm an expert in the matter here, but I certainly did have my time of watching Dennis Rodman play and he definitely did a ton of great things a lot of the time. Particularly early on in Detroit, he was just a zany go-getter, filling in all the games' blanks.

However, toward the end of his time in Detroit, he had definitely visited the dark side, and that continued in San Antonio. Dennis did provide a lot initially in San Antonio but his extracurricular antics eventually played a large part in his teams' downfall and his own. I remember there was at least one playoff game where Dennis Rodman did indeed quit on the Spurs (removing his shoes and not joining the huddle).

If I recall correctly Rodman also missed a chunk of the '95 season due to a motorcycle accident. Though riding a motorcycle is not a crime, when you combine that incident with everything else going on, there was a lot of the "Here we go again. . ." sentiment. The culmination of all these issues is what led to the Spurs only being able to yield the great Will Perdue for Rodman in a trade.

The good news is the Chicago Bulls were able to take stock of Rodman's crazy and understand what they were getting into and how might be the best way to handle things. The "give him his space and let him do his thing" mantra worked out for the most part. He still had issues (head butting an official, kicking a cameraman in the groin, etc.) but they all tended to smooth over - as winning tends to erase all that stuff.

I'd say, just because there's highlight clips of a player diving awesomely for a loose ball, it doesn't automatically mean he always gave his all and never gave up.

If you find yourself believing Rodman was never a hindrance or possibly gave up on his team, I'd suggest giving a quick read through his NBA.com profile, in particular the 1994-1995 season summary. http://www.nba.com/playerfile/dennis_rodman/bio.html

[AirJordan&Magic]

Both guys are rated accurately. Great defenders who were offensive liabilities.


Now, that being said, there are HUNDREDS of players in the NBA who are OVERRATED because of their offensive numbers.

A guy like Steve Nash winning 2 MVP's without playing a lick of defense comes to mind. I hate to pick on Nash, because he's great at what he does... but winning 2 NBA MVP's is laughable.

I always laugh when I see people call Rodman an offesnive liability. Other then his herendous ft shooting, he was hardly a liability on offense.

Contrary to this myth....Rodman was actually capable of giving his teams' quality baskets when given the opportunity, could run the floor well, and was a very underrated passer (in fact, he is one of the greatest outlet passers of all time).

Many people may not believe me, but Rodman actually had a game in which he scored 35 pts on 71% shooting and grabbed 23 boards.

And had another game in which he scored 32 pts 21 boards 4 ast 3 blks on 80% shooting.

:roll: at anyone that compares Wallace to Rodman. Wallace could not in his wildest dreams have games like this.

[AirJordan&Magic]

Actually, rodman was a very good offensesive player. He was never asked to score in chicago. And id say his low fg% was more a case of shooting jumpers and taking multiple tip in shots while battling the greatest collection of centers and pfs the league has ever had in an era. And on those nights that teams tried to double off him, he'd get 20 plus boards with half of them being on th OFFENSIVE end.

He should be in the hall.

:applause: Thank you!

The only people that say he was not a good offensive player are either ....
a) kids who never watched him play and look at 82games.com,...or
b) Rodman haters....

[niko]

Lol he never quit on a team. In fact, he gave 110 per every night. He called out the spurs and questioned robinsons will and dedication to winning. I remember him reffering to how it bothered him that when the spurs were loosing, they'd be on the sideline joking around. And he never quit as a piston or a bull.

No, that's wrong. :confusedshrug:

[Rake2204]

:applause: Thank you!

The only people that say he was not a good offensive player are either ....
a) kids who never watched him play and look at 82games.com,...or
b) Rodman haters....
He knew his offensive role. I think that'd be the way I'd put it. Also, he was never a guy you wanted to have the ball late in the shot clock, hoping he'd make something happen. So from that perspective, he didn't have a lot of offensive tools. He wasn't going to break someone down off the dribble and he wasn't going to blow past someone on the wing and he was never counted on as any kind of threat in the post.

What he did well offensively was fill the lane on fast breaks and generally just fill in gaps, period. He was an opportunistic scorer, where he'd accumulate points by being on the receiving end of a fast break dish, or by battling his butt off near the bucket for an offensive rebound or three and finishing with an eventual putback deuce. So yes, from an ability to score perspective he could physically play offense but I wouldn't say that was ever one of his strengths.

And I guess this would be mostly aimed toward Bulls 97's in terms of comparing a game in which Rodman put up 32 and 21 as a means for saying he was thereby a better player than Ben Wallace. . .I'm not sure I'd agree that a couple of isolated statistical examples would close the case. It'd be akin to pointing out that Ben Wallace has had at least two triple doubles using the points, rebounds, and blocks formula (much more infrequent than the traditional points, rebounds, assists trip-doub) as a means to reaffirm his greatness over Rodman, as Dennis has never achieved 10+ blocks.

In all honesty, as a Pistons lifer, I was big on both Wallace and Rodman so the head-to-head comparisons are always a little frustrating for me (why can't we just love them both?!) but I do feel Ben Wallace meant just as much to the Pistons' '04 ring as Rodman did to either of the Bad Boys titles. I thoroughly enjoyed watching both players play, for separate reasons.

[Nastradamus]

Both guys are rated accurately. Great defenders who were offensive liabilities.


Now, that being said, there are HUNDREDS of players in the NBA who are OVERRATED because of their offensive numbers.

A guy like Steve Nash winning 2 MVP's without playing a lick of defense comes to mind. I hate to pick on Nash, because he's great at what he does... but winning 2 NBA MVP's is laughable.

Even with his lack of defense(though he does always give full effort, that counts for something), he did more to help his team win than any other player those years. IDK if he was the best player, but he was MVP. He made, and still does make, everyone on his team better.

[Apocalyptic0n3]

Anyone remember NBA Live like... 96? The one where his hair would change every game and be something completely different. One of the first video games to do something dynamic like that, I think. Always thought it was super cool and I'd play as the Bulls ten games in a row just to see his different hairstyles. lol

[97 bulls]

I feel Rodman is rated accurately. Most people are very quick to give praise for his awesome rebounding and his great defense. Unfortunately, his on and off-court rap sheet was so lengthy that it frequently disrupted his playing career.

I've been a huge Pistons fan since the time Dennis was there and I was a monster Spurs fan while he was in San Antonio which is not to say I'm an expert in the matter here, but I certainly did have my time of watching Dennis Rodman play and he definitely did a ton of great things a lot of the time. Particularly early on in Detroit, he was just a zany go-getter, filling in all the games' blanks.

However, toward the end of his time in Detroit, he had definitely visited the dark side, and that continued in San Antonio. Dennis did provide a lot initially in San Antonio but his extracurricular antics eventually played a large part in his teams' downfall and his own. I remember there was at least one playoff game where Dennis Rodman did indeed quit on the Spurs (removing his shoes and not joining the huddle).

If I recall correctly Rodman also missed a chunk of the '95 season due to a motorcycle accident. Though riding a motorcycle is not a crime, when you combine that incident with everything else going on, there was a lot of the "Here we go again. . ." sentiment. The culmination of all these issues is what led to the Spurs only being able to yield the great Will Perdue for Rodman in a trade.

The good news is the Chicago Bulls were able to take stock of Rodman's crazy and understand what they were getting into and how might be the best way to handle things. The "give him his space and let him do his thing" mantra worked out for the most part. He still had issues (head butting an official, kicking a cameraman in the groin, etc.) but they all tended to smooth over - as winning tends to erase all that stuff.

I'd say, just because there's highlight clips of a player diving awesomely for a loose ball, it doesn't automatically mean he always gave his all and never gave up.

If you find yourself believing Rodman was never a hindrance or possibly gave up on his team, I'd suggest giving a quick read through his NBA.com profile, in particular the 1994-1995 season summary. http://www.nba.com/playerfile/dennis_rodman/bio.html
This is ridiculous. I agree rodman was crazy (like a fox), and I do remember the shoe incident, but that was 1 time. He played 13 years. And while he had his moments, he definately wasn't a quitter. He said he was frustrated by the way the spurs carried themselves. And called out david robinson as a guy that wasn't serious about winning. Now he obviously went about it wrong, but the man was a winner and wanted to continue to win. That's not a quitter in my book.

[97 bulls]

Anyone remember NBA Live like... 96? The one where his hair would change every game and be something completely different. One of the first video games to do something dynamic like that, I think. Always thought it was super cool and I'd play as the Bulls ten games in a row just to see his different hairstyles. lol
I remember that game. Loved it

[04mzwach]

Rodman is overrated on this forum.

[ThaRegul8r]

I always laugh when I see people call Rodman an offesnive liability. Other then his herendous ft shooting, he was hardly a liability on offense.

Contrary to this myth....Rodman was actually capable of giving his teams' quality baskets when given the opportunity, could run the floor well, and was a very underrated passer (in fact, he is one of the greatest outlet passers of all time).

Many people may not believe me, but Rodman actually had a game in which he scored 35 pts on 71% shooting and grabbed 23 boards.

And had another game in which he scored 32 pts 21 boards 4 ast 3 blks on 80% shooting.

I guess people are unaware that Rodman also led the league in field-goal percentage at 59.5% one year? :confusedshrug:

[Fatal9]

Rodman was also an excellent passer in the triangle.

[niko]

This is ridiculous. I agree rodman was crazy (like a fox), and I do remember the shoe incident, but that was 1 time. He played 13 years. And while he had his moments, he definately wasn't a quitter. He said he was frustrated by the way the spurs carried themselves. And called out david robinson as a guy that wasn't serious about winning. Now he obviously went about it wrong, but the man was a winner and wanted to continue to win. That's not a quitter in my book.

no, he literally sabatoged a post season for SA. Rodman was a beast when he wanted to be. But he didn't always want to be. And it wasn't here or there that he didn't want to be, it happened often.

I don't see how sugarcoating and painting over all the bad parts of a player's legacy helps people learn about them. Dennis Rodman was not all sunshine and raisins, that's just patently ridiculous and to be honest, feels like someone's opinion of him that only say him a very small number of times.

[BlueandGold]

no, he literally sabatoged a post season for SA. Rodman was a beast when he wanted to be. But he didn't always want to be. And it wasn't here or there that he didn't want to be, it happened often.

I don't see how sugarcoating and painting over all the bad parts of a player's legacy helps people learn about them. Dennis Rodman was not all sunshine and raisins, that's just patently ridiculous and to be honest, feels like someone's opinion of him that only say him a very small number of times.

I don't believe personal issues should keep the greatest defender of all time out of the hall of fame.

OJ simpson killed his wife yet he's in the hall.

MJ had an enormous gambling problem yet he's in the hall.

Ray lewis killed someone and he's going into the hall.

The only reason why rodman is not in the hall of fame is because he alienated the press/media to such a severe degree that a lot of hall of fame ballot holders refuse to vote for him just out of spite. If you were to take a coaches poll right now on if Rodman should be a first ballot hall of famer I'm willing to bet 90% would say he does.

[97 bulls]

I guess people are unaware that Rodman also led the league in field-goal percentage at 59.5% one year? :confusedshrug:
And he shot 32% from the 3 one yr too. It just shows that with his offensive rebounding abilities, the ability to start the fastbreak, his passing, his awareness, all show that while he wasn't gonna get you 20 ppg, he was not an offensive liabilty. Even with the bulls, he shot about 46% over his 3 yrs with them and that was with a decent amount of his shot attempts coming from past 12 to 15 feet.

[97 bulls]

no, he literally sabatoged a post season for SA. Rodman was a beast when he wanted to be. But he didn't always want to be. And it wasn't here or there that he didn't want to be, it happened often.

I don't see how sugarcoating and painting over all the bad parts of a player's legacy helps people learn about them. Dennis Rodman was not all sunshine and raisins, that's just patently ridiculous and to be honest, feels like someone's opinion of him that only say him a very small number of times.
"Literally sabotaged"? He missed tha first 17 games of the 94-95 season and the spurs weren't even a 500 team. They were 8 and 9. When he came back, they went 11 and 2 and finished with a 61 and 21 record. They don't even make the playoffs without him.

[97 bulls]

I don't believe personal issues should keep the greatest defender of all time out of the hall of fame.

OJ simpson killed his wife yet he's in the hall.

MJ had an enormous gambling problem yet he's in the hall.

Ray lewis killed someone and he's going into the hall.

The only reason why rodman is not in the hall of fame is because he alienated the press/media to such a severe degree that a lot of hall of fame ballot holders refuse to vote for him just out of spite. If you were to take a coaches poll right now on if Rodman should be a first ballot hall of famer I'm willing to bet 90% would say he does.
Exactly, you can't have a serious convo about all- great teams without rodman with the pistons and bulls. Nor can you talk greatest rebounder or defender ever without rodmsn being in the discussion. Like isaid earlier, the man was a winner.

[CLTHornets4eva]

no, he literally sabatoged a post season for SA. Rodman was a beast when he wanted to be. But he didn't always want to be. And it wasn't here or there that he didn't want to be, it happened often.

I don't see how sugarcoating and painting over all the bad parts of a player's legacy helps people learn about them. Dennis Rodman was not all sunshine and raisins, that's just patently ridiculous and to be honest, feels like someone's opinion of him that only say him a very small number of times.

Yes, but when he did care (like in CHicago) he was perhaps the best pure rebounder of all time. A great defender, and one of the all time greatest hustlers. He was offensively limited, but no one since was as gritty of a rebounder and as physical a rebounder.

[Rake2204]

And he shot 32% from the 3 one yr too. It just shows that with his offensive rebounding abilities, the ability to start the fastbreak, his passing, his awareness, all show that while he wasn't gonna get you 20 ppg, he was not an offensive liabilty. Even with the bulls, he shot about 46% over his 3 yrs with them and that was with a decent amount of his shot attempts coming from past 12 to 15 feet.
He did shoot 32% from the arc one year (on 100 attempts no less) and that blows me away. On one hand, it may make someone say, "Well maybe if he decided to develop that side of his game more he could have had an impact there. . ." But then you take a look at every other single Rodman season from three (even the year directly following the 32% - in which he shot 20% on 73 attempts) and you have to sort of wonder if that one season at 32% wasn't just a statistical anomaly, where he took about one three a game and happened to find the bottom 32 times. Either that, or he was just really, really unlucky from the arc in every other one of his NBA seasons.

And as vague as "decent amount" is when regarding how many shot attempts he took from 12 to 15 feet while in Chicago, I guess I'd need some clarification as to what passes as decent, because I do not recall the 12-15 foot Dennis Rodman jumper being something that Chicago went to multiple times a game. Though, I won't hang my hat on that claim, I can't recall for sure, it just doesn't ring a bell. I just always likened his high field goal percentage to the fact that most of the few shots he took were layups in transition or layups on putbacks (and that's a good thing).

I'm not arguing that Rodman should not be in the Hall of Fame, because I believe he should be. And I'm not arguing that Rodman wasn't a great player, because I think he was. I just think sometimes he gets a little overrated by others. I also never mentioned him as being a quitter but as someone who "called out david robinson as a guy that wasn't serious about winning" I often wondered how serious Dennis Rodman was about winning himself. When your life away from the court leads to suspensions, injuries and other distractions, it makes one wonder just how serious and sincere his words were.

Like I said, I know these are shallow words, but I am a Dennis Rodman fan. I guess I just enjoy commentating and discussing what he could and could not actually do on the basketball court.

[niko]

Yes, but when he did care (like in CHicago) he was perhaps the best pure rebounder of all time. A great defender, and one of the all time greatest hustlers. He was offensively limited, but no one since was as gritty of a rebounder and as physical a rebounder.

i don't disagree with what you said at all. HOwever, the thread has decided he is NOT offensively limited (he was) and that he very rarely took a day off (not true at all).

[97 bulls]

He did shoot 32% from the arc one year (on 100 attempts no less) and that blows me away. On one hand, it may make someone say, "Well maybe if he decided to develop that side of his game more he could have had an impact there. . ." But then you take a look at every other single Rodman season from three (even the year directly following the 32% - in which he shot 20% on 73 attempts) and you have to sort of wonder if that one season at 32% wasn't just a statistical anomaly, where he took about one three a game and happened to find the bottom 32 times. Either that, or he was just really, really unlucky from the arc in every other one of his NBA seasons.

And as vague as "decent amount" is when regarding how many shot attempts he took from 12 to 15 feet while in Chicago, I guess I'd need some clarification as to what passes as decent, because I do not recall the 12-15 foot Dennis Rodman jumper being something that Chicago went to multiple times a game. Though, I won't hang my hat on that claim, I can't recall for sure, it just doesn't ring a bell. I just always likened his high field goal percentage to the fact that most of the few shots he took were layups in transition or layups on putbacks (and that's a good thing).

I'm not arguing that Rodman should not be in the Hall of Fame, because I believe he should be. And I'm not arguing that Rodman wasn't a great player, because I think he was. I just think sometimes he gets a little overrated by others. I also never mentioned him as being a quitter but as someone who "called out david robinson as a guy that wasn't serious about winning" I often wondered how serious Dennis Rodman was about winning himself. When your life away from the court leads to suspensions, injuries and other distractions, it makes one wonder just how serious and sincere his words were.

Like I said, I know these are shallow words, but I am a Dennis Rodman fan. I guess I just enjoy commentating and discussing what he could and could not actually do on the basketball court.
As far as his 3 pt%, all except for one season, he took too few attempts to determine that he was a bad 3pt shooter. The one year he took a signifant amount of 3s, he hit on 32%. Remember that in SA and chicago he played as a pf that played in the paint. But that year in detroit, he was a sf that defended a lot of 3s almost a sf/pf. So he had more of an opportunity to take that many shots from behind the arc.

To respond to your next point. Remember that rodman in chicago only took around 4 to 5 shots a game. Which really isn't enough to say he couldn't still shoot in the mid 50s like he did most of his career. And when I use the term "decent", i'm Basing it on that if 2 of his 4 or 5 attempts are jumpshots (let's say about 30%), which isn't out of the realm of possibilty, and he shot 44% overall, that's not that bad. Remember that the bulls never really played an uptempo offense. There just wasn't enough shots to go around with jordan taking almost 20 and then pip and kukoc following behind him. That's why people say he could've been a better offensive player. Not great but decent. Like 10 to 12 ppg on 50% shooting. Look at it this way, if his shots soley came on putbacks and open layups snd he only shot 44%? That's a lot of blown layups, and that obviously doesn't stick out in either of our minds.

And finally, there's a lot of guys in the hof that have checkerd a past. Look at charles barkley, he's been arrested a few times, and he in. And nobody argues that he shouldn't be in. It all goes back to rodman not being considered great cuz he's wasn't scorning 25 a night. Cuz the fact is that it wasn't the 2 dpoys, the multiple rebounding titles, the championships (5 of them), the all D teams the hustle and dertemination that made him rich, it was his off the court stuff. And that our fault. And he flourished because of it.

[OldSchoolBBall]

And he shot 32% from the 3 one yr too. It just shows that with his offensive rebounding abilities, the ability to start the fastbreak, his passing, his awareness, all show that while he wasn't gonna get you 20 ppg, he was not an offensive liabilty. Even with the bulls, he shot about 46% over his 3 yrs with them and that was with a decent amount of his shot attempts coming from past 12 to 15 feet.

Uhh, Rodman was most certainly an offensive liability. The Bulls basically played 4-on-5 many times because teams didn't respect his scoring ability.

[97 bulls]

Uhh, Rodman was most certainly an offensive liability. The Bulls basically played 4-on-5 many times because teams didn't respect his scoring ability.
Why do we have to do this old school? You know, the more you post, the more I see that you are only about stats. If rodmans man leaves him to double off of someone else thats as sure an offensive rebound as your a kobe hater. Why don't you refer to rajon rondo. Its the very same reason he gets so many boards. You may be great when aguing stuff about jordan but I will own you so bad that you'll have to change your screen name to 97 bulls jr.. when it comes to basketball, your out of my league.

[mattevans11]

Did you read what I even said? Seriously. Nearly everyone who posts on this forum about players from more than 10 years ago have only seen him play only in highlight videos or a handful of select games. I have seen hundreds of Rodman games from 93-98. So tell me genius, why would what I have to say about it mean equal to or less than someone who has only seen him play in highlight vids or a handful of games?

Get your head out of your ass. You're just being an annoying clown at this point.




Highlight videos don't mean shit. They only show positive plays. Automatic fail argument. Again, I have seen hundreds of Rodman games, nearly every single game he played from 93-98, and every playoff game and reg season game vs SA or Chicago the 5 years prior to that. He quit constantly, threw fits constantly. Commited stupid fouls consecutively because he didn't feel like playing constantly. Stories of his cancerous locker room presence were rampant. The guy was a bastard. Maybe he wasn't so much of a bastard with Detroit, but he certainly was with SA and Chicago.


so you are self proclaimed to see every game he played in SA and CHI?

and you dont think anyone else here has seen rodman play..........

not everyone is as young as most the people here......

your opinion is AN OPINION..... it is not FACT because you have seen every game he played in SA and CHI (which i KNOW is untrue....._

dont try to make yourself better than you are........

dont bring this I know more about him than other people junk.... YOU HAVE NO IDEA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! do you know how often everyone on ISH actually watched Rodman? NO, YOU DONT

stop trying to pass your opinion as fact and ill understand that you might have something productive to to arguement.

is statements like "I know more about __________, so it doesnt matter what you say" is stupid. If you truly have seen him play then add your two cents and let people take it for what it is.......

[Kobe 4 The Win]

What sabotaged the Spurs in the playoffs was The Dream shitting all over League MVP David Robinson and making him look like a *****. lol

Rodman was a dominant player who doesn't get the respect he deserves. Probably because of some of his publicity attracting antics.

[BlueandGold]

Exactly, you can't have a serious convo about all- great teams without rodman with the pistons and bulls. Nor can you talk greatest rebounder or defender ever without rodmsn being in the discussion. Like isaid earlier, the man was a winner.

Rodman out of the hall would seriously be a joke, when is he up for another ballot?

[Kobe 4 The Win]

Rodman is overrated :confusedshrug:

2-time defensive player of the year

Rebounding league leader for like 7 years in a row

Key member of 5 NBA Champion teams

Not in the Hall of Fame

Overrated how?

[Quotable]

The Worm! There will never be an NBA player quite like the Worm.

Out of the top 16 players in RPG all-time, all but two are in the HOF. Dwight Howard (who barring injury should be a lock) and the Worm.

[97 bulls]

Rodman out of the hall would seriously be a joke, when is he up for another ballot?
I'm not sure. Id assume next year. I hope he gets in soon.

[niko]

I don't believe personal issues should keep the greatest defender of all time out of the hall of fame.

OJ simpson killed his wife yet he's in the hall.

MJ had an enormous gambling problem yet he's in the hall.

Ray lewis killed someone and he's going into the hall.

The only reason why rodman is not in the hall of fame is because he alienated the press/media to such a severe degree that a lot of hall of fame ballot holders refuse to vote for him just out of spite. If you were to take a coaches poll right now on if Rodman should be a first ballot hall of famer I'm willing to bet 90% would say he does.
it wasn't a personal issue, it was ON the court. anyone who doesn't know this didn't follow his career very closely because it's not some state secret.

[97 bulls]

it wasn't a personal issue, it was ON the court. anyone who doesn't know this didn't follow his career very closely because it's not some state secret.
So you don't think the cross-dressing, the marrying himself, the hair, the piercings etc. Have nothing to do with him not making it to the hall of fame? If he did the exact same things on the court, but with grant hills off the court rep, he wouldn't be in the hall? Get serious

[Calabis]

Dennis Rodman is one of the most undeserved player ever. His defensive presence of Rodman is underrated. He is a 6'7 guy who manages to put up a career avg of 14 rpg. Moreover, he has averaged 18.7, 18.3, 17.3, and 16.8 rpg in four consecutive seasons. And he is capable of shooting threes at a decent percentage.

Mr. NoPunIntended what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[Calabis]

and he hardly was focused and playing hard all the time. Did people actually see the players play that they are talking about? there was a year with SA where he actively destroyed their playoffs.

btw, is the new thing on this board going to be to try to discredit Jordan to give lebron props?

Lol, yeah because Rodman was just shutting down everyone and putting up crazy numbers....lmao besides the Sonics series(great rebounding series/poor defense, Kemp was shit'n on Rodman all series) he was avg at best in the other two. But hey let's keep overstating his worth to knock Jordan down some.

Kemp: 23pts 10reb Rodman: 7.5pts 14.67reb 0.17blk
Malone: 23pts 10reb Rodman: 2.3pts 7.67reb 0.17blk
Malone: 25pts 10.5reb Rodman: 3.3pts 8.3reb 0.33blk

perspective

Gasol: 14.67pts 10reb 0.5blk
Gasol: 18.6pts 9.2reb 1.8blk
Gasol: 18.57pts 11.57rebs 2.57blks

Rodman great rebounding series vs Sonics(huge impact) vastly overrated on defensive end during those finals

[97 bulls]

Lol, yeah because Rodman was just shutting down everyone and putting up crazy numbers....lmao besides the Sonics series(great rebounding series/poor defense, Kemp was shit'n on Rodman all series) he was avg at best in the other two. But hey let's keep overstating his worth to knock Jordan down some.

Kemp: 23pts 10reb Rodman: 7.5pts 14.67reb 0.17blk
Malone: 23pts 10reb Rodman: 2.3pts 7.67reb 0.17blk
Malone: 25pts 10.5reb Rodman: 3.3pts 8.3reb 0.33blk

perspective

Gasol: 14.67pts 10reb 0.5blk
Gasol: 18.6pts 9.2reb 1.8blk
Gasol: 18.57pts 11.57rebs 2.57blks

Rodman great rebounding series vs Sonics(huge impact) vastly overrated on defensive end during those finals
Rodmans strength against kemp was getting in his head. That why kemp averaged over 4 TOs and averaged over 4 PFs battling rodman for position.

And malone was guarded by longley more due to longleys size but rodman got in his bead too. Its not all about stats bro.

[97 bulls]

[QUOTE=Calabis]Lol, yeah because Rodman was just shutting down everyone and putting up crazy numbers....lmao besides the Sonics series(great rebounding series/poor defense, Kemp was shit'n on Rodman all series) he was avg at best in the other two. But hey let's keep overstating his worth to knock Jordan down some.

Kemp: 23pts 10reb Rodman: 7.5pts 14.67reb 0.17blk
Malone: 23pts 10reb Rodman: 2.3pts 7.67reb 0.17blk
Malone: 25pts 10.5reb Rodman: 3.3pts 8.3reb 0.33blk

perspective

Gasol: 14.67pts 10reb 0.5blk
Gasol: 18.6pts 9.2reb 1.8blk
Gasol: 18.57pts 11.57rebs 2.57blks

Rodman great rebounding series vs Sonics(huge impact) vastly overrated on defensive end during those finals[/Qlone.sorry responded to the same post twice

[AirJordan&Magic]

Rodmans strength against kemp was getting in his head. That why kemp averaged over 4 TOs and averaged over 4 PFs battling rodman for position.

And malone was guarded by longley more due to longleys size but rodman got in his bead too. Its not all about stats bro.

And this is how you seperate the guys who witnessed these legends play from the clowns who use stats to help their argument.

It is hilarious how underrated Rodman's impact has become. And to hear morons compare Ben Wallace to Rodman?

[KoRn]

without rodman, they bulls don't beat the jazz in the finals. he single handledly too malone out of his game.

[fazzazz1k]

without rodman, they bulls don't beat the jazz in the finals. he single handledly too malone out of his game.


NO, MJ did it all on his own.... Rodman and Pippen were there just filling up court space. Lebron could have done the same if he had stayed in Cleveland :lol

[Rake2204]

Rodmans strength against kemp was getting in his head. That why kemp averaged over 4 TOs and averaged over 4 PFs battling rodman for position.

And malone was guarded by longley more due to longleys size but rodman got in his bead too. Its not all about stats bro.
I can't pick up if you're trying to be ironic or sarcastic but 4 turnovers and 4 personal fouls were Shawn Kemp's averages over the course of the 1996 regular season. I'm pretty certain Kemp led the league in fouls on a number of occasions. In fact, I tend to remember Shawn Kemp having an excellent Finals that year. At no point do I remember seeing anything that made me say, "Man, Dennis Rodman's had Shawn Kemp on lock this whole series. Shawn is really underperforming because of it."

With that said, I think Dennis Rodman should find a spot in the Hall of Fame. However, I feel that a lot of the "overratedness" is not coming from Hall of Fame voters (who appear to be ignoring him) but from people who, over time, begin to add more and more weapons to Rodman's game. At this rate he'll end up being known as a guy who "could have averaged 30 a game but chose not to because he was such a team player" by the time 2020 rolls around.

So is he underrated amongst Hall of Fame voters? It'd appear as such. I think it's safe to say his extra curricular activities (on and off the floor) have played a role in his absence (warranted or not). However, I feel amongst those ranking his on court ability, he's rated and appreciated just fine.

[97 bulls]

I can't pick up if you're trying to be ironic or sarcastic but 4 turnovers and 4 personal fouls were Shawn Kemp's averages over the course of the 1996 regular season. I'm pretty certain Kemp led the league in fouls on a number of occasions. In fact, I tend to remember Shawn Kemp having an excellent Finals that year. At no point do I remember seeing anything that made me say, "Man, Dennis Rodman's had Shawn Kemp on lock this whole series. Shawn is really underperforming because of it."

With that said, I think Dennis Rodman should find a spot in the Hall of Fame. However, I feel that a lot of the "overratedness" is not coming from Hall of Fame voters (who appear to be ignoring him) but from people who, over time, begin to add more and more weapons to Rodman's game. At this rate he'll end up being known as a guy who "could have averaged 30 a game but chose not to because he was such a team player" by the time 2020 rolls around.

So is he underrated amongst Hall of Fame voters? It'd appear as such. I think it's safe to say his extra curricular activities (on and off the floor) have played a role in his absence (warranted or not). However, I feel amongst those ranking his on court ability, he's rated and appreciated just fine.
Most of the points kemp scored were insignificant. The bulls were so far out in front of the sonics in all but 1 of their wins, that it didn't matter how many points kemp finished with. He also average 4 TOs and fortunatly for him, had a game with only 1 TO. Cuz if he stays status qou, in that one game and gets 4 he'd be pushing 6 TOs. Not to mention he averaged 5 fouls for the series. Including fouling out of 2 games. id say rodman dominated kemp. But at least we agree he should be in the hall.

[97 bulls]

Id also like to add rake, That I've never seen or read anyone say that rodman could score 20 ppg. What most people defend is the difference between not being able to score and being a bad offensive player. Rodman had a high offensive IQ. And he was still in great physical shape with the bulls. I see no reason he could score 10 to 12 ppg along with his 16 boards a game. Not to mention the things he did do on the offensive end.

[Rake2204]

Most of the points kemp scored were insignificant. The bulls were so far out in front of the sonics in all but 1 of their wins, that it didn't matter how many points kemp finished with. He also average 4 TOs and fortunatly for him, had a game with only 1 TO. Cuz if he stays status qou, in that one game and gets 4 he'd be pushing 6 TOs. Not to mention he averaged 5 fouls for the series. Including fouling out of 2 games. id say rodman dominated kemp. But at least we agree he should be in the hall.
I'm not trying to be combative, but I respectfully disagree with your logic. I do not believe points become meaningless once a team begins to trail (even if it's by double digits). I do believe in garbage time statistical boosts (certain end of the bench players scoring with 45 seconds left of a 30 point game) but I do not find Kemp's Finals statistics to be a result of this. I feel Kemp went to work in the '96 Finals and was often responsible for keeping the Sonics as close as they were.

Also, regarding the 1 turnover game followed by the 6 turnover game. . .that's essentially how averages work. When Kemp averaged four turnovers during the '96 regular season, he did not do this by turning the ball over exactly four times each game. I can say with certainty that Kemp would turn the ball over 6 times in some regular season games that season and none in other games. Long story short, Dennis Rodman was surely a great defender but I would not be so quick to conlude that Shawn Kemp's turnovers and fouls were a result of something Rodman was able to do to him. I always saw it as a turnover prone and foul prone power forward being turnover prone and foul prone. Kemp lived up to his billing in that regard, though I do believe he was able to step his game up in other facets in that series.


Id also like to add rake, That I've never seen or read anyone say that rodman could score 20 ppg. What most people defend is the difference between not being able to score and being a bad offensive player. Rodman had a high offensive IQ. And he was still in great physical shape with the bulls. I see no reason he could score 10 to 12 ppg along with his 16 boards a game. Not to mention the things he did do on the offensive end.
Yeah I feel you there. I was using exaggeration as a means to make a point about how stories tend to take off regarding Rodman. He did have a high offensive IQ (and a high basketball IQ, period) and he could have averaged 10-12points but I feel the reason he didn't is because he focused so much of his attention on other means (rebounding in particular). He could have done other things, but he didn't. I find it similar to saying David Robinson could have probably averaged at least 4 more rebounds a game if he just took a little more focus off of scoring. Maybe he could have, but he didn't, and I think that's where it ends.

[97 bulls]

I'm not trying to be combative, but I respectfully disagree with your logic. I do not believe points become meaningless once a team begins to trail (even if it's by double digits). I do believe in garbage time statistical boosts (certain end of the bench players scoring with 45 seconds left of a 30 point game) but I do not find Kemp's Finals statistics to be a result of this. I feel Kemp went to work in the '96 Finals and was often responsible for keeping the Sonics as close as they were.

Also, regarding the 1 turnover game followed by the 6 turnover game. . .that's essentially how averages work. When Kemp averaged four turnovers during the '96 regular season, he did not do this by turning the ball over exactly four times each game. I can say with certainty that Kemp would turn the ball over 6 times in some regular season games that season and none in other games. Long story short, Dennis Rodman was surely a great defender but I would not be so quick to conlude that Shawn Kemp's turnovers and fouls were a result of something Rodman was able to do to him. I always saw it as a turnover prone and foul prone power forward being turnover prone and foul prone. Kemp lived up to his billing in that regard, though I do believe he was able to step his game up in other facets in that series.


Yeah I feel you there. I was using exaggeration as a means to make a point about how stories tend to take off regarding Rodman. He did have a high offensive IQ (and a high basketball IQ, period) and he could have averaged 10-12points but I feel the reason he didn't is because he focused so much of his attention on other means (rebounding in particular). He could have done other things, but he didn't. I find it similar to saying David Robinson could have probably averaged at least 4 more rebounds a game if he just took a little more focus off of scoring. Maybe he could have, but he didn't, and I think that's where it ends.
be as combtive as you want bro. I know I am. I respect everything yourre saying agree or disagree. I just feel that kemps point were similar to when a team is down by 20 or more pts through qrts 1 through 3, then onec the other team "calls of the dogs" so to speak he pads his stats. How many time has a team been down like this and end up loosing by like 10 and you walk away sayng the game wasn't that close?

And I. Understand your reasoning on the averages thing, I still think that one game with the 1 TO was not indicative of how out of control kemp was over the six games played. I liken it to this. I have 3 kids. If one of them come home with a report card consisting of 5 Fs and and an A that probably gonna get a D- overall. Now that A helps but overall, Id call that an exception not a rule. Similar to kemp. If he gets his normal 4 TOs then his average shoots sky high