Who Was A Better Player: Horace Grant or Dennis Rodman?

[Round Mound]

Who Was A Better Player: Horace Grant or Dennis Rodman?

[coastalmarker99]

Who Was A Better Player: Horace Grant or Dennis Rodman?

I would say Rodman but it is very close.

[Full Court]

Rodman's impact when he was on the floor was higher. That's something you can't tell from just looking at stats.

[pandiani17]

Rodman's impact when he was on the floor was higher. That's something you can't tell from just looking at stats.

Rodman. Horace was better on offense, but Rodman could guard the opposition's main big-men and he also knew how to rebound and pass to the main guys (Jordan and Pippen) on offense. Not to say that he could also score from time to time if given the opportunity (as he did with Detroit).

[RogueBorg]

It's not even close, Rodman played at a different level. Grant was no where near the rebounder nor the defender. Plus he thought he was a much better scorer than he was, he was too full of himself. Rodman knew his role offensively and never sulked for not getting touches.

https://blacksportsonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Horace-Grant-Scottie-Pippen.jpg

[Xiao Yao You]

Chicago could never pressure full court with Rodman like they had with Grant

[dankok8]

Those who said Grant is better offensively are underselling it. Grant was a LOT better offensively! With Rodman you had great defense and rebounding but played 4-on-5 on offense. Grant could actually work a bit in the post, hit those midrange J's... He was no all-star but could give some offense and he was also a very good defender and rebounder. I'd go with Rodman by a hair but it's fairly close.

[RogueBorg]

Chicago could never pressure full court with Rodman like they had with Grant

Horace never made a 1st-Team All-Defensive team, never was DPOY, never led the league in rebounding. Can't believe this is even a debate. :confusedshrug:

Edit - Never was All-NBA

[Phoenix]

Chicago could never pressure full court with Rodman like they had with Grant

Flipside is Chicago couldn't get away with eg. single covering Shaq if they didn't have Rodman. That allowed them to stay home on the shooters. Maybe there are situationally some scenarios where Grant works better, but overall you can't replace what Dennis did at his very best.

[ShawkFactory]

Probably Rodman but it’s closer for me than most would say.

His numbers didn’t always pop out at you but whenever I’ve watched any 1st 3peat bulls games Grant is always just doing the right thing. Need a rebound? His. Need a stop? He’s on it. Midrange? Wet. Post? He’ll take on Ewing if asked. And he always seemed to make the right pass in the flow of the offense.

Really good player. He wouldn’t have ever really put up the numbers to be a star but every team he’s on is going to be formidable.

[Phoenix]

Those who said Grant is better offensively are underselling it. Grant was a LOT better offensively! With Rodman you had great defense and rebounding but played 4-on-5 on offense. Grant could actually work a bit in the post, hit those midrange J's... He was no all-star but could give some offense and he was also a very good defender and rebounder. I'd go with Rodman by a hair but it's fairly close.

The question is though, which is more valuable? Grant putting up an extra 6-8 points, or Rodman grabbing an extra 6-8 rebounds, along with his ability to defend bigs better and irritate his opponents? Plus Rodman was the better offensive rebounder which of course facilitated extra possessions. The Bulls had enough scoring in the 2nd 3peat with MJ dropping 30, Pippen wasn't great offensively those years but you had guys like Kukoc and Kerr off the bench. They were still the number one offensive team in 96 and 97 despite being '4 on 5' with Rodman.

[Phoenix]

Probably Rodman but it’s closer for me than most would say.

His numbers didn’t always pop out at you but whenever I’ve watched any 1st 3peat bulls games Grant is always just doing the right thing. Need a rebound? His. Need a stop? He’s on it. Midrange? Wet. Post? He’ll take on Ewing if asked. And he always seemed to make the right pass in the flow of the offense.

Really good player. He wouldn’t have ever really put up the numbers to be a star but every team he’s on is going to be formidable.

I think that's a fair summation. The thing about Horace, he didn't have any crazy highs in his game, he wasn't going to be the 'key to victory' most nights, but he won't do anything to kill your chances of winning either. He was pretty steady and reliable on what you could expect from him every night. Solid defense and rebounding, a good clean up man around the rim, and could stick the 15 footer with some consistency. Solid player overall.

[L.Kizzle]

They won 3 with both. Hell, the 2nd 3 peat, Rodman wasn't even starting all of the playoffs games ...

[Xiao Yao You]

Horace never made a 1st-Team All-Defensive team, never was DPOY, never led the league in rebounding. Can't believe this is even a debate. :confusedshrug:

Edit - Never was All-NBA

Rodman was a huge headcase. They were lucky to win the last two years with him. I'd have rather had Horace

[Xiao Yao You]

The question is though, which is more valuable? Grant putting up an extra 6-8 points, or Rodman grabbing an extra 6-8 rebounds, along with his ability to defend bigs better and irritate his opponents? Plus Rodman was the better offensive rebounder which of course facilitated extra possessions. The Bulls had enough scoring in the 2nd 3peat with MJ dropping 30, Pippen wasn't great offensively those years but you had guys like Kukoc and Kerr off the bench. They were still the number one offensive team in 96 and 97 despite being '4 on 5' with Rodman.

Kerr? Jerr could hit some open shots and bring the ball up the court occasionally. He didn't do much else

[Phoenix]

Kerr? Jerr could hit some open shots and bring the ball up the court occasionally. He didn't do much else

He did what my post originally said, he provided some offense off the bench. I didn't say he did much of anything else.

[ClipperRevival]

Rodman

Peak Rodman was the 2 time DPOY with Detroit who still had the insane athleticism to legit guard 1-3 and also spot guard 4-5. He ran the floor like a deer and filled the break, was already an insane rebounder on top of being a GOAT tier defender and had GOAT tier stamina.

Grant's only advantage is his O. He had a midrange shot, something many bigs had. But that's it.

[aceman]

Chicago could never pressure full court with Rodman like they had with Grant

Younger Rodman could do that easily. With bulls he was older but that came with ability to guard biggest centers

[aceman]

Rodman

Peak Rodman was the 2 time DPOY with Detroit who still had the insane athleticism to legit guard 1-3 and also spot guard 4-5. He ran the floor like a deer and filled the break, was already an insane rebounder on top of being a GOAT tier defender and had GOAT tier stamina.

Grant's only advantage is his O. He had a midrange shot, something many bigs had. But that's it.

Horace was a fine player; mobile for his size, a good defender, rebounder & nice post up game & open shot. Rodman was better because he was an all time great in two categories; rebounding & defense.

[aceman]

Rodman was a huge headcase. They were lucky to win the last two years with him. I'd have rather had Horace

Wouldn't have one without Rodman

[aceman]

I think that's a fair summation. The thing about Horace, he didn't have any crazy highs in his game, he wasn't going to be the 'key to victory' most nights, but he won't do anything to kill your chances of winning either. He was pretty steady and reliable on what you could expect from him every night. Solid defense and rebounding, a good clean up man around the rim, and could stick the 15 footer with some consistency. Solid player overall.

Bulls missed him in 95 & Orlando can say Grant was key to winning that series. Rebounding & Interior presence was essential - couldn't win without it

[NBAGOAT]

rodman is better but for their time with Bulls, I like grant a bit more

[3ba11]

Peak Dennis was better, circa 90-93'

Otherwise, maybe Horace has the edge - Horace averaged 12/8 alongside MJ, and was still gettting 9/7 as a starter for the champion Lakers in 2001

Otoh, Rodman won a bunch of rebounding titles, but lots of bums do that

[SouBeachTalents]

Peak Dennis was better, circa 90-93'

Otherwise, maybe Horace has the edge - Horace averaged 12/8 alongside MJ, and was still gettting 9/7 as a starter for the champion Lakers in 2001

Otoh, Rodman won a bunch of rebounding titles, but lots of bums do that
How many bums lead the league in rebounding 7 straight seasons?

[3ba11]

How many bums lead the league in rebounding 7 straight seasons?


It's just rebounding (replaceable).. Rodman's rebounding peak was alongside MVP Robinson - and what happened?..... Not a damn thing - Rodman couldn't do shit with the league MVP and his antics made him a complete outcast after the Spurs' debacle - no one wanted Dennis until MJ threw him a bone and agreed to let him on the team

[aceman]

It's just rebounding (replaceable).. Rodman's rebounding peak was alongside MVP Robinson - and what happened?..... Not a damn thing - Rodman couldn't do shit with the league MVP and his antics made him a complete outcast after the Spurs' debacle - no one wanted Dennis until MJ threw him a bone and agreed to let him on the team

Maybe if Dennis guarded Hakeem instead of David..

[JR Swish]

Rodman for me

[Phoenix]

Bulls missed him in 95 & Orlando can say Grant was key to winning that series. Rebounding & Interior presence was essential - couldn't win without it

Yeah, generally the Bulls were missing an interior defender/rebounder, something that Horace would have provided. Hard to battle the likes of Shaq and *insert good power forward* with Toni Kukoc manning the 4.

[Phoenix]

It's just rebounding (replaceable).. Rodman's rebounding peak was alongside MVP Robinson - and what happened?..... Not a damn thing - Rodman couldn't do shit with the league MVP and his antics made him a complete outcast after the Spurs' debacle - no one wanted Dennis until MJ threw him a bone and agreed to let him on the team

That also happened to coincide with Hakeem's peak, who was a better player. Usual dumb take by you, who else in the modern era( let's define that by the 90's onwards) was doing 18 boards a night some years. If that was replaceable....replaceable with who? Because only Rodman hit that mark since the days of the 60s when there were plenty of shots and misses for multiple players to post cartoon rebound numbers.

[iamgine]

When I look into Rodman, I've heard about him being one of the greatest defender and rebounder of all time. Which his 2 DPOYs and rebounding numbers clearly indicates.

However, when looking further into his championships, his first 2 championships with Detroit he only averaged 23 and 19 minutes a game in the finals. And in the 2nd Bulls threepeat, he averaged 37 (great), 27 and 30 minutes a game in the finals. All of this indicates Rodman was not seen as that important of a player when the chips are on the line. Unlike Horace Grant who was averaging 37-39 minutes a game in Bulls first threepeat finals.

[houston]

Horace Grant was the better player. Out of all the role playing all-star quality PF's of the 90's. Otis Thorpe was the most consistent one numbers wise and won championship as team second best player.

[Druckenmiller]

Question for those who think it was Horace Grant — which playoff seniors a did Grant completely dominate and take the other teams best player completely out of the series.

Go back and watch the Bulls- Sonics series. Rodman dominated that series in a way that I’m not sure a non scorer has ever dominated a series before or since. It was a different game back then, and possessions and the little things mattered in a different kind of way than they do now.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E_qUoOBBlA0

[iamgine]

Question for those who think it was Horace Grant — which playoff seniors a did Grant completely dominate and take the other teams best player completely out of the series.

Go back and watch the Bulls- Sonics series. Rodman dominated that series in a way that I’m not sure a non scorer has ever dominated a series before or since. It was a different game back then, and possessions and the little things mattered in a different kind of way than they do now.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E_qUoOBBlA0
Even assuming this is true, that's one series.

I mean, for one series I've seen Jamal Murray and Donovan Mitchell did some crazy stuff. That doesn't make them automatically better than some other players who haven't done what they did.

[Druckenmiller]

Dennis Rodman in the HOF

WhoreAss Grant was overrated. The minute he left the Bulls his numbers got worse.

[3ba11]

That also happened to coincide with Hakeem's peak, who was a better player. Usual dumb take by you, who else in the modern era( let's define that by the 90's onwards) was doing 18 boards a night some years. If that was replaceable....replaceable with who? Because only Rodman hit that mark since the days of the 60s when there were plenty of shots and misses for multiple players to post cartoon rebound numbers.


It isn't optimal to have 1 guy grab all the rebounds and play 4 on 5 offensively because the guy literally can't score

Rodman infact sucked and is entirely overrated, as proven by his low use (minutes) in the Finals - when it matters, he's often unplayable.

[LeCola]

Career: Rodman>Grant
Performance for Bulls: Grant>Rodman

[Phoenix]

It isn't optimal to have 1 guy grab all the rebounds and play 4 on 5 offensively because the guy literally can't score

Rodman infact sucked and is entirely overrated, as proven by his low use (minutes) in the Finals - when it matters, he's often unplayable.

It's not optimal to have one guy carry the offense either, but you've spent over 30,000 posts arguing for that guy. The Bulls were the top ranked offensive team in 96 and 97 despite playing '4 on 5' with Rodman, so clearly it wasn't that much a detriment to the offense or the end goal( winning a title).

[Airupthere]

Now imagine rodman from 96-98 if he had horace's midrange.

[SouBeachTalents]

Dennis Rodman in the HOF

WhoreAss Grant was overrated. The minute he left the Bulls his numbers got worse.
Huh? Grant had some of his best playoff runs and series on Orlando

[Round Mound]

I love Rodman but Horace could actually shoot mid range and had some post moves. Its contradictory when people say they put two-way players ahead of ones with just offense or defense. Horace was way more of a two-way player than Rodman because he was good on offense and defense. I love Rodman btw but Grant was probably a more complete player.

[Xiao Yao You]

Even assuming this is true, that's one series.

I mean, for one series I've seen Jamal Murray and Donovan Mitchell did some crazy stuff. That doesn't make them automatically better than some other players who haven't done what they did.

But Mitchell is the best player in Jazz history!

[ShawkFactory]

Rodman infact sucked.

You’re too predictable.

[Phoenix]

You’re too predictable.

It's funny, because you have a lot of people saying the 2nd 3peat Bulls were stacked in spite of Rodman being a marginal offensive player. So 3nut is trying to argue that it would have been better for Rodman to also be a good scorer, on top of being a dominant rebounder/defender....which in turn would have made the argument that the Bulls were a super team even moreso and in counter to his narrative that they were a one-man team.

[ShawkFactory]

He said Rodman was better 91-93 and Grant was better 96-98.

Very nice :lol

[bizil]

Rodman EASY!!!! Rodman is arguably the GREATEST FORWARD EVER in these areas:

- Rebounding
- Defense
- Positional versatility on defense (one of the rare guys that could guard all five positions effectively)
- Motor

Grant wasn't all time great AT ANYTHING over the long term!! Rodman on the other hand is arguably THE GOAT in multiple areas at the forward spot!

[Thenameless]

Question for those who think it was Horace Grant — which playoff seniors a did Grant completely dominate and take the other teams best player completely out of the series.

Go back and watch the Bulls- Sonics series. Rodman dominated that series in a way that I’m not sure a non scorer has ever dominated a series before or since. It was a different game back then, and possessions and the little things mattered in a different kind of way than they do now.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E_qUoOBBlA0

Bill Russell is an all time great with a very poor scoring resume. Dominated with great defense and rebounding. And he was far superior to to Rodman as far as team leadership goes.

[Druckenmiller]

Bill Russell is an all time great with a very poor scoring resume. Dominated with great defense and rebounding. And he was far superior to to Rodman as far as team leadership goes.

The league was barely integrated when Russell played. There’s a reason the modern era starts after the merger.

[SaintzFury13]

Both guys were better for their respective times with the Bulls.

Rodman doesn't fit as well with the first peat Bulls as Grant does due to the personal on the team and how they played. Jordan and Pippen were relied on a lot more for their offense and that's simply asking too much without having someone reliable to fill the third option role to the point where you can't just put all the focus and attention on them. What's where Grant came in. He created a legitimate inside presence that allowed Chicago to outright dominate their opponents in almost every aspect of the game.

But then on the flip side, Grant doesn't fit the second three peat Bulls as well as Rodman did. With the addition of Harper, that group became more focused on being a dominant, elite defensive unit the likes of which we had never seen before. They were the literal definition of a juggernaut. And Rodman personified that. He was a feisty, fearless defender who didn't care who he went up against. He was the heart and soul of that second three peat Bulls dynasty. Grant was great in his own right, but I doubt he has the same impact Rodman does in 96, or even in 97 and 98.

[LostCause]

Career? Rodman

I think Horace was better during their time in Chicago though

He was a lot better than a serviceable role player. His impact shouldn’t be diminished. Lest we forget his total decimation of Chicago in the 95 playoffs was among the chief reasons they got Rodman to begin with (Shaq played good but it was Horace who killed Chicago, which is why Shaq himself called Grant the MVP of that series). I’m sure his absence also contributed to Orlando being swept in 96 as well