Dennis Rodman on the 2nd three-peat Bulls was so overrated

[QUOTE=Yao Ming's Foot]And it must be some strange coincidence that Rodman had the lowest individual defensive rating on the team for those years on the Bulls as well. :facepalm[/QUOTE]

I'm not saying Rodman wasn't a great defender, but to say that he was the Bull's defensive anchor is incorrect. Like I said, the second three-peat Bulls didn't really have a defensive anchor per say, they were great for two reasons.

1) Talent - They had one excellent defender in Scottie Pippen, three great defenders in Jordan, Rodman, and Harper, and several more above average defenders.
2) Mindset/Effort - Those Bulls were one of the few teams who really put in 100% effort each and every night.

Rodman's defense on the Bulls is indeed vastly overrated. Guard all 5 positions? Please. This wasn't 1989 anymore.
He was still a great defender, but often he would sacrifice a good defensive position for a good rebounding position

idk, about overrated, but karl malone shouldve killed rodman. jazz lost because he didnt step up. rodman pretty much dared him to shoot and he just couldnt make them, even though he had for most of his career. some people say it was the gay stuff rodman did to rattle opponents, but he still should have played better than he did.

sonics clearly didnt believe they could win, especially guys like detlef. payton seemed to be the only one to play with a "fukk chicago" mentality. he wasnt afraid of them like many of his teammates.

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/xKvmT.jpg[/IMG]

My big issue with Rodman was how much he messed with the offense and defense and he focused on positioning for rebounds. I think I remember hearing Tex Winter at the time lamenting how he would ruin rotations or mess things up for teammates in order to secure rebounds. Reminds me of the Clippers era Camby. Great box score numbers, but you'd sometimes see him steal rebounds from teammates instead of running back.

[QUOTE=icewill36]idk, about overrated, but karl malone shouldve killed rodman. jazz lost because he didnt step up. rodman pretty much dared him to shoot and he just couldnt make them, even though he had for most of his career.[/QUOTE]

Karl Malone is overrated. Rodman wasn't the one who discouraged him in "stepping up". He choked in big games before 97 and 98 Finals and after.

Malone should've killed a lot of guys when the playoffs came around (he obviously did get his in some series), but he overall didn't step up enough like other have in the past and present. Same goes for John Stockton. They had too many inconsistencies.

Downgrading Rodman is retarded way to imply Jordan is better than Kobe, OP.

[IMG]http://gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgifs4/1138072_o.gif[/IMG]

MJ, Pip, PJax and the rest of the Bulls roster had nothing but praises for The Worm's 100% effort on the court. Overrated my a$$

[QUOTE=stax][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/xKvmT.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]Always wondered how this picture ends :lol does he fall on his stomach or wut

[QUOTE=andgar923]"[B][COLOR="Red"]but one can even argue[/COLOR][/B]"

I never stated that he was like Haslem, but one can certainly make an argument that he was a glorified role player similar to Haslem. A player that has one role which is to be tough defensively and rebound. Although even Haslem had to be an option offensively.

Rodman's sole focus was to rebound, that's what he did. If they ran plays for him he'd lose position and possibly use up some energy which will result in a decline in his boards.

We are also talking about an older Rodman and NOT the defensive player of the year version.

But as I mentioned, it sounds harsh but not my intention to diminish him as much as it may appear. Simply something to think about.[/QUOTE]

You put Haslem name in there exactly to say Rodman was like him. Don't try and sniggle out of what you did, putting those names in the same breath like that.

And no. Sorry. None of this is correct.
Rebounding wasn't ever Rodman's sole focus, contrary to myth. Teams seldom ran plays for D Rod because he had low scoring skills due to his late start in the game. His energy level was insane, out-driving everyone on the court for many minutes even when he was aged. And his defense got smarter as he got older to the point where he was a literal defensive genius in the late '90s.

We can disagree all right, but at least use [I]some[/I] fact [I]some[/I]where.

As absurd as the premise the comparison isn't even Rodman vs Gasol. Ir's Rodman vs Lamar Odom. Scottie Pippen vs Pau Gasol. :confusedshrug:

Rodman was a glorified role player. Why the hell is anyone arguing that he wasn't? It doesn't mean he wasn't an all-time great player, but any player thats success comes mainly from his hustle and energy and is basically almost useless offensively is a role player. Rodman literally is just a much better version of someone like Reggie Evans. There roles were basically the same, Rodman just being much better and more consistent at it.

And Rodman being better then Gasol? :oldlol: Gasol should be compared to Pippen, not Rodman.

Rodman is role player, Pippen is complimentary player, Kukoc is euro trash ,poor Mike did it all by himself.:rolleyes:

In second three peat, Pippen was almost superstar, Rodman was borderline all star player. Kukoc could be easily star player in most of the teams.

None of these can stain MJ's GOAT status. It means Bulls were that good.

[QUOTE=rodman91]Rodman is role player, Pippen is complimentary player, Kukoc is euro trash ,poor Mike did it all by himself.:rolleyes:

In second three peat, Pippen was almost superstar, Rodman was borderline all star player. Kukoc could be easily star player in most of the teams.

None of these can stain MJ's GOAT status. It means Bulls were that good.[/QUOTE]


Saying Rodman was a role player doesn't mean he wasn't a great player and Jordan did everything by himself. Rodman was a role player even when he was making all-star teams in Detroit. He's arguably the greatest role player ever, but that doesn't mean he wasn't a role player.

[QUOTE=guy]Saying Rodman was a role player doesn't mean he wasn't a great player and Jordan did everything by himself. Rodman was a role player even when he was making all-star teams in Detroit. He's arguably the greatest role player ever, but that doesn't mean he wasn't a role player.[/QUOTE]


I don't care a whole lot for math but really you should indulge yourself.

[url]http://skepticalsports.com/?p=1143[/url]

[QUOTE=La Frescobaldi]I don't care a whole lot for math but really you should indulge yourself.

[url]http://skepticalsports.com/?p=1143[/url][/QUOTE]

I'm not going to bother reading all that, because numbers have nothing to do with what I'm talking about. Rodman is the type of player that is always defined as a role player. That's not diminishing him, even if you think it is, its just stating the truth. Doesn't mean he doesn't have a huge impact on his teams, cause he did. But generally, players who's job is to do the thing that he does and nothing else are defined as role players.

[QUOTE=guy]Rodman was a glorified role player. Why the hell is anyone arguing that he wasn't? It doesn't mean he wasn't an all-time great player, but any player thats success comes mainly from his hustle and energy and is basically almost useless offensively is a role player. Rodman literally is just a much better version of someone like Reggie Evans. There roles were basically the same, Rodman just being much better and more consistent at it.

And Rodman being better then Gasol? :oldlol: Gasol should be compared to Pippen, not Rodman.[/QUOTE]

So you agree that (prime) Ben Wallace a role player? :confusedshrug:

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]So you agree that (prime) Ben Wallace a role player?[/QUOTE]

Sure I'd agree with that. Like I said, that doesn't mean they aren't two of the greatest players ever, easily in the top 75-100 players of all-time, but they are still glorified role players like someone else said.

[quote=Derivative]it's amazing how they could of threepeated against opponents such as Shaquille O'Neal, Shawn Kemp, Karl Malone, Patrick Ewing, Alonzo Mourning[/quote]

Don't forget Hakeem and Robinson! They were still effective and All-Stars during the Bulls' second 3-peat.

Goes to show how GOAT Jordan really is.

[QUOTE=guy]Sure I'd agree with that. Like I said, that doesn't mean they aren't two of the greatest players ever, easily in the top 75-100 players of all-time, but they are still glorified role players like someone else said.[/QUOTE]

Bill Russel would be greatest glorified role player too then. If guys like Barkley,Amare,Melo doesn't considered as role players because they can't defend, Rodman & Wallace should not be considered as role players because they can't score.

Ron Harper second threepeat was a great role player. Luc Longley was a role player. Rodman was a star player for the Bulls.

[QUOTE=swi7ch]Don't forget Hakeem and Robinson! They were still effective and All-Stars during the Bulls' second 3-peat.

Goes to show how GOAT Jordan really is.[/QUOTE]


You can equally argue it goes to show how GOAT Rodman really is at defense. Or Pippen.

Jordan threw up desperately all over the 80s as far as rings. He had to have great players around him to do all that.

[QUOTE=rodman91]Bill Russel would be greatest glorified role player too then. If guys like Barkley,Amare,Melo doesn't considered as role players because they can't defend, Rodman & Wallace should not be considered as role players because they can't score.

Ron Harper second threepeat was a great role player. Luc Longley was a role player. Rodman was a star player for the Bulls.[/QUOTE]

that's exactly right.

[QUOTE=swi7ch]Don't forget Hakeem and Robinson! They were still effective and All-Stars during the Bulls' second 3-peat.

Goes to show how GOAT Jordan really is.[/QUOTE]

The presence of Hakeem and Robinson does absolutely nothing for Jordan's legacy as he never faced either of them even once in the playoffs. If anything, it actually strengthens the legacy of the other stars such as those who eliminated those two from the playoffs preventing them from making it to the Finals during Jordan's championship runs .

[QUOTE=rodman91]Bill Russel would be greatest glorified role player too then. If guys like Barkley,Amare,Melo doesn't considered as role players because they can't defend, Rodman & Wallace should not be considered as role players because they can't score.

Ron Harper second threepeat was a great role player. Luc Longley was a role player. Rodman was a star player for the Bulls.[/QUOTE]

Actually, Russell was expected to score and pass as well. He wasn't Wilt or Oscar in that regard, but he wasn't just asked to do basically nothing on offense but offensive rebound like those guys.

We're really just talking about labels. Generally, its those type of players that people call "role players". You can call it whatever you want, but thats what most people call those type of players.

[QUOTE]
Rodman was a role player even when he was making all-star teams in Detroit. He's arguably the greatest role player ever, but that doesn't mean he wasn't a role player.
[/QUOTE]

There are 3 things basketball requires. Offense, defense, and getting the ball. Dennis is in the discussion for the greatest player to ever do 2 of them. Would I put him over russell? No. Would I say hes flat out miles better than Barkley as a rebounder considering Barkley also had to play offense at a high level? No.

Is it reasonable to bring up Rodmans name in discussion of the best? Yes.

But he does not score. He did however set great screens, is probably the best offensive rebounder ever, could pass, and ran the floor well. He did everything on offense well other than actually put the ball in the basket and dribble.

He did literally everything on defense well other than be a great shot blocker and even that was partly because he was solid off the ball and didnt often allow the penetration that would result in needing toe block a shot....but still.

He did everything else well.

Hes good at most elements of offense, virtually everything you do on a court without scoring, and might be the GOAT rebounder.

So im assuming that to you...the only way to be a star is to dribble and score? No combo of other things one can do is enough...is it?

If all we measure is...what you do without dribbling or shooting...who....ever...is better than Dennis Rodman? Not me saying the answer is nobody...just asking.

Who is it? How many are there?

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]There are 3 things basketball requires. Offense, defense, and getting the ball. Dennis is in the discussion for the greatest player to ever do 2 of them. Would I put him over russell? No. Would I say hes flat out miles better than Barkley as a rebounder considering Barkley also had to play offense at a high level? No.

Is it reasonable to bring up Rodmans name in discussion of the best? Yes.

But he does not score. He did however set great screens, is probably the best offensive rebounder ever, could pass, and ran the floor well. He did everything on offense well other than actually put the ball in the basket and dribble.

He did literally everything on defense well other than be a great shot blocker and even that was partly because he was solid off the ball and didnt often allow the penetration that would result in needing toe block a shot....but still.

He did everything else well.

Hes good at most elements of offense, virtually everything you do on a court without scoring, and might be the GOAT rebounder.

So im assuming that to you...the only way to be a star is to dribble and score? No combo of other things one can do is enough...is it?

If all we measure is...what you do without dribbling or shooting...who....ever...is better than Dennis Rodman? Not me saying the answer is nobody...just asking.

Who is it? How many are there?[/QUOTE]

Well said. I do think that the best offensive rebounder is Moses, but the best rebounder ever is arguably Rodman imo

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]There are 3 things basketball requires. Offense, defense, and getting the ball. Dennis is in the discussion for the greatest player to ever do 2 of them. Would I put him over russell? No. Would I say hes flat out miles better than Barkley as a rebounder considering Barkley also had to play offense at a high level? No.

Is it reasonable to bring up Rodmans name in discussion of the best? Yes.

But he does not score. He did however set great screens, is probably the best offensive rebounder ever, could pass, and ran the floor well. He did everything on offense well other than actually put the ball in the basket and dribble.

He did literally everything on defense well other than be a great shot blocker and even that was partly because he was solid off the ball and didnt often allow the penetration that would result in needing toe block a shot....but still.

He did everything else well.

Hes good at most elements of offense, virtually everything you do on a court without scoring, and might be the GOAT rebounder.

So im assuming that to you...the only way to be a star is to dribble and score? No combo of other things one can do is enough...is it?

If all we measure is...what you do without dribbling or shooting...who....ever...is better than Dennis Rodman? Not me saying the answer is nobody...just asking.

Who is it? How many are there?[/QUOTE]

I agree, and I know it seems as tho some of us are knocking him (I'm not), but when all he does is focus on rebounding his numbers are gonna be higher than somebody that's asked to do other things offensively.

Yes setting screens matter, but after that he positions to 'rebound' and nothing else. When other players set screens, they set them to possibly get the ball to shoot. We've seen Rodman pad his rebounding at least once every single game (often more). Not to say he wouldn't be a great rebounder or that he wasn't, but his stats are somewhat misleading.

There's no doubt that the Bulls don't win without his contributions, I don't think anybody has argued that (not to say you said it). But he wasn't the defensive juggernaut that he was when he was a Piston, and he never LOCKED DOWN anybody like some have even stated.

[QUOTE=andgar923]I agree, and I know it seems as tho some of us are knocking him (I'm not), but when all he does is focus on rebounding his numbers are gonna be higher than somebody that's asked to do other things offensively.

Yes setting screens matter, but after that he positions to 'rebound' and nothing else. When other players set screens, they set them to possibly get the ball to shoot. We've seen Rodman pad his rebounding at least once every single game (often more). Not to say he wouldn't be a great rebounder or that he wasn't, but his stats are somewhat misleading.

There's no doubt that the Bulls don't win without his contributions, I don't think anybody has argued that (not to say you said it). But he wasn't the defensive juggernaut that he was when he was a Piston, and he never LOCKED DOWN anybody like some have even stated.[/QUOTE]

He was lock down defender at low post. He wasn't the guy who can also guard perimeter players great like in Pistons but he was still one of the best guys in low post. (He was 34-36 years old at that time.People usually forget his age because he was too energetic & dominant on boards)

I have seen many games he shut down or at least slowed down some of the HOFer big men when he was in Bulls. There are many games on youtube about that.

When he was playing for Lakers & Mavs, he seemed less interested in defense compared to Bulls & Pistons years but rebounding was still there even at 37-38 years old.

[QUOTE=rodman91]He was lock down defender at low post. He wasn't the guy who can also guard perimeter players great like in Pistons but he was still one of the best guys in low post. (He was 34-36 years old at that time.People usually forget his age because he was too energetic & dominant on boards)

I have seen many games he shut down or at least slowed down some of the HOFer big men when he was in Bulls. There are many games on youtube about that.

When he was playing for Lakers & Mavs, he seemed less interested in defense compared to Bulls & Pistons years but rebounding was still there even at 37-38 years old.[/QUOTE]

No he was NOT a lock down defender in the post. He was 'good-great' at times, but he never locked anybody down. All the good bigs still got theirs, they just had to work a bit harder.

His strength was messing with their psyche, he would annoy and frustrate them, but he wouldn't lock them down.

Unless we have completely different meanings on what 'locking down' is.

To me locking down is, the mufuhka aint scoring on him, and maybe get a rebound or two on him. He did throw them outta their games and comfort zones, but I wouldn't call that locking down. Semantics I agree, but there should be some clarification before shit runs wild.

Honestly, you could've replaced him with another good rebounder/defender. But the Bulls probably don't win 3 in a row. His strengths were his ability to get under people's skin, he was as tough as they ever came and that's something that no stat measures.

[QUOTE=andgar923]
To me locking down is, the mufuhka aint scoring on him, and maybe get a rebound or two on him. He did throw them outta their games and comfort zones, but I wouldn't call that locking down. Semantics I agree, but there should be some clarification before shit runs wild.
[/QUOTE]


we're talking about defending patrick ewing, karl malone, shaq, mourning, barkeley, shawn kemp.
going by your definition, nobody locks them down. it never happened.

[QUOTE=Teanett]we're talking about defending patrick ewing, karl malone, shaq, mourning, barkeley, shawn kemp.
going by your definition, nobody locks them down. it never happened.[/QUOTE]

I can't recall them per se, but I've seen star players get locked down based on my interoperation. I'm sure there's been times when even they were locked down vs a defender. Remember, Rodman or said defender doesn't defend them all game every possession. It is very feasible for a defender to lock somebody down.

[QUOTE=andgar923]No he was NOT a lock down defender in the post. He was 'good-great' at times, but he never locked anybody down. All the good bigs still got theirs, they just had to work a bit harder.

His strength was messing with their psyche, he would annoy and frustrate them, but he wouldn't lock them down.

Unless we have completely different meanings on what 'locking down' is.

To me locking down is, the mufuhka aint scoring on him, and maybe get a rebound or two on him. He did throw them outta their games and comfort zones, but I wouldn't call that locking down. Semantics I agree, but there should be some clarification before shit runs wild.

Honestly, you could've replaced him with another good rebounder/defender. But the Bulls probably don't win 3 in a row. His strengths were his ability to get under people's skin, he was as tough as they ever came and that's something that no stat measures.[/QUOTE]

He slowed down Shaq in playoffs, locked down malone most of the series in finals. There are regular season games where he locked down Shaq & Hakeem in 4th quarter etc.

I don't know what do you mean with not allowed to score at all or giving a rebound as being a lock down defender.. Nobody can do that entire game in NBA history against HOFers.

Why do Jordan stans slight alltime greats ( Rodman was the greatest defender /rebouder /energy guy of his generation) to prop up MJ???


silly...

[QUOTE=AlphaWolf24]Why do [B]Jordan stans[/B] slight alltime greats ( Rodman was the greatest defender /rebouder /energy guy of his generation) to prop up MJ???


silly...[/QUOTE]

You just answered your own question.

Just so everyone is clear, "role player" is code for any player who doesn't provide volume scoring.

(Note that no one would ever a call a player who only volume scored and did absolutely nothing else of worth on a basketball court a "role player.")

[QUOTE=ThaRegul8r]Just so everyone is clear, "role player" is code for any player who doesn't provide volume scoring.

(Note that no one would ever a call a player who only volume scored and did absolutely nothing else of worth on a basketball court a "role player.")[/QUOTE]

Pretty much, according to the opinions voiced in this thread...

[QUOTE=ThaRegul8r]Just so everyone is clear, "role player" is code for any player who doesn't provide volume scoring.

(Note that no one would ever a call a player who only volume scored and did absolutely nothing else of worth on a basketball court a "role player.")[/QUOTE]

Just when I was ready to mention Reggie Miller...And Rodman was a greater rebounder than Miller was a scorer, and he actually did a second thing great, play interior defense.

[QUOTE=Psileas]Just when I was ready to mention Reggie Miller...And Rodman was a greater rebounder than Miller was a scorer, and he actually did a second thing great, play interior defense.[/QUOTE]

Not to mention, his passing/facilitating is pretty underrated too.

[QUOTE=Legends66NBA7]Not to mention, his passing/facilitating is pretty underrated too.[/QUOTE]

Rodman in transition game was just.... [I][B]Glory Be[/B][/I]

There was just way too much logic in these last few posts.