In the 1996 Finals, Rodman deserved consideration for Finals MVP that went to Michael Jordan.
During those Finals Rodman averaged 7.5 points and 14.7 rebounds in 37.5 minutes per game. He tied an NBA Finals record for most offensive rebounds in a game with 11. And he did that in Game 2 and the deciding game 6.
The Bulls had a commanding 3-0 lead after Jordan had his series high in points. Payton would outplay Jordan the next two games delaying the inevitable, but Jordan won the Finals MVP. I don't think Jordan deserved it. Rodman won the series with his offensive rebounding. - Elliot Kalb, Who's better Who's best in basketball?
During the Finals Jordan not only shot terribly from the field, he was absolute shit in the fourth quarters too (shot 33.3% in them, and only 15.4% in the fourth quarters of the three close games). In the two close wins of the series, Rodman averaged 11 offensive rebounds/game. He was setting records, and when MJ was shooting the team out of the game with bricks (rest of the team struggled shooting wise too), it was Rodman getting all those rebounds to give Bulls the extra possessions. Bulls as a team shot much lower than Sonics in that series...why do you think they still won? They got 34 more possessions from offensive rebounds (Rodman alone had 41!). MJ's scoring could have been replaced in that series, but Rodman's historic offensive rebounding? Not so much.
Rodman should have been the MVP of that Finals. The Bulls shot much worse from the field than the Sonics in the Finals but still won. How did that happen? Simple. The Bulls got more shot opportunities from offensive rebounds basically negating many of their misses. Rodman, by himself, secured and additional 41 possessions for the Bulls with his offensive rebounding including 2 games where he tied an NBA Finals record. That's like playing H-O-R-S-E and someone giving you multiple "do overs" after you've missed.
In the deciding Game 6 Jordan went 5-19 (26 FG%) while Rodman set a Finals record with 11 offensive rebounds. At the very least he was the MVP of the close out Game 6.
I see your point. And it was well thought out with facts. And bades on what you said, I wouldn't have argued if rodman won the mvp for the 96 finals. But just remember that that championship was. A defensive struggle. And sometimes you have to win dirty. Fortunately for the bulls, they had the ultimate dirty player
Seattle coach George Karl said, “As you evaluate the series, Dennis Rodman won two basketball games. Game 2 and tonight, he was the reason they were successful.”
In Game 6, in which Jordan shot 5-for-19 (26.3%) and Chicago 39.7% as a team, Rodman had 19 rebounds, 11 offensive, tying the single-game record for the second time, nine points, five assists and three steals.
In Game 2, in which Michael Jordan shot 9-for-22 (40.9%) and Chicago 39.0% as a team, Rodman scored 10 points and grabbed 20 rebounds, an NBA Finals record-tying 11 on the offensive glass, to lead the Bulls to a 92-88 win. “Rodman was definitely the difference,” Hershey Hawkins said. “Rodman killed us,” said Vincent Askew. “There is no question he was the MVP of the game,” Karl said. “His offensive rebounds hurt us. A lot of possessions, the momentum of the game, the style of the game, and even the scoreboard might have changed.”
No one on the Bulls could hit a shot, and Rodman's offensive rebounding with CRUCIAL, giving them second possessions and extra chances. They were talking about it on sports talk radio—I listened to what was being said AT THE TIME—that Rodman should have been MVP, but Jordan got it because he was Jordan, when that was by far his worst finals, and he had an un-Jordan-like deciding game. And there was no way in hell Dennis Rodman was going to be voted MVP.
I wouldn't clap too hard, its subjective enough just like the 2010 NBA Finals. Apart from game 1 and a RIDICULOUS 3rd quarter in game 5, and a decent game 6 in a blow out .. Kobe wasn't exactly always playing MVP caliber like during the series.