While watching "Sober House" with Dennis Rodman as a participant I decided to look up his basketball profile to see if he was good as I remember.

I think he is actually better.

He has the highest average rebounds per game for any player since 1973.
13.1 rebounds/game for career.

He has 5 of the 8 highest top rebounding seasons on a per game basis since any player since 1973.
18.7 rebounds/game for a season.

5x NBA Champion
2x All-Star
2x NBA Defensive Player of the Year
2x All-NBA Third Team Selection
7x NBA All-Defensive First Team Selection
7x NBA Rebounding Champion

Should be in the Hall of Fame...no question!

i think it's somewhat funny that 7x NBA defensive 1st team and 7x rebounding champion gets you 2 all star games

and he basically lost a full season during his prime because of his antics (93-95).

I agree with Barkley. Take any NBA player, really, with any size and length in the 6'7" plus range. Make it their ONLY job on the offensive end to rebound. See how many rebounds they can get. Rodman's "skill" was that he was singleminded. Go back and watch him in the classic Piston days...he was actually involved offensively and had a nice game...and he was only pulling in 8-9 rebounds per contest (still impressive). It wasn't until the end of the Bad Boy era and in SA and Chicago that he decided he only wanted to rebound the ball. At that point his offensive game plummeted.

Rodman was a great defender. He definitely had a nose for the ball. But after the first few years of his career he was an offensive liability. I remember more than one instance in San Antonio when he'd rebound the ball, be the only person under the rim, but throw it out to Chuck Person or Vinny Del Negro, who would promptly rip up a bad shot.

He shot well over 50% for most of his career. He did not turn the ball over, passed well and made most of the shots he took.
I would not call him an offensive liability any more than most defensive minded players.

He never even received passes in SA. Sometimes he would get the ball up top as the trailer and pass it before he dribbled.

There wasn't a lot of opportunity for a turnover or assist.

And his defense suffered a lot. He could really play tough D when he wanted to, but he would leave his man to rebound too early or would slack on D so he could be in better rebounding position quite often.

quote:

---

I would not call him an offensive liability

---

If you can find a tape of him in his San Antonio days, I encourage you to watch it. A guy like Rodman, with his size, MOST DEFINITELY becomes a liability when the opposing team can leave him and play 5 on 4. Everybody in the league knew that if the ball fell in Rodman's lap, 3 feet from the hole, there was a good chance he would pass it out to a shooter.

Granted, he made up for it with 4-5 offensive boards every game, but if he ever was losing the rebound battle, he was worthless.

[This message has been edited by MassAggie97 (edited 4/28/2010 10:34a).]

I got no use for him. The single biggest coaching gaffe in Spur history, I believe, is when Bob Hill let that sorry.... return to the starting lineup after his motorcycle injury late in the season.

Rod was a distraction all year, then got hurt in an incident that he was supposed to be banned from participating in. Spurs had, I believe, Terry Cummings feel the Rodman role and they went on something like a 16 game winning streak.

Then Rodman returns for playoffs with all his wild hair distractions and everything else, and Hill puts him right back in starting rotation.

Spurs were heavy favorites to finally reach the Finals, and instead Houston beats them two games in S.A., then a third in S.A.

And Rodman quit on his team like the POS that he is, once he realized the Spurs were overmatched against Houston.

He had every chance in the world to step up and help lead the team, instead he started calling out teammates.

excellent rebounder..not a hall of famer...

I still can't believe that crazy m'fer wore a spurs jersey.

It was a very non-Spur thing to do, and we paid for it in the end.

What I love most about the Spurs is the lack of locker room drama. Kudos to management, coaches, and our marquis players, who always give this franchise the chance to do something special by focusing on the game of basketball.

quote:

---

excellent rebounder..not a hall of famer...

---

if you are the best of all time at a specific stat of the game, rebounding, you should unquestionably be in the hall of fame. plus...

-seven-time leader in rebounds per game
-seven-time All-Defensive First Team selection
-two-time Defensive Player of the Year
-two-time All-Star
-five-time NBA champion


just because he's become a joke in retirement, doesn't mean he shouldn't be in the hall of fame. he definitely should

He was a joke when he was a player.

As good as he was at rebounding, his lack of offensive ability crippled the Spurs. Not as big of a deal on the Bulls, but the Bulls also had a lot more weapons

Rodman doesn't deserve to be in the HOF, just like Alvin Robertson doesn't deserve it.

And before you go checking, Alvin was the best ever at steals. 2.71spg for his career. Michael Ray Richardson was second at 2.63, then Jordan third at 2.35. That's a huge jump from best ever to third best. The NBA Most Improved Player Award was created specifically for him. He was a 5-time All-Star. He is still ranked top 10 all time in total steals. The only current player close to him is Kobe, who has about 600 less steals than him in about 300 more games. Alvin also had 4 of the top 10 single seasons in steals, including the most ever at 3.67spg. Only 7 players have ever broken 3.0 spg in a single season. Only one player - Alvin - has done it more than once. He did it 5 times. On top of that, he could score. He averaged 17ppg or more 5 times. He also had a pretty amazing season of 20 points/7 assists/6 rebounds/3 steals/1 block.

But despite being one of the greatest defensive players ever, and being the undisputed king of steals, Alvin doesn't deserve being in the HOF.

uhh soup, TERRIBLE comparison.

roberston played in the nba for less than 10 years. he won DPOY once.

second team all nba. 4 time all star. 0 championships.

his resume is NOTHING like rodman's. horrible comparison.

not to mention he's involved with a child trafficking ring. domestic violence, kidnapping, child molestation....


uhhh, yeah, that couldn't be a worse comparison. rodman should get it. robertson should not.

Rodman never made All-NBA second team.

You can't blame Robertson for getting traded to Milwaukee. Rodman was never a star - just a single-focused role player, and he was only on good teams that were already good when he got there.

Robertson played 10 full seasons. Rodman played 120 more games - about a season and a half more than him.

HOFers as a player with less seasons and/or games than Alvin:
Bill Walton (played less than 500 games)
Dick McGuire
Buddy Jeannette (just 3 seasons)
Vern Mikkelsen
George Yardley
David Thompson
Arnie Risen
Gus Johnson
Maurice Stokes (just 3 seasons)
Drazen Petrovic (just 4 seasons)
Dave Cowens
Harry Gallatin
Connie Hawkins
Neil Johnston
KC Jones
Clyde Lovellette
Bob Houbregs (less than 300 games)
Pete Maravich
Bobby Wanzer
Billy Cunningham
Tom Heinsohn
Al Cervi (Just 202 games)
Bill Bradley
Slater Martin
Frank Ramsey
Willis Reed
Paul Arizin
Joe Fulks (less than 500 games)
Chuck Cooper (less than 500 games)
Tom Gola
Bill Sharman
Bob Davies
Andy Phillip
Ed Macauley
George Mikan

his accolades aren't as good as rodman's, and his off the court personal problems are much worse.

just because he doesn't make it is NOT PROOF that rodman shouldnt be in. rodman clearly is in a different category. because robertson clearly isn't MORE QUALIFIED than rodman.

so it's a dumb comparison, and all it proves is robertson shouldnt be in. same with mike penberthy, he shouldnt be in at as well. what does that have to do with rodman? rodman is more qualified.

good logic would be to show someone more qualified than rodman in rodman's statistical area that isn't in the HOF

[This message has been edited by Simplebay (edited 4/29/2010 9:20a).]

His defensive awards, rebounding stats and winning pedigree should get him in.

Every other top 10 all-time rebounder is in the HOF
Only 4 of top 10 steals/game leaders are/will be in the HOF

Rodman was the 3rd best player/best big man on the greatest 3 year dynasty of all-time. He thrived when he played for teams with established solid leadership.

He would not be the worst offensive player in the HOF. Here's the list of Hall of Famers with a worse PER than Rodman's (14.6 career PER)

Player PER
Red Holzman* 7.2
Alex Hannum* 9
K.C. Jones* 10.4
Joe Fulks* 10.8
Pat Riley* 11.3
Larry Brown* 11.4
Slater Martin* 11.6
Bill Bradley* 12.2
Phil Jackson* 12.5
Jerry Sloan* 13.2
Andy Phillip* 13.5
Tom Gola* 14
Dennis Johnson* 14.6

quote:

---

ust because he doesn't make it is NOT PROOF that rodman shouldnt be in.

---

I never made that statement.

We all know you weren't in debate.

Rodman and Alvin both completely dominated a stat category like no one before them or since (before is debatable in both cases as steals weren't counted in the 60s and 50s and Russell dominated the boards while not being completely helpless on offense.)

quote:

---

good logic would be to show someone more qualified than rodman in rodman's statstical area that isn't in the HOF

---

Unfortunately, there aren't a lot of players that completely dominate one statistical category while putting up average to poor numbers in the rest.


Other than Alvin, the only other person that comes to mind is Mark Eaton. Absolutely dominated blocks. In fact, in one season he blocked nearly 10% of all 2-point attempts against his team while he was in the game. 2 DPOYs. Eaton is first all time with 3.5bpg. Manute Bol is second at 3.3 and Hakeem is third with 3.1. Eaton has the best single-season block record at 5.56. No one else has topped 5. Eaton also has two of the top 3 bpg averages since the merger.

Completely dominated blocks like no one before or since. Has been retired 16 years. No shot at the HOF.


Really, there isn't anyone else that singularly dominated stat categories, while not doing anything else.

Ben Wallace won 4 DPOYs, 5 All-D 1st teams and a title, and I doubt he makes the HOF.

Dikembe Mutombo Mpolondo Mukamba Jean-Jacques Wamutombo has 4 DPOYs, and he might make the HOF. I think he has a better shot than Wallace, since he did more than rebound and was a better shot blocker. Plus, Deke will have a lot of good will for being such a humanitarian.
Unless you count Dirk for scoring.

quote:

---

Rodman was the 3rd best player/best big man on the greatest 3 year dynasty of all-time. He thrived when he played for teams with established solid leadership.

He would not be the worst offensive player in the HOF. Here's the list of Hall of Famers with a worse PER than Rodman's (14.6 career PER)

Player PER
Red Holzman* 7.2
Alex Hannum* 9
K.C. Jones* 10.4
Joe Fulks* 10.8
Pat Riley* 11.3
Larry Brown* 11.4
Slater Martin* 11.6
Bill Bradley* 12.2
Phil Jackson* 12.5
Jerry Sloan* 13.2
Andy Phillip* 13.5
Tom Gola* 14
Dennis Johnson* 14.6

---

Holzman, Pat Riley, Larry Brown, Hannum, Phil Jackson, and Jerry Sloan made it to the HOF as a coach, not as a player.

I think he gets in, but:

quote:

---

if you are the best of all time at a specific stat of the game, rebounding,

---

He was not the best of all time...not really that close. Also, I don't believe they kept good stats on it early in Bill's career.

# Wilt Chamberlain — led the NBA in rebounds in 11 different seasons, has the most career rebounds in the regular season (23,924), the highest career average (22.9 rpg), the single season rebounding records in total (2,149) and average (27.2 rpg), most rebounds in a regular season game (55) and playoff game (41) in the NBA, and has the most career All-Star Game rebounds (197).
# Bill Russell — first player to average over 20 rebounds per game in the regular season, ranks second to Chamberlain in regular season total (21,620) and average (22.5) rebounds, averaged more than 20 rebounds per game in 10 of 13 seasons played, grabbed 51 rebounds in a single game (second best ever), grabbed a record 32 rebounds in one half, and is the all-time playoff leader in total (4,104) and average (24.9 rpg) rebounds.

quote:

---

excellent rebounder..not a hall of famer...

---

So do you also suggest that George Gervin was an excellent scorer but not a hall of famer? Because Gervin never heard the words defense or pass.

ABA All-Rookie Team
3× ABA All-Star
ABA All-Time Top 30 Team
7× All-NBA Team
9× NBA All-Star

How can you let a guy like Gervin who was all offense in the HoF and not the opposite type of player but just as valuable in Rodman?

Because Gervin was a star player and Rodman was a role player. Gervin carried the Spurs for years. Rodman was an absolute cancer and multiple teams unceremoniously dumped him for pennies on the dollar. Will Perdue? The Bulls cut him. The Lakers cut him. The Mavericks cut him and then no one else would take him on.

[This message has been edited by Guitarsoup (edited 4/30/2010 10:14p).]

I'd put Rodman in the Hall of Fame tomorrow. He's completely nuts and probably dangerous, but the guy was awesome basketball player.

Rodman was not an offensive liability. An offensive liability is a guy who shoots a bunch but never makes them. Or a guy that is sloppy and turns it over all the time. Rodman had a role and did it very well. That doesn't mean you can dismiss him with "just a role player".

He was lucky to have awesome players on his team. Why should he shoot? Give it to Pippen, Jordan, Thomas, or Duncan. That's smart basketball.

You didn't have to honor him at the elbow. But if you weren't guarding him, he would own the glass. He could absolutely control a game without taking a shot. You could play 5v4, but it was short-sighted.

Part of reason that people carp on Rodman's offense was because of the rules. The best thing the NBA has done in long time was change the illegal defense rules. In keeping with those rules, Rodman would stand away from the bucket. Usually, he would be distant from Jordan as well. His man had to stay with Rodman, despite the fact he wasn't involved in the play. Totally stupid rules, but it was effective for Bulls. By doing that, Rodman took himself (a so-so offensive player) out of the play. But that usually meant that he took a good defender away from the play as well.

Rodman was terrific on fast break. He wasn't Worthy or Drexler league at finishing, but he was next level. Saw that alot more with the Pistons.

His defense was fantastic. He was like Artest. He could handle a smaller, quicker player. But he could also bang with the bigs. He was best defensive player on some of the best defensive teams of all time.

By the time he played for Dallas and San Antonio, he wasn't that effective. Maybe Texans can't appreciate how good he really was. The physical toil of his brand of hoops and alcoholism crippled him. If Rodman had one decent season for the Spurs, guitarsoup would be singing his hosannas.

Won 5 championships with 2 different teams. How many great players have won multiple championships with different teams. Less than a dozen I bet. Probably less than 5.

quote:

---

How many great players have won multiple championships with different teams. Less than a dozen I bet. Probably less than 5.

---

Ron Harper, and Robert Horry come to mind. No one that would help your HOF argument. Horry had 2 in Houston, 3 in LA and 2 in SA. Harper had Chicago/LA.

So the answer is no GREAT player has won multiple championships with multiple teams. Three very important role players have.

quote:

---

Rodman was not an offensive liability.

---

Not that you had any credibility when talking about basketball, but if you did, it would be lost right there. Rodman was a huge liability on offense.
In the 95 Spurs-Rockets series, Hakeem didn't have to guard anyone. He stayed somewhat close to Rodman, then turned and faced Robinson. As soon as it was time to send help to Pete Chilcutt/Chucky Brown, Hakeem was there and Rodman was too much of a offensive liability to cut to the basket or backdoor it. Robinson had to use all his energy on offense getting through double teams since Rodman was a huge liability, then Robinson had to go back down the court and guard Hakeem one-on-one when Hakeem was at the absolute top of his game. Rodman's inability to do anything offensively and Bob Hill's inability to coach and adjust mean the Spurs got DOMINATED by Hakeem.

Rodman was a huge liability on offense after about 1992, and anyone who says differently doesn't have a clue what they are talking about.

quote:

---

He was lucky to have awesome players on his team. Why should he shoot? Give it to Pippen, Jordan, Thomas, or Duncan. That's smart basketball.

---

Rodman never played with Duncan, moron. In fact, he only ever even played two games against Duncan in Duncan's rookie year.
The non-offensive liability Dennis Rodman went 1-13 shooting in those two games.

quote:

---

He could absolutely control a game without taking a shot.

---

No he didn't what he did was let you release earlier because he would get rebounds that your other players didn't have to hang around to get. But he never controlled a game, and I watched him dozens of time in person and hundreds of times on TV.

quote:

---

His man had to stay with Rodman, despite the fact he wasn't involved in the play.

---

His man would double off of him at the first opportunity. This mattered a lot less when you were built for slashing with two of the greatest wingmen to ever play the game. A lot harder to double outside than inside, but people still doubled Jordan at the three point line and left Rodman open all the time. And Rodman was such a liability that he couldn't make teams pay. However, Jordan was freakin Jordan.

quote:

---

Rodman took himself (a so-so offensive player) out of the play.

---

Rodman wasn't even close to an average offensive player. He was a poor offensive player.

quote:

---

Rodman was terrific on fast break. He wasn't Worthy or Drexler league at finishing, but he was next level.

---

Holy ****. You can't really believe that. Rodman had a difficult time with lay ups.

quote:

---

His defense was fantastic. He was like Artest. He could handle a smaller, quicker player. But he could also bang with the bigs. He was best defensive player on some of the best defensive teams of all time.

---

Unfortunately, he would also day dream about getting rebounds and get beat. He was incredible on defense when he wanted to be. And he was spacey on defense a lot of the time.

quote:

---

By the time he played for Dallas and San Antonio, he wasn't that effective.

---

Maybe in this post more than any other have you shown just how little you know about NBA basketball.
Rodman played two years with the Spurs BEFORE he went to Chicago.
With the Spurs, each year he averaged more rebounds than he did in ANY year with the Bulls, and the Bulls didn't have a second great rebounder like the Spurs did. Rodman led the league with 17.8 and 16.3 rebounds with the Spurs.

quote:

---

If Rodman had one decent season for the Spurs, guitarsoup would be singing his hosannas.

---

You really are a moron. Possibly Rodman's best season of his career was in SA. 1995. In just 32mpg, he shot 57%, led the league with 16.8 rebounds and scored 7.1 points. His per-36 numbers were 8 points and 19 rebounds (6.3 offensive) on 57% shooting. Plus he his his career high in FT shooting at 68% [not counting the 12 games he played in Dallas.]

quote:

---

Unfortunately, he would also day dream about getting rebounds and get beat. He was incredible on defense when he wanted to be. And he was spacey on defense a lot of the time.

---

What kind of ridiculous comment was that? Dude was 2x NBA defensive player of the year and 7x NBA all defense team and you are trying to say he wasnt that great on defense? lol

No, he was great when he was working at it. You may not have noticed, but his mind lapsed a bit. Not the most mentally tough player that ever did. Defense wasn't his biggest priority, especially after he started to focus mainly on rebounding in ~92ish. But you could man him up on SG, SF, PF or centers with pretty good results. But when his man didn't have the ball, he would often sag towards the hoop.

But Gervin deserves to be in teh NBA? I guess he does because, you may not have noticed but he didnt step foot onto the defensive end of the court and never met a shot he didnt like.

quote:

---

It wasn't until the end of the Bad Boy era and in SA and Chicago that he decided he only wanted to rebound the ball. At that point his offensive game plummeted

---

I dont know about that. After Detroit, he went to teams with a lot of Offensive Firepower, and his role changed. He didnt need to contribute on that end of the floor like he did with Detroit.

If it was that easy to simply switch roles, and dominate defensively, and on the boards like that, more players would do it....but they cant (not like Rodman did).



[This message has been edited by AgGrad99 (edited 5/4/2010 10:45a).]

quote:

---

just as valuable in Rodman

---

Gervin >>>> Rodman

I watched both of them play several times as Spurs; Gervin at the old Hemisphere when I was little, and Rodman much later.

Personally I think mentioning them in the same breath is entirely laughable. Both players played valuable roles for their teams, yes. But guys like Gervin that can completely carry a team offensively come along once every generation. "Role players" like Rodman are fairly interchangeable.

Its like comparing a perfectly prepared prime rib to the really tasty salad you had to start the meal.

[This message has been edited by MassAggie97 (edited 5/4/2010 11:03a).]

To be in the HOF you have to be one of the greatest players at your position of your generation. The fact that Rodman was never all-NBA first or second team, and only all-NBA third team twice in a 14 year career is clearly evidence that he should not be in the HOF. He was never in the top 10% of all-around forwards in any given NBA season.

Rodman is like Robert Horry. One of the best role players of all time, but not worthy of the hall of fame. He was a contributor, but never came close to carrying a team to victory. He was consistently solid, and good a few years, but never great.

Well put. It is worth repeating that Rodman was never "the guy" on his team. He was never even the 2nd best player on any of his teams. Gervin carried the load for the Spurs for a long, long time.

Stats aside, the burden of being "the guy" always makes the stats more impressive, IMO.

Very interesting discussion. I always liked Rodman. I don't know, I'd probably put him in the Hall, but I understand both sides of the argument.