Dennis Rodman, HOF worthy, re-opening the debate

Dennis Rodman was at Scottie's HOF induction and spent some of that time campaigning for his own induction.   I blogged about this possibility before and came up kind of neutral on the topic, and I'm reopening the subject for debate.

He has some impressive credentials:

Key member of 5 NBA title teams
Defensive player of the year twice
Seven time 1st team defense (1 2nd team, 2 3rd)
A host of rebounding statistical crowns (7 time leader in rebounds per game, 8 times in TRB%, #1 all time in career rebounding percentage).

Follow dougthonus on Twitter

However, after that the case gets more sticky.

He was only a two time all-star.  

He didn't provide much on the offensive end of the court, he gives you offensive rebounding and junk baskets, but that isn't really a whole lot.

He could never be the #1 guy on a title team.   Heck, he couldn't even be the #2 guy on a title team.  In fact, he spent a portion of his career submarining a team that could have won a title if he had his crap together. 

Was there ever a year you'd put Dennis Rodman in the top 10 players in the league? 

I'm not sure how many other HOFers have those negatives on their resume, I'd guess a few of the early ones who got in probably had similar qualifications because they were just trying to fill the room, but since then, the bar has been raised considerably.

The problem is really the way the hall is constructed.   By the present rule, there is no room for specialists.   No room for the purely interesting.   The history of basketball seems incomplete without Dennis.  He's not an after thought, he was a key player in the league. 

I acknowledge that as an all around player, Dennis doesn't measure up to the Hall of Fame standard, but when you just think of Dennis, don't you think he belongs?   What's interesting is that Dennis's value is so different depending on the way you calculate.

Is Dennis Rodman a top 100 player of all time?   Most people probably laugh at this, but I think it depends on how you view the top 100.  Say you had 100 teams, and had to pick a best player for each.   Dennis wouldn't make anyone's list.   However, say you had 10 teams and had to pick 10 players for each team, Dennis probably makes most peoples list for one of the teams.

The first list represents an all around contribution, while the second list represents how he could contribute to the team he was on.   While Rodman wasn't one of the all time greats in all around play, he could certainly play in a pick up game with them in his prime and help his team more with his specialized skills than someone who had more all around skills.  

Most people would use the first approach to figure out a top 100, but is the second approach really less valid?

I don't know if Dennis ever gets into the Hall.   His HOF Probability is .467 showing that even the statisticians can't make up their mind on whether he's worthy.   I'm not sure if I think he's worthy.   It's hard for me to say "yes" to a guy whom I don't think was ever a top 10 all-around player in the league for even a single season.

That said, there's so many unique impressive things he's done.  I can still go either way.


Leave a comment
  • I saw yes. He was not an all-around player but for he did, and which we value greatly, he did extremely well and on an all-time great level: rebounding, defense and contribute to championships. I think that the Hall needs to reconsider these things and expect that people like this will be the exception rather than the norm. They've placed such a premium on scoring that without it you can't even get the conversation started regardless of your other contributions. You can do B, C and D like few others but since A (i.e. scoring) was a joke, no Hall for you! Ben Wallace is another player that we will be having this conversation about.

  • In reply to jamatokwu:

    I "say" yes.

  • In reply to jamatokwu:

    Well I think he should be there without a doubt, for a couple of reasons.

    Firstly it's not called the hall of merit, it's the hall of FAME. He's one of the most famous basketball players of his generation, he belongs there.

    However if we're going to pretend it's the hall of merit, he deserves a spot. As a rebounder he was better than anyone. To me that deserves a spot far more than someone who was just a very good all-around player like Joe Dumars or even Patrick Ewing, guys who don't have any one skill you can point to and say "nobody who ever played did what he did".

  • In reply to DontLetsStart:


    Your argument completely lost me. First of all, just because you were famous during your career doesn't mean you're a hall of famer. Latrell Sprewell was famous, but that has no baring (no should it) on whether he makes the HoF (which he won't).

    And you're arguing that you don't need merit to get into the hall? What are you on today? Usually I'm with you but this is so off the wall I have to wonder if someone stole your account.

  • In reply to WearShades:

    I'm just saying when you call it the hall of fame you probably should have probably the second most famous player of his generation (after MJ) in it.

    But maybe I'm misunderstanding the semantics of the name, maybe it's not a "hall of famous people" it's a "hall to further people's fame".

  • In reply to DontLetsStart:

    In a word, yes.

  • In reply to DontLetsStart:

    I'd have to say Rodman isn't a hall of famer and I don't really think it's that close. He was fantastic at what he did, but at no time during his career was he ever a great player. He was an absolutely fantastic rebounder but that's not really enough to make it to the hall. He was never more than the third best guy on any championship team, and I could ever understand someone saying he wasn't even in a championship team's top 3. That's too much going against him for the hall.

    Still one of my all time favorite Bulls, and that's enough for me.

  • In reply to jamatokwu:

    His resume' says YES.

    He has the RINGS, the REBOUNDS and the AWARDS to justify his induction into the HOF.

    I hope it happens.

  • In reply to jamatokwu:

    I think he belongs in the "HOF". I would say the criteria for HOF is if that player revolutionized that position in a way or was one of the best in his generation. For example, Barkley was a smaller player who kind of redefined how big a PF should be or Kevin Garnett(I know he still is not a HOF) who is a lanky,shooting PF.
    Rodman in a way revolutionized his position with his rebounding prowess and was the best rebounder in his generation or probably ever. Also, his shutting down of great players(HOF players like Malone) during crucial games in playoffs makes the difference.
    His knack of playing mental games is invaluable too which is revolutionary by itself. For ex, in your other article you talked about Mark Jackson too. Mark Jackson didn't do anything revolutionary at his position...He was just a better than average player at his position compared to his contemporaries.
    I guess because of his behavior most of our judgement gets clouded a little bit. Hopefully, that will be forgotten a little bit with time.

  • In reply to jamatokwu:

    I "sees" yes. I do think he killed a great opportunity for himself in San Antonio though so I wonder if that isn't a barrier for most voters. (I also think his post-NBA career choices are not helping him either.)

    A great talent, who undoubtedly needed better support structures in his life.

  • In reply to jamatokwu:

    Let me preface this by saying...I love Dennis Rodman. (Pause)

    When he was added to the Bulls roster for Will Perdue (of all people)...I was on a road trip and people thought my family was nuts because we pulled over the RV and started celebrating!

    But he's no Hall of Famer.

    He was a key member of 5 NBA Champions....
    He was a flamboyantly demonstrative player who was GREAT for the game...
    He's an excellent guest at cocktail parties and bat mitzvahs across the Contintental US....

    But he's not the pedigree of an All-Star.

    Charles Barkley had hella personality...but he backed it up by being versatile in many areas...

    No one has ever accuses Wilt Chamberlain of being silent...but no one could EVER question his pedigree...

    The Worm? Not so much.

    Sorry Dennis

  • In reply to jamatokwu:

    I say "yes" as he was an elite defender and rebounder. Does the hall just take elite scorers?

  • In reply to evilhoban:

    I agree...It seems like somebody can go to Golden State or play for D'Antoni and score at will to become a HOFer because they have a chance to win scoring titles.
    This way, Monta Ellis(no defense) could be a HOFer if scoring is the criteria without winning in the playoffs.

  • In reply to evilhoban:

    Saying Rodan is a "specialist" because he was such a great rebounder is like saying Jordan is a specialist because he was such a great scorer. You wouldn't say that because Michael was a great defensive player and could also pass the ball well. If you look at Dennis Rodman as an entire player you have to take into account his defense. Defense that was amazing during all five of his Championship seasons. And he was playing defense against guys like James Worthy, Shawn Kemp (in his prime), & Karl Malone. Then you look at his interior passing. I must admit I didn't watch Dennis much when he was with the Spurs but I seen a lot of great passing when he was in Chicago and Detroit. He was a great rebounder yes, but that was not all he brought to the table. If you asked who the best rebounder during the 90's was everyone would say Dennis Rodman. If you asked for the top three defensive players at the PF position in the NBA during the 90's Dennis would make every ones list. And if you want to argue that Dennis wasn't even the second best player on his team during his career then you can't blame the Spurs lack of ability to make it to the finals on him. That would be like blaming Luol Deng for the Bull's not getting to the finals this year. So YES Dennis Rodman should be in the HOF based on his Rebounding, Defense, and Interior Passing that made his team better, leading to FIVE NBA Championships.

  • In reply to CPBuff22:

    I would go one step further, he was in the top 3 defenders in the entire league in the 90's.

    Pippen, Rodman and Payton?, Or Rodman, Pippen and Payton.

  • In reply to BigWay:


  • In reply to jamatokwu:

    I wouldn't campaign for Rodman, but if I had a vote, I'd vote for him. I look at Rodman the same way as I view Dennis Johnson. Johnson had better stats in his early career than he did later in Boston, but it was the titles in Boston that got him into the Hall this "soon." I'd argue that Rodman was just as important to the teams with whom he won titles in Chicago and Detroit.

    I think the San Antonio years were overblown. I remember them well, as I was going to college in Texas at the time. Being without the NBA Season Ticket, I was bombarded by Rockets and Spurs games (though I still got to watch the Bulls on WGN). Sure Rodman was a distraction, I'd never argue that. But I think he was also a popular scapegoat for them falling short in the playoffs. It was easier to point to his foolishness than it was to blame the beloved David
    "Admiral" Robinson for his inability to raise his level of play against Utah and Houston.

  • I mean if Monta Ellis keeps scoring at the same rate , he might even win a few scoring titles before he is done... And if he is scoring so much, probably his team is not winning in the playoffs. But he might get consideration because he scores so much rather than if he had won "defensive player" titles without scoring. I was just seconding his point that "scoring" is valued more than "rebounding" or "defense" for HOF consideration.

  • In reply to schaumburgfan:

    Really? Are there any Nelson stars in the hall right now?

    (Really asking, not sure.)

  • In reply to Duke:

    I have no idea. But, I was trying to emphasize the point of "scoring" getting more consideration than "rebounding"...that's all. I don't think Ellis will win a scoring title nor will he even sniff HOF. I just came up with an example of a scoring type of player in a system for scoring and nothing else...

  • In reply to Duke:

    I don't know, I waffle on this, pretty much the same way Doug outlined in his post. On the one hand, Dennis filled an important role for championship teams, and he did it possibly better than anyone I've seen. Not only that, he did it without complaining. I think this is something that people don't realize--as hard as it is to get elite defense and rebounding, it can be harder to get it from a guy who doesn't also want to be a huge scorer. And that's something that teams can't always handle. Certainly the Bulls couldn't have supported a third guy who would have been complaining if he didn't get 25 points a night. Adding defense and rebounding of Rodman's caliber without adding a need to be the man was really big, IMHO. I mean, essentially, that was part of why Horace left, right? Dennis made lots of waves/trouble in other ways, but never because he didn't like his role on the team.

    On the other hand, it's hard to put someone in the hall who you would take after every other current hall member in a pickup game, and probably some current players, too. He was a complimentary piece, not a building block.

    I think I'm also affected by a sort of "90's Bulls Representation Complex". Right now, there are only 2 of those Bulls (I think) in the hall (although Phil will certainly get in). And for such a great team, it seems like there should be more Hall-worthy players. So you start going over the roster and trying to figure out who you can flesh out the roster with. Because those teams deserve a lot of Hall recognition. But I'm not sure that the players do, unfortunately.

  • It is called the Hall of Fame and he is famous. I would say yes. But I doubt they let his in.. That would be an interesting speech.

  • In reply to souleater7:

    The hall of fame is not a hall of famous people, it's a hall for great players. The "interpret the name as literally as possible" argument is ridiculous.

  • In reply to WearShades:

    It might be ridiculous to interpret the "famous" argument...but I think the point is more deeper than you think. I think he impacted the game and he kind of famously did it. As somebody said earlier, it is not fame like Latrell Spreewell or Len Bias but he did a few things which made the Bulls and basketball more popular...But being "famous" definitely shouldn't be the only criteria for HOF ...

  • In reply to schaumburgfan:

    I was the one who brought up Latrell, and frankly the level of fame of a player is irrelevant. If not a single person outside of basketball had heard of Jordan, would his achievements on the court be any less impressive? No. This "he's famous and it's the hall of fame" argument is just a manufactured way of trying to convince oneself that Rodman deserves enshrinement. He was a very important part of the second threepeat, but that doesn't mean he's a hall of famer. Frankly, he's not really that close to that level.

  • In reply to schaumburgfan:

    Nobody seems to answer or know why one of the two but where was Toni Kukoc at Scotties HOF? I get the feeling they didnt really like each other, which watching old games seems apparent, maybe I'm seeing something that isnt there...

  • Yes Rodman, deserves to be in the HOF, He was one of the best defenders at his position and the best undersized rebounder in the league. He has the awards and stats to back it up even if he was crazy.

    To be honest I dont know why the 72-10 bulls team hasnt been inducted as one of the best NBA teams ever, they induced entire olympic teams why not the bulls? they could do the lakers team that won 33 games in a row also.

  • In reply to Snypershawn:

    That's a good one. I think if and when the new "HEAT" team fails to win 65 in a couple of years, the Bulls team might be inducted like the dream team. Sometimes, I guess it takes a great "on-paper" team fail, you appreciate the real accomplishments better.

  • In reply to Snypershawn:

    Also, don't you think TMZ, National Enquirer and even news organizations would make it a bigger event than the regular HOF event to check out on what "dress" Rodman will be wearing?

  • In reply to Snypershawn:

    Basketball HOF, slam dunk. Human being HOF, not so much.

    Just by way of comparison, was Rodman as important to the second Bulls 3 peat as James Worthy was to the showtime Lakers? I say absolutely. Both could be considered the 3rd guy, Worthy was an offensive player, he is in, Rodman was a defensive player, arguable more dominant on defense than Worthy was on offense and he is not in.

    The Bulls never win 72 & 69 without him, and we don't have a second 3 peat without him. Just like the first 3 peat needed Grant the second needed Rodman and was superior to the first because Rodman was superior to Grant.

    There is clearly a HOF bias toward scoring. The biggest argument that people have used against Pippen, was that he was not a dominant scorer. In some ways Rodman is an exagerated Pippen. Way less offense, way more rebounding and defense.

    F.Y.I. As part of its HOF coverage Fox Sports did a top 5 HOF snubbs, Rodman was #1, Artis Gilmore #2, and Tex Winter #5.

    Finally, I don't think that the criterion for entry into the HOF is being a top ten player in the league, at least not by looking at who is already in.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    Good point. Rodman helped the Bulls to get to super high level of maximum number of wins in the season(that in itself deserves a HOF induction as we discussed earlier). Plus, Jordan and Pippen were not as elite as they were in the 91-94 period especially Jordan(at his level before somebody goes off). Also, during the 91-94 time, Magic/Bird/Isaih had declined and there was only the Ewing Knicks who were big time competition. But in 95-98, you had Orlando, NY,Jazz,Houston, Indiana and a lot of good to great teams at their peak to contend with. Basically, his contribution was far greater than Grant for 91-94(that's my opinion)..

  • In reply to BigWay:

    Agree with your first statement. Nicely put.

  • In reply to KenyattaWright:


  • Excellent point,

    I would absolutely take Rodman the basketball player on my team any day, every day as a piece of my championship mix.

    Statistically, he is the greatest rebounder ever
    (not by volume, but by efficiency or relative effectiveness)

  • In reply to BigWay:


  • Sports like baseball and football acknowledge specialized skills in their HOF's. Kickers, OL, etc. get recoginition in FB and relievers get it in BB. If Ricky Henderson only had his stolen base records don't you think he would still be in?

    The value someone like Rodman brings (similar to Noah I think) cannot be undervalued. There were no plays called for him and he still averaged 7 a game. Those points were also probably more valuable than many since most were second chance points. He did all the things that help a team win championships. He should be in.

  • In reply to UnstopaBull:

    Number of kickers in the pro football hall of fame: 1 (Jan Stenerud). :)

  • In reply to Duke:

    like I said,

  • In reply to UnstopaBull:

    There's a difference. Baseball and especially football are games of specialists, so of course players with only one specific skill are going to get in. Basketball isn't like that, and Rodman didn't really have a second quality skill other than rebounding. Rebounding alone isn't enough IMO.

  • Ray Guy is most certainly NOT in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. There are many who think he should/will be in, but not yet.

    (It's a significant point of contention.)

  • In unrelated news, my favorite "Stewie" impersonator - Oleksiy Pecherov - is headed to Milan.

  • In reply to claytonabigsby:

    That's too bad....we should have signed him just to hear Stacey King yell "Steeeeeeewie" every game...

  • In reply to evilhoban:

    Apologies....didn't see the second link....:)

  • I would take Sebastian Telfair over Rodman if it was a pickup game. That's not valid criteria.

    Why is that not valid criteria? Why is it not important which guy gives you more? Why is "fits into team" more important?

  • In reply to Duke:

    Pick-up games even if they have the same talent does not include other things such as constant traveling, media attention, functioning in a business atmosphere and lots of other things....

  • In reply to schaumburgfan:

    Which basically confirms my suspicion that by using the phrase "pickup game" I was unwittingly conveying a specific meaning I was unaware of. My mistake.

    My basic point was, who would you take if you were assembling a team to win an NBA game? If presented with Dennis Rodman and a random HOFer, you'd probably take the random HOFer most of the time.

  • In reply to Duke:

    That's not valid criteria because Telfair would just no look pass into the stands all game.....:)

  • Payton made a more consistent all game effort, but if I had to choose between the two for a 5 minute stretch in the play-offs, I'm going with Jordan.

    I seem to remember Jordan taking a few plays off here and there.

  • Does that mean Kenyella is WPR??!!! He would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for you meddling kids!!!:)

  • In reply to evilhoban:


  • A ban for switching accounts? All the crap that goes on around here and you want to ban someone for switching an account? McHappy should be banned for his trade proposals alone.

    But if it makes you feel powerful and almighty, go ahead... whatever gets your juices flowing.

    Just know that if you do ban me, it greatly reduces your odds of ever ending up in my TMobile Fav 5. Just saying.

  • In reply to KenyattaWright:


    Hey, this isn't basketball related, but anyone going to ComicCon this weekend? I'm driving down from MN with another user, Turdburglar, and would like to talk Bulls if anyone's going to be around...

  • In reply to KenyattaWright:

    And if this is my last post, I'd like to take a moment to thank a few people. First off, I'd like to thank Jordan. Through Him, all things are possible. I'd also like to thank my parents. They're the reason I'm here today.

    Finally, I'd like to thank Evilhoban. I wouldn't be the blogger am I today without his evil posts. I used to think I was evil, but he has shown me that I'm only quasi-evil. He is pure evil, and I feel like I'm a better person for having known him.

    In closing, I beg all of you not to shed a tear for me. I know I will be greatly missed, but this too shall pass (and I'll just come up with another id, as I have lots of ideas, and access to lots of internet connections).

  • In reply to KenyattaWright: single tear....:)

  • Seriously?! I'm just basing my opinion on what I saw when he was here in MN....he was laughably a Owe Boll movie.

  • I think he was a legend based on a potential he never came close to achieving....and being Starbury's cousin. On the NY playground, defense is lax (only go for blocks and steals)and competition is for the show, not the win....right?

  • This was written yesterday. I'm guessing you missed it...

    Bigway said:

    Kunt-Yall-AHole, I presume,

    Hiding behind a moniker bearing the name of an venerated institution(one which I am sure that you never heard of) which would never in a million years accept a character(or I should say lack of character) of your ilk is cowardly.

    But then you have proven over and over again that you are nothing more than a foul mouthed, name calling, racist, coward, ever so typical of your species. That would be the species that is always wishing that people who they disagree with would die in a plane crash or from cancer.

    Posted on August 15, 2010 1:56 AMRepl

  • In reply to KenyattaWright:

    That's not cool....

  • In reply to evilhoban:

    The best part about it is that he posted it at 1:56am. What does he do? Go out for a few drinks, come home and beat his wife, then send me a message?

    Good times.

  • In reply to KenyattaWright:

    It would be nice if you vented somwhere else...

  • In reply to mdot1986:

    I'm still not convinced that you're old enough to be using a computer.

    With that in mind, sorry for all the adult talk. Please don't tell your mom.

  • In reply to KenyattaWright:

    Apparently age doesn't make up for ignorance.

  • In reply to mdot1986:

    I don't think you understand the meaning of "ignorance."

    But you shouldn't be embarrassed, it's not your fault. I blame the school system. So, I'll contact your school board and tell them the education you're being provided is substandard.

    Which junior high do you attend?

  • In reply to KenyattaWright:

    Ignorance and immaturity...seems your intelligence hasn't since you left junior high. You are out right?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to KenyattaWright:

    This thread's probably over but I didn't get to post earlier today. Rodaman's 21st on the all-time rebounding list. 21st is a tough sell for the hall of fame. He may just have to wait until they build a hall of infamy. He's first ballot there for sure.

  • In reply to mdot1986:

    I think Dennis Rodman deserve to be in the Hall of Fame, people should not judge his off the court issues. I say this on my blog and realgm, people should look at him as a basketball player not as a person and it is not like he did anything that is tragedy and very dramatic.

    He was one of the best rebounder in the league, that impressive for his size which he was what? 6'8 with shoes I believe? He was also a very good defender and he hustles night in and night out, I hope he gets the nod some day hopefully maybe next year. He deserve that honor.

  • In reply to mdot1986:


    An ESPN report now states that Melo wants out of Denver prior to the season starting.

    I still say the Bulls can put together the best trade package, compared to NY or NJ.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Nothing new...This is reading too much into toasts by Ric Bucher. Plus, if Melo can come to Chicago; he can as well go to Portland or OKC or any other place. If the Nuggets are going to trade him, they are going to trade him to the highest bidder. And if Melo plans to leave Denver it is probably because of aging talent(Billups, Martin) rather than home-town or Eastern conference or any team..

  • In reply to KenyattaWright:

    Yes without a doubt, Rodman belongs in the HOF.

    Not only is he the greatest rebounder ever- which should be enough on it's own- but he's also the greatest defensive player I've ever seen.

    And I've been watching the NBA since the Finals were on tape delay after the 10 PM local news.

  • They probably realized that Kukoc was a gentleman who didn't care for all their agendas(against Krause) and behaved professionally and focussed on basketball. I don't remember hearing anything bad about Kukoc and he looks more like an "Economics Professor" than a basketball player. Coming from a different country into such a high pressure situation and having to prove himself with Jordan and Pippen(who were at their peak in both their game and ego at that time). It really speaks more about Kukoc as a person and also Pippen later understanding the reality of the circumstances.

  • Which I guess gets to core of the argument: is "4th guy on your team" a position*, and if it is, does the guys who did it best deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. I can see the case for it, but it's not clear cut for me.

    I'm trying to articulate my reservations about Dennis in the Hall and I'm having trouble. One thing, though, is that I feel like Hall of Fame guys are guys that you could put on any team and they would bring that team closer to being a contender. I feel like Dennis isn't that kind of guy. If you put Dennis on a really bad team, then, you know, you have better defense but you still don't have the efficient, elite scorers you need. If you got a really good scorer, well, I guess getting the guys you need to provide good rebounding and defense aren't as hard. Maybe?

    I guess that's what I'm trying to say. I'm not convinced that he doesn't belong in the Hall, though. I'm just trying to explain the part of me that thinks he shouldn't be in. I'm really on the fence.

    * Or "best player to put on your team after you already have Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen"

  • I'd go so far as to say their animosity was less toward Kukoc personally and more toward Krause. Krause went so far as to put Pippen's negotiations on the back burner to get that deal done with Kukoc. I kinda felt bad for Kukoc at first because it wasn't his fault Krause fell in love with him. But it was all good after that 72-win season.

  • In reply to magestew:

    I am still surprised though that Pippen and Jordan haven't let their animosity towards Krause go away. Anyhow, the money Pippen didn't get would have gone away anyhow with his bankruptcy;-)

  • I remember a lot of ducking under the shooter and running back down the court to "cherry pick".

  • Doug,

    Thanks for the compliment, I guess...haha.

    Who was the person with the numerous Dickey Johnson and LeCon James topics again? I'm just curious.

    That wouldn't be redundant, right?

  • In reply to MrHappy:


    There is a thing called the "Devil's advocate."

    It's my alter-ego. I definitely raises the level of discussion.

    I don't get personal, but I do like to look at the other-side.

    You can thank me later...haha.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Thank you for being a friend.
    Traveled down the road and back again.
    Your heart is true your a pal and a confidant.

    And if you through a party....invited everyone you ever knew. You would see the biggest gift would be from me and the card attached would say thank you for being a friend.

  • In reply to evilhoban:

    Evil genius.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    While we are on the redundancy topic, it would be more beneficial to everyone if you stop your personal attacks too. According to you, almost everyone on this blog has no knowledge about NBA and basketball except for you. It is an immature, unnecessary and useless argument and it just derails whatever point you are trying to make.

  • In reply to schaumburgfan:

    I second that...

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    I don't think its so much about his persona or off court antics, but rather his lack of offense that has prevented him from entering so far, and I couldn't disagree with that any more.

    First of all, in basketball you don't need every single one of your 5 men on the floor to be able to score. You need 2 strong options and maybe a decent 3rd or 4th that can diversify your attack. The defensive end of the floor is a little different because its more of a weakest link of a chain kind of concept, in that the offense will attack you where you are weak. Dennis was most certainly not a weak link here, as Rodman was the kind of defender who took big men out of their game. One of the best defenders of all time and the best rebounder in the modern era. That kind of player makes a winner, and Rodman proved that with 5 rings. Rodman took the Bulls from where they were at losing to Orlando in the playoffs Jordan's 1st playoff back to a record setting 1996 season. Defense & rebounding win as long as you have a couple of strong scoring options, & players like Rodman win.

    Secondly, there is more to offense than creating points. Cleaning up the glass allowing for more & longer offensive possesions, being a master of the tip in, and setting picks is also a benefit to any offense, and that's what Dennis brought to the table.

    Absolutely a hall of famer!

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Also, there is a strong bias towards offensive player at work here. If you has one of the best scorers of all time, who was not known for his defense, that player is a shoe in, even if they have no rings. Vice Versa? Not so much, and its wrong.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Also, there is a strong bias towards offensive players at work here. If you have one of the best scorers of all time, who was not known for his defense, that player is a shoe in, even if they have no rings. Vice Versa? Not so much, and its wrong.

  • In reply to ChiRy:

    It was mentioned before but I totally agree. Hopefully the Hall of Fame nominating committee(or whatever its called) can change or address this. Then again it may mean re-visiting snubbed players from previous eras...maybe they don't want to undertake that prospect.

  • In reply to ChiRy:

    As far as your point on him only being a 2 time all star: You can't question whether he deserves to be be recognized, by using recognition as your evidence. Just because he was failed to be recognized in the past does not mean it should occur in the future. Instead you should continue to look upon his body of work.

    Your 2nd point about offensive rebounding & junk baskets is off the mark, it is very important as too is setting picks and controlling loose balls (which have the same statistical value as a steal). I will go back to my point. If you play with a great scorer, or even a very good one, the offense is going to run through him. The end of games is going to come down to that guy. You don't need your best rebounder & post defender to score if you have 3-4 capable options along with a closer.

  • In reply to ChiRy:

    I think the All-Star point is a fair one. It's what people thought of him at the time that he was playing. Now, you can make the case that people didn't value him enough, but you have to actually make that case. But you can't just wave it away as not meaning anything.

  • In reply to Duke:

    Who votes for all star teams? Fans who by the masses care about scoring & coaches, many of whom did not like Rodman personally.
    Its a big popularity contest with no concrete criteria.

  • In reply to ChiRy:

    Not the reserves, right? Rodman could have been put on the team as a reserve, if he was that highly thought of.

  • In reply to ChiRy:

    The all star game is a big production. It is not a real game, it is not intended to reward the 12 or so most deserving players. Its an exhibition game typically featuring off the charts scoring. Fans don't want to see great defense and rebounding, come on wake up. Players like Rodman will never make all star teams at the rate they deserve vs. players that score. The fans want alley-oops & behind the back passes and shit like that.

  • In reply to ChiRy:

    And Doug your comment here that he could never even be the 2nd guy on a title team implies that you only need 1 or 2 strong guys to win, and that a scorer would automatically be placed ahead of him. Obviouslly he was not one of the top 2 guys on the Bulls, but he might have been at other places and they did well.

  • While I normally agree with you Doug I have to disagree here. I really don't think it's close. Rebounding and defense are important skills, but you could have replaced Rodman with a good but not great defensive player/rebounder and the teams fortunes are fairly similar. He just wasn't integral enough to the success of the teams he was on for me to feel he's HoF worthy. Also, and this is something I've been told but never bothered to check, the Bulls were statistically better with Rodman off the court than on the court.

  • Huzzah....someone else had to endure a Boll movie! Agreed on Telfair...he is not good.

  • Doug,

    And I'm guessing Chicago is on his list.

    Everyone thinks New York, but all Melo keeps saying is that he wants to win. He can do that in Chicago, not NYC.

    Chris Paul isn't going anywhere (for now) and D'Antoni proved already that his system doesn't win NBA championships. There is a reason why MJ didn't want to play with Barkley. Well, the same reasons could exist for Melo and Amar'e.

    You never know. Melo does get mentored by MJ.

    If he wants out of Denver, prior to the season starting, he can force his way out. The Bulls' brass needs to be ready to make a move here.

  • schaum,

    Like I told Doug, there is NO WAY IN HELL that Denver is going to trade their best player, Carmelo Anthony, within the same division. That's what they would be doing, if they traded him to OKC or Portland.

    You guys need to be smarter than that.

  • True dat....

  • Melo will not come here, he is not even consider the Bulls. As others pointed out, we do not have the cap room to get him if he becomes free agent next summer(assuming he didn't sign a extension/traded.).

    I would love to have Melo and I would trade for him if he even really consider us and sign an extension with us. But very unlikely that is even going to happen, it seem a very strong possible he'll go to New York or maybe else where. New York will probably be the #1 destination.

  • In reply to pduh:

    If we traded him, we couldn't sign him as a free agent? Wouldn't we have his Bird rights, or whatever?

  • While I'm tempted to agree with you, it's not the "NBA hall of fame"...

Leave a comment