RealGM

All at their peaks, which duo would you rather have?

IF, and it's a big if, they can work together without imploding, Kemp/Rodman gives you far superior defense than Amare/Draymond and we have found in the modern NBA that there are a lot of guards and wings that can space and score. If the guards situation is such that they need a big man playmaker and the team needs Draymond at point forward, that's the main situation I think my opinion might differ other than personality clashes that make the situation untenable.

Neither Rodman nor Draymond brings dynamic scoring but Rodman was the better defender. Kemp and Amare are about the same offensively but Kemp is much better defensively.

So Kemp/Rodman gets the edge by virtue of Amare being weak on the defensive end.

Rodman would be unplayable today, so that is your answer.

Not a fan of how Rodman fit next to Robinson with the Spurs offensively, and I view Kemp as a lesser, smaller version of Robinson.

Although Draymond is a fairly impotent scorer...he can fit in an offense well because of his facilitating. And his team-oriented defense is more valuable than Rodman's iso/rebound focus.

Kemp is a better defender than Amare, but Amare also brings more to the table offensively with his excellent midrange shooting.

I'll go with Amare/Draymond.

What is Draymond's value on offense if Amare is the one setting screens in the PNR? They both play the same role on offense albeit in different ways, I don't think it's actually a complementary fit despite Draymond being able to cover for Amare's defensive deficiencies.