RealGM

Posted: **Tue May 13, 2008 12:51 am**

Whos the better defender? Dennis Rodmin or David Robinson?

Posted: **Tue May 13, 2008 1:03 am**

David Robinson, definitely.

Posted: **Tue May 13, 2008 1:19 am**

tmac4real wrote:David Robinson, definitely.

.

Posted: **Tue May 13, 2008 1:39 am**

tmac4real wrote:David Robinson, definitely.

Posted: **Tue May 13, 2008 1:49 am**

Yeah, it's D-Rob. Far more explosive in terms of shot-blocking and comparable or just slightly less in terms of man to man.

Posted: **Tue May 13, 2008 9:00 am**

Robinson once averaged 6.5 combined steals and blocks!

Posted: **Tue May 13, 2008 9:24 am**

TMACFORMVP wrote:Yeah, it's D-Rob. Far more explosive in terms of shot-blocking and comparable or just slightly less in terms of man to man.

Excuse me, but not at all. Admiral might be more valuable overall defender with his steals and intimidating blocks in the paint, but man-to-man Rodman was clearly more superior (not to mention - far more versatile).

Posted: **Tue May 13, 2008 4:50 pm**

Myth_Breaker wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Excuse me, but not at all. Admiral might be more valuable overall defender with his steals and intimidating blocks in the paint, but man-to-man Rodman was clearly more superior (not to mention - far more versatile).

Clearly more superior? Come on man, seriously?

Posted: **Tue May 13, 2008 5:43 pm**

Elite help/team defense is more valuable than elite man-to-man defense anyway, so whether or not Rodman had an edge in man-to-man defense (which I agree that he did; it's not as large as Myth_Breaker implies, however) doesn't really matter when determining who the better defender is.

Posted: **Tue May 13, 2008 7:27 pm**

Did you create this discussion because this is a topic you're genuinely interested in, or because you thought comparing two players who aren't even close in terms of overall value yet have similar nicknames would make for a fun thread title?

Posted: **Tue May 13, 2008 9:21 pm**

Myth_Breaker wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Excuse me, but not at all. Admiral might be more valuable overall defender with his steals and intimidating blocks in the paint, but man-to-man Rodman was clearly more superior (not to mention - far more versatile).

Didn't the Rodman get played on the Spurs leave his man open just to collect rebounds? I know some Spur player (can't remember who, maybe Sean Elliot) accused of him of leaving Horry open for a trey so that he could get ready to get a rebound at the end of the game.

Posted: **Wed May 14, 2008 5:13 pm**

Rodman was an average-at-best defender. He was too preoccupied with getting rebounds to contribute as a help defender (like at all---he played almost no help defense), and his man-to-man abilities were solid but were limited by his height.

Posted: **Wed May 14, 2008 7:29 pm**

Cigamodnalro wrote:Rodman was an average-at-best defender. He was too preoccupied with getting rebounds to contribute as a help defender (like at all---he played almost no help defense), and his man-to-man abilities were solid but were limited by his height.

You obviously didn't see him from '87-'93, but even after that period your statement is a significant exaggeration. I'll agree that he wasn't nearlya s good a help defender as some other all-time level defenders of his generation (MJ/Pip/Payton).

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 10:47 am**

tmac4real wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Clearly more superior? Come on man, seriously?

How often did you see D-Rob shutting down and frustrating his opponent in a way Rodman routinely did?

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 10:51 am**

Jordan23Forever wrote:Elite help/team defense is more valuable than elite man-to-man defense anyway, so whether or not Rodman had an edge in man-to-man defense (which I agree that he did; it's not as large as Myth_Breaker implies, however) doesn't really matter when determining who the better defender is.

What?! It's the other way around: man-to-man defense is generally more valuable (hence e.g. Bowen>Kirilenko). Unless we talk about elite shotblockers/defensive rebounders, who affect play of the whole opponent's team: Robinson was one of them, hence I've already admitted he might be considered greater overall defender than Rodman, having more complete defensive package. But man-to-man and on the boards Rodman was CLEARLY superior.

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 10:55 am**

Cigamodnalro wrote:Rodman was an average-at-best defender. He was too preoccupied with getting rebounds to contribute as a help defender (like at all---he played almost no help defense), and his man-to-man abilities were solid but were limited by his height.

First, it's clear you didn't see prime Rodman in action. Second, I'd love to hear reasoning behind your statement about Worm being limited by his height. Did it limit him when he guarded Jordan - was too tall? Or perpaps while guarding Shaq - was too small? Since everybody who watched Dennis could see his physical attributes were just there where they should be, enabling him to become one of the most versatile and dominant defenders in NBA history.

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 10:59 am**

shawngoat23 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Didn't the Rodman get played on the Spurs leave his man open just to collect rebounds? I know some Spur player (can't remember who, maybe Sean Elliot) accused of him of leaving Horry open for a trey so that he could get ready to get a rebound at the end of the game.

Yep, during 1995 WCF, won by Rockets in 6. The more Rodman aged, the more often we've been hearing about such behavior: but I was focusing on his Detroit prime. And Worm remained very valuable defender until end of his career anyway.

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 12:42 pm**

(a) A great shotblocker has an effect on the game that exceeds pretty much any other defensive position (GREAT shotblocker, not just good one) . . . Robinson was a great shotblocker

(b) Rodman was a terrific man defender when he chose to be (which was most of the time). So was Robinson but Rodman's dirty play got into opponents' heads the way Robinson's clean defense didn't so Rodman is probably the better man defender.

(c) But . . . Rodman did cheat off his man for rebounds regularly even in Detroit. He didn't like to chase outside shooters and would let them have open jumpers so he could hang back and grab boards . . . some called it stat padding but the other view is that Rodman knew how valuable his great rebounding was and didn't think those players could beat him consistently from outside.

I didn't like Rodman and am more impressed by guys like Bobby Jones (who won 1st team All-D as a PF, SF, and C . . . and again as a 6th man who played SG about 40% of the time in Philly) but Rodman was a terrific defensive player when you combine his terrific post defense, his inconsistent but capable athletically outside defense, and his great rebounding. Almost makes up for his being such a flaming jerkoff.

Posted: **Thu May 15, 2008 6:57 pm**

Myth_Breaker wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

What?! It's the other way around: man-to-man defense is generally more valuable (hence e.g. Bowen>Kirilenko).

I disagree. Elite help/team defense is more important than elite man defense. The thing is, the type of players you're thinking about (Kirilenko) aren't really elite help/team defenders. He's great in one area (blocking shots off his man), but he doesn't take charges, double post players well, read plays, make proper rotations, get his hands in to knock the ball loose on penetration etc. The only two truly ELITE non-big help/team defenders that I've seen are Jordan and Pippen. The rest are big men, which goes to your point below:

Unless we talk about elite shotblockers/defensive rebounders, who affect play of the whole opponent's team

RealGM

D. Rob VS. D. Rod?

D. Rob VS. D. Rod?