1996 Bulls and the 2016 GSW

[LAD]

Did I ever imply Rodman was not a great defender? I simply said he was not a better defender than Green. I was a huge Jordan fan and watched just about every game the '96 Bulls played, so I know exactly how good Rodman was.

Draymond does not have the accolades because he has not been around as long. Will he be as good for as long as Rodman was? Who the hell knows.

Today, however, Draymond is every bit as good defensively as Rodman ever was. Dray should have won DPOY last year, and he will win it this season.

And to say that Rodman would not negatively impact the Warriors offense is foolish. The Warriors are so tough to guard because all 5 are a threat. Unless you are going small and playing Rodman at the 5, using him like they do Ezeli, he would have a significant negative affect on the Warriors offense, because playing Rodman at the 4 means you only have 3 perimeter threats to defend instead of 4.

How can you tell me in one sentence he wasn't a better defender than Green then turn right around in the very next sentence and say Draymond doesn't have the accolades yet to determine if he'll be better? That doesn't make sense. If anything I think we can say Dray is on pace TO BE a better defender.

I pointed out Rodman's accolades because that in fact does tell us that right now, he's the better defender of the two. Will that be the case once Draymond has played more seasons? We don't know. But, even if Dray wins DPOY this season how does that make him better than a player that's won it TWICE and been voted NBA All defensive first team 7 times?

Also, I love me some Dray, but I don't think they're giving him that award. I think it's going to Leonard.

 

[tlance]

No.

The accolades are accrued over time.

Draymond is the best defensive player in the NBA today. The whole conversation is comparing the '96 Bulls to the 2016 Warriors. How many accolades Rodman accumulated in his career is irrelevant. All that matters is that 2016 Green is every bit as good defensively as '96 Rodman.

If Green retires after this season, that will affect his legacy, but it does not make him any less great right now. this comparison is a snapshot in time, yet you are using Rodman's entire career to say that he is better. That makes no sense for this argument.

 

[tlance]

How can you tell me in one sentence he wasn't a better defender than Green then turn right around in the very next sentence and say Draymond doesn't have the accolades yet to determine if he'll be better? That doesn't make sense. If anything I think we can say Dray is on pace TO BE a better defender.

I pointed out Rodman's accolades because that in fact does tell us that right now, he's the better defender of the two. Will that be the case once Draymond has played more seasons? We don't know. But, even if Dray wins DPOY this season how does that make him better than a player that's won it TWICE and been voted NBA All defensive first team 7 times?

Also, I love me some Dray, but I don't think they're giving him that award. I think it's going to Leonard.

How can Leonard be the defensive player of the year, when he is not even the best defender on his team?

 

[LAD]

How can Leonard be the defensive player of the year, when he is not even the best defender on his team?

The same way he won it last year without being the best defender on his team I would assume.

 

[tlance]

The same way he won it last year without being the best defender on his team I would assume.

That just Goes to show you why you can't base everything off accolades. Draymond is the best defensive player in the league, and Rodman's DPOY awards came when he played for the Pistons.

So one could easily make the case Draymond is a better defender today than Rodman was in '96, but I am calling it a push.

 

[SJ76]

Did I ever imply Rodman was not a great defender? I simply said he was not a better defender than Green. I was a huge Jordan fan and watched just about every game the '96 Bulls played, so I know exactly how good Rodman was.

Draymond does not have the accolades because he has not been around as long. Will he be as good for as long as Rodman was? Who the hell knows.

Today, however, Draymond is every bit as good defensively as Rodman ever was. Dray should have won DPOY last year, and he will win it this season.

And to say that Rodman would not negatively impact the Warriors offense is foolish. The Warriors are so tough to guard because all 5 are a threat. Unless you are going small and playing Rodman at the 5, using him like they do Ezeli, he would have a significant negative affect on the Warriors offense, because playing Rodman at the 4 means you only have 3 perimeter threats to defend instead of 4.

Yikes.. Don't know about that. The Worm had 7 all NBA 1st team defense selections and 2 Defensive POY. The guy guarded Karl Malone, Shaun Kemp, Barkley, and Shaq


Don't think the NBA has those caliber players in the post currently.. Not to mention they don't let them bang like they use to either.

Green is good. But he's not the Worm.

 

[SJ76]

No.

The accolades are accrued over time.

Draymond is the best defensive player in the NBA today. The whole conversation is comparing the '96 Bulls to the 2016 Warriors. How many accolades Rodman accumulated in his career is irrelevant. All that matters is that 2016 Green is every bit as good defensively as '96 Rodman.

If Green retires after this season, that will affect his legacy, but it does not make him any less great right now. this comparison is a snapshot in time, yet you are using Rodman's entire career to say that he is better. That makes no sense for this argument.

Go watch the '96 Finals. The Bulls switched after game 2 and put Dennis Rodman on Shawn Kemp. The Worm got in his head. Game 6 was a classic - I think Kemp fouled out.

 

[tlance]

Rodman was great. So is Green.

Again, when comparing one season, the accolades a player accumulated over their entire career are irelevant.

Why is that so hard to understand?

 

[SJ76]

Rodman was great. So is Green.

Again, when comparing one season, the accolades a player accumulated over their entire career are irelevant.

Why is that so hard to understand?

Again, go back and watch Rodman guarding Shaun Kemp in the '96 Finals. If you are telling me he was not as good a defender on the Bulls, as he was in Detroit.. I say

Rodman guarded Karl Malone in the '98 Finals when he was "old"

 

[tlance]

Yikes.. Don't know about that. The Worm had 7 all NBA 1st team defense selections and 2 Defensive POY. The guy guarded Karl Malone, Shaun Kemp, Barkley, and Shaq


Don't think the NBA has those caliber players in the post currently.. Not to mention they don't let them bang like they use to either.

Green is good. But he's not the Worm.

Also, wouldn't the game being "less physical" be a nod to Green? It is a lot easier to play defense when you are allowed to be more physical.

 

[SJ76]

Also, wouldn't the game being "less physical" be a nod to Green? It is a lot easier to play defense when you are allowed to be more physical.

Unless you have to guard Karl Malone, Shaun Kemp, Barkley, and Shaq (when he was in Orlando).. By all means i'm sure that was easy.

 

[tlance]

And again, I am not saying Rodman was not a great defender.

I am saying Green today is a better all around player than Rodman on 96, and as good a defender.

 

[LAD]

That just Goes to show you why you can't base everything off accolades. Draymond is the best defensive player in the league, and Rodman's DPOY awards came when he played for the Pistons.

So one could easily make the case Draymond is a better defender today than Rodman was in '96, but I am calling it a push.

I mean I totally agree about Leonard not being the DPOY last year or this year. And I agree that I think Green is better than Leonard, which BTW, is an easier comparison than Green/Rodman.

 

[LAD]

Also, wouldn't the game being "less physical" be a nod to Green? It is a lot easier to play defense when you are allowed to be more physical.

No not in the case with Green. I think because he's-more times than not-asked to guard the opposing team's center & usually is the smaller guy. But, he still does a very good job.

 

[CitySushi]

Green gets love as a great defender, but he's always going to be at a disadvantage because of a few things:

1) He's a PF and considered a big.
2) He's undersized
3) His perimeter defense is not appreciated.
4) Bigs don't usually get consideration for shutting an opponent down. Mostly applys to wings.

When you have guys like DeAndre Jordan getting DPOY votes over Green, it shows that there is a stigma that comes along with being a big. If you have great block numbers and rebound numbers, you're perceived to be a great defender, when in actuality the two stats don't really do justice.

Green outperforms most bigs in almost every advance metric aspect with his defense, but his rebounding and blocks will never wow you. He's considered a big, so he's judged mostly on face value from those who don't watch him game in and game out.

It's easier to see in the stat line and say "Kawhi Leonard held x to only 5 of 13 shooting". Or DeAndre Jordan had 18 rebounds and 5 blocks. But what you don't see is Draymond diverting the PG away from the hoop on a pick and roll to prevent a score. Or you don't see his on ball defense to prevent a guy he's giving 6" inches in height to push him away from the hoop.

The other game when the Warriors played the Spurs, all you read was LA disappeared. Did anyone cite why he disappeared? Nope.

 

[LAD]

And again, I am not saying Rodman was not a great defender.

I am saying Green today is a better all around player than Rodman on 96, and as good a defender.

All around player, yest Green is better. But my original comment was that Rodman would only be needed for his rebounding & some defending. Next to Green they'd be a monster front court.

 

[SJ76]

Really is interesting to see how the center position has evolved even since Shaq. Now days in the NBA it's guys like Dwight Howard, DeAndre Jordan, and many other Center's don't even have the footwork or the touch to make a traditional post move to score in the paint. It's more about spread the floor for easy dunks, blocks, defense, rebounds, and offensive tip-ins. Shows you how much the game has changed (gotten softer) outside the paint with jumpshots and ISO - 1 guy going to the hole to shoot or dish. Marc Gasol is about the only big I can think of that reminds me of a traditional center.

Kind of weak if you ask me.

 

[SJ76]

All around player, yest Green is better. But my original comment was that Rodman would only be needed for his rebounding & some defending. Next to Green they'd be a monster front court.

If Rodman was on Golden St you wouldn't need more than 3 options outside anyway. He'd own the defensive boards and it would be off to the races. He would set screens and get plenty of offensive rebounds too.

A great defensive player isn't going to hurt you at all. He's going to create more offense by getting stops and boards.

That's why they say defense creates offense. That's why the Warriors are good. Sure they can score, but they can get stops and go on runs.

 

[CitySushi]

Really is interesting to see how the center position has evolved even since Shaq. Now days in the NBA it's guys like Dwight Howard, DeAndre Jordan, and many other Center's don't even have the footwork or the touch to make a traditional post move to score in the paint. It's more about spread the floor for easy dunks, blocks, defense, rebounds, and offensive tip-ins. Shows you how much the game has changed (gotten softer) outside the paint with jumpshots and ISO - 1 guy going to the hole to shoot or dish.

Kind of weak if you ask me.

It really all stems from development and youth leagues and AAU ball. Big men aren't developing their skills around the hoop. They're being more encouraged to work on ball skills including handling and shooting. It really is a travesty that big men are dying breed.

One of the biggest things you'll hear about bigs in the upcoming draft is if they have a nice outside touch or if they can hit a mid-range shot. You'll hear people rave about big men if they can hit a three.

Guys like Dwight and DeAndre have gotten away their entire careers so far just by being physical specimens. They haven't done a thing to improve their actual game.

 

[LAD]

If Rodman was on Golden St you wouldn't need more than 3 options outside anyway. He'd own the defensive boards and it would be off to the races. He would set screens and get plenty of offensive rebounds too.

A great defensive player isn't going to hurt you at all. He's going to create more offense by getting stops and boards.

That's why they say defense creates offense. That's why the Warriors are good. Sure they can score, but they can get stops and go on runs.

Exactly, which is why I even mentioned Rodmand in the first place...about 2-3 pages back.