Series Thread: 1st Round: 3) Kings vs 6) Warriors

[rmilia1]

Smaller than your hater ones.

If you were here more you'd know I'm a pretty straight shooter as far as homer takes. I get the issues with Dray, and I am fine with this suspension. They could have just fined him but I respect what they are trying to do. Ultimately it's on him to control his shit.

But to call Draymond 'less of a drag' on offense than an almost literally useless offensive player in Rodman is bush league. Draymond is an excellent offensive player in every way except scoring and he's still better than Rodman at that. Meanwhile he leads the team in assists and won 4 rings doing it. Defensively Rodman was obviously a better rebounder. Dray is every bit as good at other things and better in some like being a defensive coordinator on the floor.

Draymond is objectively a significantly better player than Rodman.

Yeah there's no real way to think otherwise

Rodman was a great rebounder and a great defender in his era when more physicality was allowed

But Green is a better defender and better at everything else other than rebounding

Rodman is one of those guys who played on probably the only era he coups have ever found success in. His style really only works in the 90s when pace slowed way down and guys were ostensibly allowed to foul and have it be called "great defense"

If you transported 1993 Rodman to today he'd foul out within 8 minutes of being on the court every time he played

 

[msgkings322]

Yeah there's no real way to think otherwise

Rodman was a great rebounder and a great defender in his era when more physicality was allowed

But Green is a better defender and better at everything else other than rebounding

Rodman is one of those guys who played on probably the only era he coups have ever found success in. His style really only works in the 90s when pace slowed way down and his were ostensibly allowed to foul and have it be called "great defense"

If you transported 1993 Rodman to today he'd foul out within 8 minutes of being on the court every time he played

I think that last sentence is going a bit far but basically yes, this. Obviously Rodman would adjust his game if he played today. But the bolded is basically the case.

 

[Mebert]

That's what I'm talking about, "aggressive". Really? And I never said preferring Rodman was "laughable". I just don't agree with your take and you seem peeved by this. Both players are HOFers. They are comparable as defensive players and Green is significantly better on offense and that's not a homer take.

You literally replied with LOL. You are correct though, thinking Green is better is not a homer take. Thinking he is SIGNIFICANTLY better is.

 

[rmilia1]

I think that last sentence is going a bit far but basically yes, this. Obviously Rodman would adjust his game if he played today. But the bolded is basically the case.

If he adjusted his game he'd largely become useless though . That's really all im saying

There are certainly guys from that era who could play today and adjust easily. I just don't think he's one of them

 

[msgkings322]

If he adjusted his game he'd largely become useless though . That's really all im saying

There are certainly guys from that era who could play today and adjust easily. I just don't think he's one of them

What are ya some kind of Draymond homer?

 

[rmilia1]

What are ya some kind of Draymond homer?

As a Lakers fan i just threw up

 

[CitySushi]

We are fine to disagree on it. Thinking the gap is significant and that preferring Rodman is laughable removes you from serious conversation though. You aggression on this is just fucking weird, but you have at it. I would be curious to here @CitySushi take on this, as he has respectable views on basketball and would come from a similar fandom.

IMO, comparing Rodman to Draymond is like comparing Scottie Pippen and Tracy McGrady. It's an impossible comparison on a player to player basis because they did completely different things and operated their teams in different ways. What Pippen brought to the table is exactly what was needed on those Bulls Championship teams. Likewise, Pippen could never volume score and be the main lead on an offense like McGrady. So comparing the two as players would be impossible (without the championship accolades).

Rodman was exactly what his teams needed from him at the time. Draymond is exactly the player the Warriors have needed. If you replaced Green with Rodman, the Warriors are not nearly as good as they were. Likewise if you subbed Draymond for Rodman on those Bulls teams, they're not nearly as good either.

I think it's an unfair comparison of players because they're both so unique and really representative of the era's in which they both played. So again if you ask me who's the better player, context absolutely would play a key in determining this.

 

[msgkings322]

You literally replied with LOL. You are correct though, thinking Green is better is not a homer take. Thinking he is SIGNIFICANTLY better is.

I mean, ok?

 

[msgkings322]

As a Lakers fan i just threw up

There's a non-zero chance he ends up there next year so maybe that's it...

 

[rmilia1]

There's a non-zero chance he ends up there next year so maybe that's it...

Ewwwww

 

[CitySushi]

I get it...but kind of also a horrible precedent.

 

[Mebert]

If he adjusted his game he'd largely become useless though . That's really all im saying

There are certainly guys from that era who could play today and adjust easily. I just don't think he's one of them

I think this is a gross misrepresentation of Rodman on defense, outside of the defense he is regarded as one of the most intelligent players by Michael Jordan and others, to think that he would not adapt to a modern game and maintain his effectiveness is off base I think. Not to mention Rodman was already a freak athlete, I would love to see what he would do with modern training and diet.

 

[Mebert]

IMO, comparing Rodman to Draymond is like comparing Scottie Pippen and Tracy McGrady. It's an impossible comparison on a player to player basis because they did completely different things and operated their teams in different ways. What Pippen brought to the table is exactly what was needed on those Bulls Championship teams. Likewise, Pippen could never volume score and be the main lead on an offense like McGrady. So comparing the two as players would be impossible (without the championship accolades).

Rodman was exactly what his teams needed from him at the time. Draymond is exactly the player the Warriors have needed. If you replaced Green with Rodman, the Warriors are not nearly as good as they were. Likewise if you subbed Draymond for Rodman on those Bulls teams, they're not nearly as good either.

I think it's an unfair comparison of players because they're both so unique and really representative of the era's in which they both played. So again if you ask me who's the better player, context absolutely would play a key in determining this.

Pippen vs McGrady is interesting!

 

[rmilia1]

I think this is a gross misrepresentation of Rodman on defense, outside of the defense he is regarded as one of the most intelligent players by Michael Jordan and others, to think that he would not adapt to a modern game and maintain his effectiveness is off base I think. Not to mention Rodman was already a freak athlete, I would love to see what he would do with modern training and diet.

You may be right. Just my opinion

Do you ever think about guys from back then and try to figure out who played a style more sites for now? Or guys from now who should've played then?

I think about a guy like Andre Drummond now and i think on the 90s he's a perennial all start and a league leader in rebounding 5+ times

Or a guy like Eddie Jones back in the day who would be a perfect 20s player on the wing

Lots of examples of that

 

[Mebert]

You may be right. Just my opinion

Do you ever think about guys from back then and try to figure out who played a style more sites for now? Or guys from now who should've played then?

I think about a guy like Andre Drummond now and i think on the 90s he's a perennial all start and a league leader in rebounding 5+ times

Or a guy like Eddie Jones back in the day who would be a perfect 20s player on the wing

Lots of examples of that

I do agree, many players are just from the wrong era. Ralph Sampson now vs when he played have very different careers. Both on his health and his overall impact. Olajuwon on the other hand is an all time great in any era. I think Rodman falls in the any era he is just as successful.

 

[CitySushi]

You may be right. Just my opinion

Do you ever think about guys from back then and try to figure out who played a style more sites for now? Or guys from now who should've played then?

I think about a guy like Andre Drummond now and i think on the 90s he's a perennial all start and a league leader in rebounding 5+ times

Or a guy like Eddie Jones back in the day who would be a perfect 20s player on the wing

Lots of examples of that

Michael Redd would be a 6x all star instead of the 1x allstar he was in his era. Lamar Odom would be one of the most coveted 4's in the NBA right now.

 

[Mebert]

Michael Redd would be a 6x all star instead of the 1x allstar he was in his era. Lamar Odom would be one of the most coveted 4's in the NBA right now.

I forgot about Redd, that is a great one.

 

[thunderc]

There's a non-zero chance he ends up there next year so maybe that's it...

You don’t think he opts in on his option?

 

[msgkings322]

Ewwwww

Honestly that would help the Lakers in a meaningful way and I guess he and LeBron are besties?

 

[msgkings322]

You don’t think he opts in on his option?

It's really up in the air...he said he wants a big extension, and if another team offers it maybe he bails. The Warriors have a lot of decisions to make after this year and if they flame out in the first round they may decide to clean the slate, it's honestly impossible to say. Klay wants an extension...the GM still has no new contract he might leave, do they trade Poole for someone, etc. We're obviously in the late innings of this dynasty, perhaps the last year of it.