Originally Posted by DatAsh
So a center that makes the average team worse at rebounding is better than a guard who improve's the average team's rebounding?
Is the purpose of a great rebounder to put up good stats or is it to help his team?
Having an above average rebounding PG is only worth it if you have at least average rebounding at every other position. The problem is, having a great rebounding PG doesn't say anything about the rebounding of the rest of the players on your team. You can have the best rebounding PG of all time, but if you have anemic rebounders at every other position, it won't make you a good rebounding team.
Good rebounding guards are such a commodity because even average rebounding bigs can be relied upon to grab like 7 boards, so this offers you a huge advantage, assuming you can get average rebounding bigs. You're definitely right on this point. Practically, you would want someone like Rondo over a 7-boards-per-game big because you can just sign an average center to grab 7 boards, but you won't find a guard like Rondo on the waiver wire.
But that's not the argument we're having. We're asking, is a below average rebounding big more impactful on the boards than an above average rebounding small?
If you make no other assumptions about the rest of the team, the big is more impactful on the boards.
Yeah, sure, maybe Rondo has more talent for boarding than Lopez does, and the only reason Brook gets more boards is because he's a foot taller, but the fact remains that he gets more boards. It doesn't matter why. You said it well in your other post, "such is life."
Anyway, the original point stemmed from Kennethgriffin's continuous "this is more impressive, so it's better" argument. Bigs are almost always more impactful on D than smalls. Yes, they have a huge, unfair advantage. Yes, I'm frankly way more impressed when someone like MJ or GP or Bowen can dominate a game defensively than when Roy Hibbert or even Mutombo do it. But that doesn't make them better defenders than the bigs (though, I'm not sure MJ and GP aren't better than Hibbert lol I'm just saying, more impressive doesn't necessarily mean better/more impactful).