ISH All-time Top 25 Forwards Project #19: Dolph Schayes vs Dennis Rodman.

[rodman91]

vs

[FF1]

Dolph Schayes

Because I can't justify voting for rodman since he was never even the best player on his team (usually not even the 2nd best).

[Droid101]

Dolph Schayes

Because I can't justify voting for rodman since he was never even the best player on his team (usually not even the 2nd best).

If he contributed more to wins, then he was technically the reason the team won.

And Rodman did that better than anyone not named Jordan, Bird, or Magic did.

Rodman just won. Period.

[quote]
Let

[Gotterdammerung]

I'd have to go with Dolph Schayes over Rodman because u could build around him. Rodman, u needed a very strong stable organization in order to let him focus on rebounding. A cerebral specialist and likely the X-factor that turns talented teams into championship teams.

But he wasn't the complete player Schayes was.
More later.

[NugzHeat3]

He always was a drama queen, but he won you games. He couldn't have hurt team chemistry that much if they won 55 and 62 games in his only seasons there. Players blamed Rodman simply because he was the easiest guy to blame. No one wanted to blame the league MVP that stunk up the joint. In terms of blame, it's 1)Robinson, 2)Hill, 3)Rodman.





You should be concerned with the stats. The alpha dog and league MVP was god awful in those two playoffs. Rodman not rotating on Horry are individual plays. Robinson had complete games where he just stunk it up and those games were also consecutive at times. And even if he bounced back, he didn't bounce back as much as he should have. Blame goes to multiple people. Basketball is a team sport. But Rodman is not more at fault than Robinson was.





It seemed fine during the regular season. He had no problem helping the Spurs to an average of 58.5 wins in 2 seasons.





That Pistons team was on the downfall and everyone knew it. That 1993-94 season, Laimbeer and Isiah both played their final seasons. Laimbeer missed all but 11 games and Isiah missed 24 himself.

OK so tell me this. You are obviously not concerned with his antics and what it does for team chemistry.

If Rodman was so valuable and so impactful during his time with SA, why did the Spurs win 59 games after trading him for Will Perdue?

He was traded for a scrub which begs the question why he was traded for a scrub.

Same with Detroit. Those guys weren't concerned with his numbers, more with his attitude. Their GM even said he wasn't concerned with getting equal value in return for him. If a team wants to get rid of him so badly, it is not a good sign and an indication something is wrong.

[Kblaze8855]

That isnt really fair. The spurs won 50 or more for much of the 90s. Why wouldnt they do so after rodman? Drob was an mvp level player. But the pistons spurs and bulls all won the most games in their history to that point with him.

And the pistons went from average to 20 wins when he left and they still had isiah and dumars. Isiah missed time but they went to straight doormat mode. They were 14 and 44 with isiah. Laimbeer was done but he was an 8 and 5 player by the previous seasonn anyway.

Rodman was a difference maker. I have no doubt.

[D.J.]

OK so tell me this. You are obviously not concerned with his antics and what it does for team chemistry.

If Rodman was so valuable and so impactful during his time with SA, why did the Spurs win 59 games after trading him for Will Perdue?

And you conveniently ignore that they were winning for several seasons before he arrived. Two seasons before he arrived, the Spurs won 49 and 47 games. Hovering right around the 50 win mark. They won 55 and 62 games when he was there. They won 59 games after he left because Elliott upped his production to 20/5. Del Negro upped his production, and Avery Johnson was pushing a double-double. The system remained the same. A couple of guys had career years. They overachieved and it showed when Utah beat them for the 2nd time in 3 years and both times being upsets. Once again, Robinson showing he was the reason for the postseason failures, not Rodman. Robinson having games of 11, 11, 24, and 17 points against Utah and recording only 2 double-doubles.

He was traded for a scrub which begs the question why he was traded for a scrub.

If they didn't get career years from Johnson and Elliott, they're not winning anything remotely close to 60 games. They overachieved and it showed in the playoffs.

Same with Detroit. Those guys weren't concerned with his numbers, more with his attitude. Their GM even said he wasn't concerned with getting equal value in return for him. If a team wants to get rid of him so badly, it is not a good sign and an indication something is wrong.

How are you going to get equal value for a guy averaging 18 RPG? They were re-building. Isiah and Laimbeer were playing their final games and they drafted Allan Houston and Grant Hill in back-to-back years. They weren't concerned with equal value. They were re-building.

[HYJ]

DOLPH SCHAYES

As much as i like the worm but we are comparing a Player who can be a centerpiece of a team and a guy who can be a defensive specialist but you cannot make him a centerpiece.

(But rodman is still the GOAT rebounder in my books).

[RobertdeMeijer]

Dennis Rodman

Everybody has to read http://skepticalsports.com/?p=1397 kk? (that means all the related posts, too)


The next time somebody writes a fifty page essay on how good Dolph Schayes was, let me know please.
In the meantime, I'll just wonder how a player who's signature move was a two-handed shot could play with an arm broken.

[LJJ]

Dennis Rodman

Everybody has to read http://skepticalsports.com/?p=1397 kk? (that means all the related posts, too)


The next time somebody writes a fifty page essay on how good Dolph Schayes was, let me know please.
In the meantime, I'll just wonder how a player who's signature move was a two-handed shot could play with an arm broken.

Schayes led a team to a championship (in dominating fashion you could add), an achievement completely out of the realm of possibility for Rodman.

Schayes was recognized as a top 10 player in the NBA for 12 seasons. Versus Rodman's 0 seasons.




We can all agree Rodman is a cool guy and possibly the greatest rebounder and one of the greatest defenders ever, but let's look at this rationally.

[Kblaze8855]

Im not sure you could say Dolph led in dominating fashion. Not relative to other its said of at least. And some believe the Pistons threw the series by the way....

But thats a whole other...thing.

[Droid101]

Schayes led a team to a championship (in dominating fashion you could add), an achievement completely out of the realm of possibility for Rodman.

Schayes was recognized as a top 10 player in the NBA for 12 seasons. Versus Rodman's 0 seasons.




We can all agree Rodman is a cool guy and possibly the greatest rebounder and one of the greatest defenders ever, but let's look at this rationally.

Yes, let's look at it rationally.

If we do an all-time draft, you pick Rodman FIRST. Yes, even over Jordan.

[quote]This is probably easiest to illustrate in the NFL, where positions and responsibilities are extremely rigid. An example I used in response to the commenter is that an NFL kicker who could get you 2 extra wins per season could be incredibly valuable. These two extra wins obviously have visible value: By definition, this is a player for whom we would expect to observe a 2 game per season win differential. But there

[Droid101]

[LJJ]

Yes, let's look at it rationally.

If we do an all-time draft, you pick Rodman FIRST. Yes, even over Jordan.


And, to bring it back to basketball


http://skepticalsports.com/?p=1397

Read this site, NOW.

I've read that a couple of months ago and it's an interesting take sure, but it doesn't warrant close to the stock you are putting into it right now. Rodman is not capable of being a franchise player on a contender, and was never really close to that level either.

He was a very amazing and unusual type of role player and that is were a lot of the statistical discrepancy comes from. I haven't seen more than a few glimpses of Schayes, but it's clear that he was a lot more than that.

[Droid101]

I've read that a couple of months ago and it's an interesting take sure, but it doesn't warrant close to the stock you are putting into it right now. Rodman is not capable of being a franchise player on a contender, and was never really close to that level either.

He was a very amazing and unusual type of role player and that is were a lot of the statistical discrepancy comes from. I haven't seen more than a few glimpses of Schayes, but it's clear that he was a lot more than that.

More than what? Able to be plugged into any team and make them better? 17-23% better (which is better than anyone not named Jordan, Bird, or Magic), no matter what the circumstances?

Rodman can do that.