Dennis Rodman or Ben Wallace?

[Teanett]

Ben Wallace. People act as if Ben couldn't defend 1-5 like Rodman but that's a lie. He could defend every position as well, played the passing lanes better than Rodman and was obviously a superior defender of the rim. Rodman was better at staying in front of his man on the perimeter... but Wallace has more value as a defender.

[La Frescobaldi]

We're obviously dealing with some young, confused individuals in this thread.

we obviously are. just for example.

using rebound rate as a primary indication of what a player can do is a farce based on an absurdity

[Droid101]

we obviously are. just for example.

using rebound rate as a primary indication of what a player can do is a farce based on an absurdity

Rebound rate is a better indicator of how well you rebound than RPG.

Just go visit that link and get educated. Rodman is better than Ben in every category (including WINNING).

http://skepticalsports.com/?p=112

[97 bulls]

I agree. I just don't think it should be a UNANIMOUS decision. Let's just say....I don't give much weight to regular season performances.

Then look at his playoff performances, people always knock karl malone for not commingthrough against the bulls. But never give rodman credit for minimzeing malones impact over the course of those two championships. And its not just malone. Rodman has shut down shaq, jordan, pippen, mourning, worthy, magic, webber, bird, mchale, to name a few. Remember what he did to kemp in the 96 finals? And before someone posts kemps stats, id like to remind you that alot of kemps points were scored with the game well in hand. Phil jackson said rodman was the greatest athlete he's ever seen. George karl said rodman should've been finals mvp and that he single handedly won two of the bulls four games in 96.

Wallace, although great inoverrates his ownaccomplishments right, has been blessed with the good fortune of playing in an era full of terrible bigmen. Which greatly overrates his accomplishments. However, I do feel he belongs in the hall of fame.

[CLTHornets4eva]

You obviously have never seen Ben at his peak. He was hands down the greatest defender of this decade; Ben could dunk, unlike Rodman, and he was a true leader of a championship team while Rodman is just a scrub.

PRIME Ben > PRIME Rodman

When does dunking effect who is better?

I lived in Sag nasty when the Pistons won. I have seen both in person multiple times.

Ben was less talented and it's not close. Chauncey was the leader of that team- a much worse team than any of the bulls teams. Rodman on the Pistons was equal to Ben.

Rodman on the bulls in his upper 30's! >>> Ben In his prime

[DrunkenDave]

Rebounds per game is a stupid way to measure it.

Rebound rate is the only way to accurately measure how many rebounds you get when you're on the floor compared to everyone else.

Ben Wallace's best rebound rate was 23.9% of all rebounds grabbed while he was on the floor in the 02-03 season.

Rodman's career rebound rate was 23.4%, and he had SEVEN seasons with a higher rebound rate than Ben Wallace's career high.

And the playoffs? Please.

Ben's career high rebound rate in the playoffs was 23.4%. Rodman had four post-seasons equal to or better than that, and a higher career average (not to mention guarding every position).

Lettuce be realism. Go here and read why Rodman has a case to be the most valuable player to be picked first if you're doing an all-time draft:
http://skepticalsports.com/?p=112

Rodman is the better rebounder, no doubt. But Ben Wallace is the better overall defender (dont get me wrong, Rodman was great too). It just comes down to your personal preference, and i pick defense.

[Clippersfan86]

I'm a huge fan of both and watched both in their prime. Wallace= more valuable defender to a team. Rodman= better man defender.....didn't defend the rim. Wallace not only averaged 2 steals per game and played great man D in his prime but also was the best defender of the rim in the game, averaging 3 blocks a game and intimidating the hell out of people at the rim.

Rodman was a better rebounder but Wallace was elite in that regard too so I didn't want to go down that road. Plus I'm not a believer in using defensive rebounds to argue defense. Rebounding comes AFTER a shot and AFTER defensive play on that shot.

[DrunkenDave]

When does dunking effect who is better?

I lived in Sag nasty when the Pistons won. I have seen both in person multiple times.

Ben was less talented and it's not close. Chauncey was the leader of that team- a much worse team than any of the bulls teams. Rodman on the Pistons was equal to Ben.

Rodman on the bulls in his upper 30's! >>> Ben In his prime

How is that a knock on Ben?

[IamRAMBO24]

When does dunking effect who is better?

I lived in Sag nasty when the Pistons won. I have seen both in person multiple times.

Ben was less talented and it's not close. Chauncey was the leader of that team- a much worse team than any of the bulls teams. Rodman on the Pistons was equal to Ben.

Rodman on the bulls in his upper 30's! >>> Ben In his prime

Dunking is a huge deal. It's 2 points. Rodman had absolutely no offensive game nor can he block. I have never seen a more dominant defender when Ben was at his peak. It says a lot when they won the championship based on his defense and leadership.

Rodman had less of an active role playing next to Jordan and Pippen. He was hardly the face of the bulls, hell some games he didn't show up because he was too busy partying the night before.

There is no way the worm is better than Ben when you look at the both of them in their prime years.

[LALakerFan4Life]

The Worm > Big Ben

[CLTHornets4eva]

How is that a knock on Ben?

It was in reply to someone that said that Ben was a bigger leader on his team. It's a little bit easier to lead more on a worse team. Especially one that doesn't have 2 other hall of famers on the roster.

[AMISTILLILL]

Dunking is a huge deal. It's 2 points. Rodman had absolutely no offensive game nor can he block. I have never seen a more dominant defender when Ben was at his peak. It says a lot when they won the championship based on his defense and leadership.

Rodman had less of an active role playing next to Jordan and Pippen. He was hardly the face of the bulls, hell some games he didn't show up because he was too busy partying the night before.

There is no way the worm is better than Ben when you look at the both of them in their prime years.

Is this real life?

[oolalaa]

I'm not getting how Wallace wins the playoff argument between the two simply by posting marginally better numbers. If Rodman wasn't the same type of rebounder in the playoffs (which isn't the only way he influenced games, but that's debatable), what's Wallace's excuse for posting numbers that are barely any higher?

When did I say Wallace wins the playoff argument Like I said, Rodman > Wallace, BUT, Rodman's numbers (particularly rebounding) dropped come playoff time and Wallace's didn't.

[97 bulls]

I'm a huge fan of both and watched both in their prime. Wallace= more valuable defender to a team. Rodman= better man defender.....didn't defend the rim. Wallace not only averaged 2 steals per game and played great man D in his prime but also was the best defender of the rim in the game, averaging 3 blocks a game and intimidating the hell out of people at the rim.

Rodman was a better rebounder but Wallace was elite in that regard too so I didn't want to go down that road. Plus I'm not a believer in using defensive rebounds to argue defense. Rebounding comes AFTER a shot and AFTER defensive play on that shot.

But who has wallace ever shut down? Just about every center he played against was utter garbage. Its easy to get blocks when the man your guarding is whack

[IamRAMBO24]

It was in reply to someone that said that Ben was a bigger leader on his team. It's a little bit easier to lead more on a worse team. Especially one that doesn't have 2 other hall of famers on the roster.

In overall talent, Ben can do a lot more than Rodman since he doesn't need to irritate the f*ck out of someone to get them off their game.