Can you argue that Dennis Rodman was a more valuable player than Karl Malone?

[DonDadda59]

This is Jordan hating taken way too far. Rodman is NOT comparable to Malone.

Even if you say Rodman is a better complement on teams that already have offensive firepower, let's take the Bulls as an example: 96-98 Bulls with Jordan, Pip AND Karl?! Come on now

David Stern would've basketball reasons'ed the hell out of that team. That would've been criminal.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Could you legitimately build around Rodman?

I can see the case being made for Malone despite his woeful postseason play. Worm is like the perfect 3rd wheel - a guy that could impact some aspects of the game at superstar levels. His attitude could be seen as a detriment, though, and could scare off some managers that don't have the "right" personnel in their locker room.

[SouBeachTalents]

I'm a big Rodman fan but this is ridiculous. If not for Jordan's Bulls, Malone would likely have 2 rings, 2 FMVP's, and be squarely in the discussion for top 10 all time. You cannot compare Rodman to a first option / franchise centerpiece. It's completely apples and oranges.

Exactly, if not for Jordan, Malone would have had 2 MVP's, 2 Finals MVP's, and 14 All-NBA Teams, including 11 First Teams. That's a top 10 resume of all time. And we're asking whether or not he's as valuable as Rodman?

[Human Error]

Is this a justifiable claim? All things considered.

No.

[Clifton]

in a vacuum yeah, on the basis that rodman's abilities and traits are more difficult to come by. a burly fast break big with a jumper? that type of player is one of the easiest in the league to plug into your roster.


malone/artest
rodman/pierce

which do you take?

It's important to note that Malone was very coachable and never missed a game. He played almost two decades at the all-star level. And at his best (which was almost his whole career), he clearly had a spot among the second-tier all-time greats (where guys like Durant and Jerry West are or will be). If he played today, he would be a top 5 player in the league no question.

He had his weaknesses. You claim that Rodman's weaknesses could be more than made up for by a guy like Pierce (or any another guy who could put up 20 points a night). Well, Malone's weaknesses would be made up for by any of the takeover combo guards our league has. Anyone willing to have the ball in his hands and create a shot for himself on the team? Well, Malone had everything else. The Jazz may have beaten the Bulls if they had such a player. Certainly they would have beaten the Warriors, even without that player.

It's not clear to me that Rodman would be as effective in the NBA of today. Coachability is needed now. In my opinion, in the Spurs-Hawks-Warriors era, so is genuine chemistry with teammates, not just on the court but off. And a lot of his tactics would not be accepted by the refs. Mind games were 20% of his effectiveness; 50% in important moments (like when he's shutting down Malone in the fourth quarter). I don't see him getting away with that stuff today.

Rodman would still be great, but he'd be in a Draymond Green category now. That is, Max Player on the Warriors (or Bulls); a bad contract and a personnel issue for most other teams.

Malone though? Timeless. 60s, 70s, now... top 5 player in any era whatsoever. You think he was deadly with Stockton? Let's see him run a pick and roll with Nash, Rose, Harden, someone who is capable of heavy individual damage off the pick and roll.

Basically, imagine if Kevin Love never got injured and played good man defense. You're not taking Draymond over that are you? Only one team out of 30 is doing it today, and that team is one in a million.

[Fallen Angel]

Rodman's defensive, rebounding, and hustle impact on the game is amazingly underrated, he's was so valuable to every single one of his championship teams.

Malone's impact is greater because he puts points on the board. I'd take a great two way player over a great one way player.

[Clifton]

But to answer the OP, you can definitely argue it. I remember back in 2002 or 2003 (before the Pistons got Sheed and won the title), I used to argue Ben Wallace was a top 10 player. A guy who can absolutely shut down multiple positions (or, in Big Ben's case, entire teams) and gobble up every rebound is insanely important. But with guys like that, you need the right players and the right coach and the right culture, or it won't come together. Do you remember anything Ben Wallace did outside of Detroit? Or for that matter before Sheed got there?

Of course you could say the same about Malone: without Jerry Sloan and Stockton (in that order, IMO), he might be as lost as Kevin Love on the Cavs. Perhaps. But look at what Durant was able to do when he made the Finals in spite of a clueless coach and a reckless point guard who couldn't run an offense (which Westbrook was until 1-2 years ago) - the exact opposite of the framework in which Malone got exactly as far, with a comparable level of individual performance.

[ArbitraryWater]

Rodman wouldn't be the best player on a "stacked" team. If a team is "stacked", that means they have some good offensive players. And a go-to scorer/playmaker is by far the biggest necessity on a basketball team. You can always find/replace/fill-in for someone who just plays hard. Bulls went 38-9 w/o Rodman from 96-98, won the '97 championship despite Rodman barely contributing, and won in '98 too despite Rodman not even starting half the games(and 0 come Finals). Not that hard for a unit to make-up for someone whose best attribute was effort. Those players are not THAT valuable. Thus, there's no scenario where Rodman would be more valuable than Malone. And it's not like Malone wasn't a pretty good rebounder and defender in his own right. Even if he's on some bizarro team where he's neither the 1st or 2nd option, he's still so good offensively that whatever he's giving up on defense/rebounding to Rodman, he'll more than make-up for it on the offensive end. Rodman's honestly the single most overrated player on this board.

DROPPIN' KNOWLEDGE!

[Beastmode88]

[warriorfan]

Malone was a bonafide franchise player. Dennis was a complementary guy. You couldn't build a team around his 7 PPG caliber offense. You'd need at least 4 other offensive options whereas Karl could be an anchor on both ends of the court. Obviously he wasn't the defender Rodman was, but he wasn't anywhere near A'mare level on D... he was very solid. He made a few all defensive first teams.

Well said. Rodman gets lots of love because of his unorthadox style of play but let's be serious, he is on another tier or two lower than Karl Malone. Some people assume that Karl Malone wasn't a good defender for some reason and that is just wrong.

[GIF REACTION]

You have to be careful with what you say. You could get banned.

[Marchesk]

Swap Rodman and Malone, and where are the Jazz?

[4 Inches]

It has been 13 years since Malone started his last season for Utah and 13 years since his latest girlfriend was born.

[iamgine]

Would it be like comparing Deandre Jordan with Blake Griffin?

[Cali Syndicate]

Ish has gone full retard