Not really, Rodman was pretty much looked at as a malcontent (cancer). For the Spurs, he was the blame for them losing and he wasn't great team-mate or tag along person to the command of the Admiral. From injuries to ejections to his clashes with management, Rodman's rumblings were quickly pushed out of town after 2 seasons. He was essentially a T.O. type player. Great on the field, but troubled off the field and sometimes on the court.
Fact is that people were allowed to guard Jordan. At least before the Jordan rules were fully implemented.
"Jordan Rules" as far as the general public is concerned can take on both ... if not latter more often than the former. Whether or not you believe is one thing. Whether or not something actually is, is another. There's no real contradiction between the two.
Did you watch Rodman play? If so, you wouldn't be implying that a 34 year old Rodman was past his prime. The guy was an athletic freak. At 39 years old, he was still able to pull down 14.3 rebounds a game in his limited stint with the Mavs. To put that in perspective, only Ben Wallace (in 02-03) has averaged more rebounds since the last time Rodman won it in 97-98.
Well, for future reference then, use the definition I described. Otherwise, if you're talking to a knowledgeable fan, he/she will think you're an idiot.
You didn't read my previous post about Rodman's behavior and his relationship with the Spurs (management/on-off the court antics). It had to do with his inability to fit in with the Spurs. I'm not questioning Rodman's production at all. No other player in the last 35 years has been able to rebound, like Rodman, since a Wilt Chamberlain at the twilight of his career. But again, if his production was so great why didn't the Spurs keep him and let him go for Will Perdue.
I did read your previous post about Rodman's behavior, but you were comparing the ages of Rodman and Gasol which is generally used to compare performance, not behavior. Production isnt everything. The Lakers let Shaq go despite the fact that he led them to 3 titles.
A "knowledgeable" fan would know that Rodman doesn't rely on his athleticism to pull down his rebounds. He has the uncanny ability to "read" where the rebound will be after the shot. Therefore even with diminished speed and a diminished vertical, he's able to out-rebound more athletic players.
Ok, he can "read" where the rebound is headed. In addition, he's able to get to that spot first because of his superior agility, speed, and reaction times. And those all tie into his athleticism.
Uh...no. Let me spell it out for you: he gets there b/c he has a head start, or simply other can't read where the ball is going to go and chase the ball instead.
The one and only way Rodman was a so-called "athletic freak" was his lack of decline in his 30s. At no point in his career was he athletically "freakish". He didn't jump extremely high. He was strong, but it definitely wasn't strength that made him a great rebounder. He wasn't particularly fast either. What set Rodman apart was his rebounding instincts, which were probably the best in NBA history. He had an uncanny ability to anticipate where the ball was going. Never seen anything like it. He was also able to slither around and get inside position on players who tried to block him out. Certainly Rodman wasn't past his rebounding prime at 34, but it wasn't due to him being more athletic than anyone else. His long career is a testimony of what a player can do WITHOUT great athleticism.
it's a combination of both. for all of his eccentricities, the amount of preparation he put into his game was pretty surprising. two anecdotes come to mind specifically. one was an account from chuck daly with regard to the maniacal extent of dennis' leg workouts. even into his late 30's he was an awesome physical specimen. the other account was from an interview where he's discussing the diligence of his film preparation. he would study the tendencies of each player's shots and off which part of the rim they would bounce if missed.
Those are two things youngsters could learn from Rodman. His work ethic in general, strengthening his legs, and watching film. I've said before that Rodman was basically a Superman version of Chuck Hayes with greater rebounding instincts. Again, although he was physical specimen, he wasn't a great jumper (like another poster pointed out) or had explosive speed, like a number of forwards. Rebounding is about instinct, timing, and aggressiveness, more times than not. Just because a team has giant big men or team with great length doesn't necessarily mean that they will be a superior rebounding team.
His relentless energy and incredible stamina should not be discounted. Maybe he wouldn't win a dunk contest, but I do think it takes an incredibly gifted athlete to do the things he did. Didn't he used to vigorously workout after games? That's some kind of freak.
Because the Spurs were stupid and had a locker room full of dudes that either couldn't control Rodman, or tolerate his antics. That's wasn't the case for Chicago.
Rodman's incredible energy and stamina is part of why he was so great. Nobody is discounting those. Nobody says he wasn't a gifted athlete, but he was NOT special by NBA standards by any stretch. If you ask me, it was more mental than physical. The guy was a lunatic kook who pushed his body to it's uttermost capability. Very few NBA players have done that. What helped was that rebounding became his sole focus on the offensive end. On occasion, it seemed like he was trying to pad his stats because he sometimes passed up obvious putback opportunities to pass the ball out so another shot would go up for him to rebound. He wasn't the only Bull who worked out aside from games and practices.
