Better Defender: Dennis Rodman or Tim Duncan

[tbonewalker]

Because you took career Defensive win shares. Just take the individual season defensive win shares or see how many games and minutes they played.

No, you don't look at win shares at all. That stuff is for statboys who can't properly assess the game and it's players.

[tbonewalker]

The conclusion so far:

Rodman was a better defender and athlete by far. Also won more championships and did it with two different franchises.

[ElNono]

2/10, tbh

Can't keep up with own troll thread: 1/10
Bump troll thread two months later: 1/10

[tbonewalker]

1. Tickets to series clinching Game 4 of Suns/Spurs 2010 Semi-finals... $250

2. Longoria jersey... $70

3. Attempting to bring a basketball IQ of 14 into a basketball debate... Priceless.


ElNono, you talk a big game yet you can't back up your opinion with anything other than... exactly. :lmao

[ElNono]

2/10, tbh

Can't keep up with own troll thread: 1/10
Bump troll thread two months later: 1/10

[Koolaid_Man]

...with nothing to back it up.

I gave you a nice little write up to start this off. It might have been too convincing, judging by the replies thus far.

Not one Spur fan is showing the capacity to debate logically and objectively.

Any one have the fortitude?


Rodman would fuck Duncan in front of all these people and then eat his ass chew it up and spit it out...and Duncan would lay there bleeding to death...:lol

[ElNono]

America, eatin' my lunch from a single bowl in my parents basement, where I'm livin'. Happy Birthday, I'm forty-three.

Don't want to waste those precious calories...chewin'. Jesus come move my jaw for me, help me get my sloppy food down my throat.

[history2b]

:lobt: SHAO-LIN IN DA HOOOOUSE! :lobt:

[Trill Clinton]

http://i944.photobucket.com/albums/ad289/bhilde1/24e0zt2.gif

[history2b]

Yeah, saying that 2 time Defensive player of the Year award winner, versatile shut down defender who successfully defended star players at every position on the court is better than a 0 time DPOY award winner who reluctantly defends his natural position is just hating.

No logic. Haters just gonna hate.

Lol

[ElNono]

:lobt: SHAO-LIN IN DA HOOOOUSE! :lobt:

LOL once a wingman, always a wingman
LOL dumb, blind and stupid

[bongraider]

tbonewaker: why did you start this thread when you already seem to know the answer? fishing much?

Dennis Rodman, Shawn Kemp's nuts says hi.

[Trill Clinton]

Yeah, saying that 2 time Defensive player of the Year award winner, versatile shut down defender who successfully defended star players at every position on the court is better than a 0 time DPOY award winner who reluctantly defends his natural position is just hating.

No logic. Haters just gonna hate.

Lol


Nope, no need to offer up any "logic" in this here thread.

http://i745.photobucket.com/albums/xx100/MABOcho/dance-on-thread-freepost.gif

[Chieflion]

Translation for Laker fans: I don't want to look at stats which don't support my argument.

[WeNeedLength]

No, you don't look at win shares at all. That stuff is for statboys who can't properly assess the game and it's players.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y47/Jollyblue/meanwhileinkazahkstan.jpg

[LnGrrrR]

Also, Duncan is not even the best defensive big man of his era. KG and Ben Wallace are ahead of him. And Rodman was better than both of those guys. Sorry Spur fags, you guys have lost another one, and have once again failed.

I was a little young when Rodman was in his prime, but yeah, I'd say he has a little bit over KG. (Maybe it's just because KG seemed physically gifted, and Rodman moreso had to make use of his will/desire/insert cliche here.

[LnGrrrR]

Wrong. There are more factors. I never said DPOY is the only factor. You can go back in your corner now. Grown folks still sorting things out.

So, what exactly are you going by? What priority do you give the following:

All-Defense selections
DPOY
Stats
Personal opinion

[Roger Freemason Jr.]

Finally a realistic response. I can respect responses like this.

Cheers, lmbebo! :toast


Rodman was the more versatile defender. At 6'7", he could guard positions 2-5 in some cases. Obviously he was more effective guarding 4-5 even at a height disadvantage.

You're a dick man. "Finally a realistic response!" Yes of course, only when the response looks like a response you WANT to see. & what the fuck is the point of this thread? What kind of juxtaposition is Duncan & Rodman? Either you're a troll, or a high horse riding prick trying to bust Tim Duncan's chops for some repressed reason.

[LnGrrrR]

How did you see that all in one week when Bird retired before Shaq played in the NBA?

ESPN classic? :lol

[LnGrrrR]

The Skunker withstanding.

Is it New Year's yet? Then STFU.

[buttsR4rebounding]

Rodman was a good rebounder, not a good defender.

DPOY never really gives credit to the players who play good defence, only those who rack up "defensive" stats. Classic example is Bowen never winning it, whilst Camby was.

Duncan an easy winner in this one.

Especially if you look at an entire career. Rodman was a much better defender when he was with the Pistons. Then he started focussing entirely on rebound stats and would regularly leave his man early to get in position for the defensive board. The Rodman defender in his prime was better IMO, but he lost that intensity after the 2 championships by the Pistons. In addition, Rodman expended NO energy on offense while Duncan carried the Spurs' offense. Lastly, to say that Rodman has 5 rings to Duncan's 4 is somewhat irrelevant in this discussion. Was Robert Horry a better defender than both? In conclusion, I would say that Rodman was the better defender in his prime, but for their entire careers Duncan is due to the fact that Rodman decided to focus entirely on winning rebounding titles the last half of his career and was nowhere near the same defender he was the first half.

[TDfan2007]

Rodman was a better one on one defender, Tim is better at help D. Rodman is better on the boards, but often at the expense of defensive position. In his prime, Tim defended the pick and roll better than any big in history outside of KG. It all just depends on what you want. I will say that a Duncan/Rodman frontcourt would have been almost impossible to score on.

IMO Rodman and Duncan are a wash defensively, but I wouldn't argue with someone who'd give a slight nod to Rodman.

A lot of people here are seriously underrating Tim's defensive presence though. Tim has single-handedly anchored one of the best defenses in the league from 03/04 to 07/08. Even before that he was a defensive beast, and after a 2 year lull he's back to being a monster on defense. Think about it this way, KG won DPOY in 2008 for doing basically what Tim had done his whole career. In 2007, Tim or Bruce hands down deserved the award, but it went to Marcus Camby because the media was so obsessed with stats. DPOY is worthless in the debate between the two imo.

[SpursDynasty85]

Defensive Rebounding = Rodman


Team defense = Rodman by a hair

I'll give you these



Man to man defense (most important in the post) = Rodman


Theres no way in hell Rodman could've gaurded the Rasheed Wallace's, Kevin Garnett's, Shaquille O'neals like Duncan could have.

Also, Of course Rodman was a better defensive player. Thats all he did! Defense and Rebounding. Duncan's game literally translates in to all facets of the game, while Rodman's is limited to the amount of energy he can exert on the court. Rodman was a hauss. I would say Duncan could have been better, but he also had to take the offensive load also.


-Duncan was the better shot blocker (which doesn't make up for everything else Rodman is better at on Defense). Duncan averaged one more block than Rodman. This makes much more sense when you look a little deeper though. Something to remember is that Duncan get's a lot of his blocks from the weakside, hardly ever gets blocks on his own man. Not chopping his legs off here, just stating a fact. :-)


I would argue most great shot blockers don't just block their Man, they block the whole team. A block is a block, so I don't understand the logic on why this makes duncan any less of a shotblocker than anyone else. If anything this definitely helps his team defensive position. Duncan's weakness is his jumping ability but he's a smart defender who always seemed to make stops. From what I saw in the playoffs, if you needed a stretch where a player needed to get a rebound and make a stop, Duncan was always there. I coudlnt' say definitively who was a better playoff/finals defender/rebounder but Duncan is up there with the best.

[history2b]

Rodman was a better one on one defender, Tim is better at help D. Rodman is better on the boards, but often at the expense of defensive position. In his prime, Tim defended the pick and roll better than any big in history outside of KG. It all just depends on what you want. I will say that a Duncan/Rodman frontcourt would have been almost impossible to score on.

IMO Rodman and Duncan are a wash defensively, but I wouldn't argue with someone who'd give a slight nod to Rodman.

A lot of people here are seriously underrating Tim's defensive presence though. Tim has single-handedly anchored one of the best defenses in the league from 03/04 to 07/08. Even before that he was a defensive beast, and after a 2 year lull he's back to being a monster on defense. Think about it this way, KG won DPOY in 2008 for doing basically what Tim had done his whole career. In 2007, Tim or Bruce hands down deserved the award, but it went to Marcus Camby because the media was so obsessed with stats. DPOY is worthless in the debate between the two imo.

DPOY is not a worthless debate just because you think your player deserved to win but did not.

That does not and should not detract from Dennis' winning the award especially considering his era; He beat out a prime Hakeem Olajuwon, David Robinson, Mark Eaton and a young Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen.

And you're talking about Marcus freakin Camby? Give me a break.

[history2b]

I'll give you these




Theres no way in hell Rodman could've gaurded the Rasheed Wallace's, Kevin Garnett's, Shaquille O'neals like Duncan could have.

Also, Of course Rodman was a better defensive player. Thats all he did! Defense and Rebounding. Duncan's game literally translates in to all facets of the game, while Rodman's is limited to the amount of energy he can exert on the court. Rodman was a hauss. I would say Duncan could have been better, but he also had to take the offensive load also.



I would argue most great shot blockers don't just block their Man, they block the whole team. A block is a block, so I don't understand the logic on why this makes duncan any less of a shotblocker than anyone else. If anything this definitely helps his team defensive position. Duncan's weakness is his jumping ability but he's a smart defender who always seemed to make stops. From what I saw in the playoffs, if you needed a stretch where a player needed to get a rebound and make a stop, Duncan was always there. I coudlnt' say definitively who was a better playoff/finals defender/rebounder but Duncan is up there with the best.


What do you mean there is "no way" he could have guarded Rasheed, Garnett and Shaq? lol

He guarded Charles Barkley, Karl Malone, James Worthy, Magic Johnson and Larry Bird but Rasheed and KG, "NO WAY!"

Idiot, lol.

[tbonewalker]

History2b IN DA HOOOUSE!!!

[tbonewalker]

Theres no way in hell Rodman could've gaurded the Rasheed Wallace's, Kevin Garnett's, Shaquille O'neals like Duncan could have.

Lol, then there's no way in hell you watched Rodman play ball. The guy was a freak and didn't back down from anybody for a second. As History2b already said, Rodman successfully defended the likes of Charles Barkley, Hakeem, Worthy, Magic, Malone, etc.



Also, Of course Rodman was a better defensive player.

Thanks, this is all you had to say.

[tbonewalker]

Rodman was a better one on one defender,

Correct.


Rodman is better on the boards,

Correct...


but often at the expense of defensive position.

...Pointless and wrong. So, Rodman was grabbing rebounds at the expense of defensive positioning. Because grabbing a board means you have to play defense right after. :lmao


It all just depends on what you want.

Except that isn't the topic. The topic is - who is the better defender? Not - what do you want? Better defense is always better defense.



DPOY is worthless in the debate between the two imo.

Lol, it's only worthless because Duncan never won the award. Face it, fanboy, if Duncan had two DPOY awards you'd be playing those cards. But he doesn't, so you aren't.

Rodman does, and it's completely relevant to the discussion.

[history2b]

Lol, then there's no way in hell you watched Rodman play ball. The guy was a freak and didn't back down from anybody for a second. As History2b already said, Rodman successfully defended the likes of Charles Barkley, Hakeem, Worthy, Magic, Malone, etc.




Thanks, this is all you had to say.



Good to see you Tbone!

The thing I love most about Spurstalk is that the type of garbage this tool just spewed has done unchallenged for so long they actually believe it.

It's like walking into a cult's compound and seeing massive shrines erected in Tim Duncan's name with a bunch of morons parading around acting like he is the fuckin messiah.

We come in with knowledge outside of their tiny enclave and they got really offended.

[Venti Quattro]

Good to see you Tbone!

The thing I love most about Spurstalk is that the type of garbage this tool just spewed has done unchallenged for so long they actually believe it.

It's like walking into a cult's compound and seeing massive shrines erected in Tim Duncan's name with a bunch of morons parading around acting like he is the fuckin messiah.

We come in with knowledge outside of their tiny enclave and they got really offended.

If you have to relate it to your life (unless the structure is predetermined), I'd start with an anecdote about yourself, preferably something that makes an audience laugh and you can pivot to make a more poignant point.

College Education
Homelessness
Blood Drive
AIDS
Cancer
Education
After-school programs
Tutoring program
Arts in School
Technology upgrades in Schools
Drunk Driving
Rape Victims
Domestic Violence Victims
Adoption
Abortion support group
Autism and other developmentally disabled
Eating Disorders
Drug treatment
Environmental Activism
Supporting Farmers
Human Rights across the world
Medical care across the world
Supporting Free Speech
Curing Diabetes
Advocating for the Disabled

[ElNono]

America, eatin' my lunch from a single bowl in my parents basement, where I'm livin'. Happy Birthday, I'm forty-three.

Don't want to waste those precious calories...chewin'. Jesus come move my jaw for me, help me get my sloppy food down my throat.

[tbonewalker]

That kind of delusional yes-duncan mentality seems to be a permanent airborne disease transferred from one Spur fan to another.

Nice cult analogy. Convincing a Spur fan that Duncan isn't the greatest defensive player all time is akin to convincing an Amish man to use electricity and automotive vehicles.

[Texas_Ranger]

LOL@ all this shit being said about Tim Duncan on the NBA forum. Some of you motherfuckers are really pathetic.

[ElNono]

2/10, tbh

Can't keep up with own troll thread: 1/10
Bump troll thread two months later: 1/10

[tbonewalker]

LOL@ all this shit being said about Tim Duncan on the NBA forum. Some of you motherfuckers are really pathetic.


Why, because you don't possess the basketball IQ to counter any of the points made in this thread?

Why, because Rodman is a better defender than Duncan?

In your twisted delusional mind, is Duncan the best at everything?

[Texas_Ranger]

Why, because you don't possess the basketball IQ to counter any of the points made in this thread?

Why, because Rodman is a better defender than Duncan?

In your twisted delusional mind, is Duncan the best at everything?

Don't really care about this thread. I was talking in general. All this Duncan stuff is just too much.
Also, I don't know if Dennis was a better defender cause I didn't watch games in the 90's, so I can't really say.
And no, Duncan is not the best at everything, but he is one of the best players in the NBA. And he deserves respect, not all this bullshit.

[hater]

:lmao

using DPOY to judge who was actually better defender

:lol :lol

wow

what's next, use MVP to judge who was a better player???? :lol (see Nash/Noshitski in the playoffs)

[tbonewalker]

Don't really care about this thread. I was talking in general. All this Duncan stuff is just too much.
Also, I don't know if Dennis was a better defender cause I didn't watch games in the 90's, so I can't really say.
And no, Duncan is not the best at everything, but he is one of the best players in the NBA. And he deserves respect, not all this bullshit.

You do care about this thread. Otherwise you wouldn't have clicked on it and posted what you posted.

I commend you for being honest about not watching basketball in the 90's. Make no mistake, it was a great period of basketball.

Duncan gets plenty of respect. Plenty of Duncan fanboys pump him up (at the expense of other players accomplishments) and bow down to him here every day.

I'll gladly be in the minority here and call it how it is. If I said Larry Bird was a better 3pt shooter, Duncan fanboys would rush in and exclaim Duncan was better because he hit a 3pter vs. PHO in the playoffs. :lmao

[LnGrrrR]

So, what exactly are you going by? What priority do you give the following:

All-Defense selections
DPOY
Stats
Personal opinion

Asking again....

Also, a reason why Defensive Win Shares are "worthless" would be nice. Just saying it doesn't make it so.

[history2b]

Defensive Win Shares, lol

What next +/- stats and PERs?

Without stats, awards or anything, who is the better defender Bruce Bowen or Matt Bonner?

[WeNeedLength]

You do care about this thread. Otherwise you wouldn't have clicked on it and posted what you posted.

I commend you for being honest about not watching basketball in the 90's. Make no mistake, it was a great period of basketball.

Duncan gets plenty of respect. Plenty of Duncan fanboys pump him up (at the expense of other players accomplishments) and bow down to him here every day.

I'll gladly be in the minority here and call it how it is. If I said Larry Bird was a better 3pt shooter, Duncan fanboys would rush in and exclaim Duncan was better because he hit a 3pter vs. PHO in the playoffs. :lmao


This scrub needs to go back to those pathetic ESPN forums. We. Dont. Give. A. Fuck. aka DGAF so GTFO MF POS SOB HA HA

[WeNeedLength]

defensive win shares, lol

what next +/- stats and pers?

Without stats, awards or anything, who is the better defender bruce bowen or matt bonner?


dgaf

[LnGrrrR]

Defensive Win Shares, lol

What next +/- stats and PERs?

Without stats, awards or anything, who is the better defender Bruce Bowen or Matt Bonner?

Please explain why they're flawed then. It should be easy to do if they're laughable.

[WeNeedLength]

Please explain why they're flawed then. It should be easy to do if they're laughable.

He won't do that. He expects everyone to know what he is thinking. And if that were true, he'd scare us all off.

[BigTex342006]

Nice to see loincloth and history still have a hard on for Duncan and anything Spurs. Hilarity.

Duncan has been a better defender in every way you can measure it, including the "eye test". The only part of Rodman's game I give him a nod would be perimeter defense. Protecting the paint and the rim, which has the most effect on the game is where the comparision's end. Rodman wasn't on the same level as Duncan.

[history2b]

Please explain why they're flawed then. It should be easy to do if they're laughable.

Simple.

But you're going to have to respond to my questions if we are going to make any progress here...

First of all, I think statistics are a useful tool as they can provide a fair amount of insight. The problem is when people, like yourself, attempt to use them as the end all be all fact on the matter.

Who is the better defensive player:

Kobe Bryant or Dirk Nowitzki?

[history2b]

Nice to see loincloth and history still have a hard on for Duncan and anything Spurs. Hilarity.

Duncan has been a better defender in every way you can measure it, including the "eye test". The only part of Rodman's game I give him a nod would be perimeter defense. Protecting the paint and the rim, which has the most effect on the game is where the comparision's end. Rodman wasn't on the same level as Duncan.


Wow, looks like even the cloven hoofed swine managed to get a Spurstalk account.

Technology is amazing these days.

[ohmwrecker]

Who is the better defensive player: Kobe Bryant or Dirk Nowitzki?

Now that is a thread worthy topic . . . you should start one.

[history2b]

Now that is a thread worthy topic . . . you should start one.

This is the problem with Spurstalk...

Every time a legitimate basketball discussion has potential to get underway a faggot with a Lakers stick lodged up his ass comes in and disrupts things.

[ohmwrecker]

This is the problem with Spurstalk...

Every time a legitimate basketball discussion has potential to get underway a faggot with a Lakers stick lodged up his ass comes in and disrupts things.

I already gave a legitimate opinion on this thread, jackass.

You see, it doesn't matter . . . You aren't interested in debate. You are only interested in pushing your agenda by using circular arguments. You've disrupted your own thread countless times because you are not seriously trying to debate. You should thank your sad, stained hump pillow that anyone bothers to respond to you at all.

[z0sa]

Tim is a much better help defender. Certainly arguable about who is the better man defender especially on the perimeter, but factoring in help and the fact Tim always had a huge load on offense as well, it's pretty obvious who the answer is.

[LnGrrrR]

Simple.

But you're going to have to respond to my questions if we are going to make any progress here...

First of all, I think statistics are a useful tool as they can provide a fair amount of insight. The problem is when people, like yourself, attempt to use them as the end all be all fact on the matter.

Who is the better defensive player:

Kobe Bryant or Dirk Nowitzki?

Nope. That's not how it works. After all, this is about Duncan and Rodman, right? So no point in introducing other players quite yet.

If you think statistics are useful, that's great. You obviously don't think that Defensive Win Shares are a useful statistic. Please explain why.

And can I assume that you tbone, and just forgot to switch over to your other account? Or are you answering independently why you also think Defensive Win Shares are a poor stat.

Finally, saying "people like myself" is pretty stupid, when I never claimed that Duncan was better.

[history2b]

Nope. That's not how it works. After all, this is about Duncan and Rodman, right? So no point in introducing other players quite yet.

If you think statistics are useful, that's great. You obviously don't think that Defensive Win Shares are a useful statistic. Please explain why.

And can I assume that you tbone, and just forgot to switch over to your other account? Or are you answering independently why you also think Defensive Win Shares are a poor stat.

Finally, saying "people like myself" is pretty stupid, when I never claimed that Duncan was better.


To understand the fundamental reason behind that specific statistic is flawed you have to examine all data, not just selective data.

In my personal view, Bill Russell impacted the game defensively like no other player in the history of the sport and coincidentally, your statistic supports this idea. But my perspective was not formed based on this.

But there are too many examples of poor defenders who are ranked too high and great defenders ranked too low to use this a legitimate measure defense. Useful but so flawed it is darn near irrelevant.

Put it this way, if Red Auerbach was sitting at a table with Dean Smith and John Wooden and they started talking about defense do you think they are going to talk about "Defensive win shared" statistics? Lol, please. That's internet statboy talk. Anyone who knows the game of basketball wouldn't resort to this.

[history2b]

Tim is a much better help defender. Certainly arguable about who is the better man defender especially on the perimeter, but factoring in help and the fact Tim always had a huge load on offense as well, it's pretty obvious who the answer is.


That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Duncan gets the nod defensive because he shouldered more of the load on offense? lol

The things you guys rationalize is purely comical.

[z0sa]

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

You realize, of course, this is a compliment.

Thank you.


Duncan gets the nod defensive because he shouldered more of the load on offense?

You, in your shortness of rationality, fail to understand that shouldering a huge load on offense tires you out. Shouldering the load on both ends is definitely worthy of consideration and is definitely a factor. Conversely, a second factor is the concept Rodman was focused only on defense and rebounding, and never was an offensive option.

Tim had to do much, much more than Rodman on the basketball court.

You fail.

[LnGrrrR]

To understand the fundamental reason behind that specific statistic is flawed you have to examine all data, not just selective data.

Great! Now we're getting somewhere. Now, let's see where you go with this opening statement.


In my personal view, Bill Russell impacted the game defensively like no other player in the history of the sport and coincidentally, your statistic supports this idea. But my perspective was not formed based on this.

Ok, so you've stated that Defensive Win Shares agrees with your contention that Bill Russell was a great defender, but you still think Defensive Win Shares are a dumb stat. Let's read on. (Also, it's not "my" statistic. I would be making alot more money if I came up with it.)


But there are too many examples of poor defenders who are ranked too high and great defenders ranked too low to use this a legitimate measure defense. Useful but so flawed it is darn near irrelevant.

Fair enough. What defenders in particular are glaring deficiencies in Defensive Win Shares? Do you think that other statistics have examples that might point to a flawed reasoning behind them? (For instance, has there ever been a good rebounder/steal/block player who was a poor defender?)


Put it this way, if Red Auerbach was sitting at a table with Dean Smith and John Wooden and they started talking about defense do you think they are going to talk about "Defensive win shared" statistics? Lol, please. That's internet statboy talk. Anyone who knows the game of basketball wouldn't resort to this.

Just because they didn't talk about it back in the day doesn't mean it's a poor stat. Do you think that the great coaches in baseball talked about on-base percentage, VORP, or any number of advanced metrics? Of course not. That doesn't mean they are bad statistics though; many GM's/coaches use those statistics today in baseball.

It's a fallacious argument. It's akin to saying, "We're going to let women vote? Can you imagine George Washington, John Adams and Benjamin Franklin talking about that?

[ElNono]

America, eatin' my lunch from a single bowl in my parents basement, where I'm livin'. Happy Birthday, I'm forty-three.

Don't want to waste those precious calories...chewin'. Jesus come move my jaw for me, help me get my sloppy food down my throat.

[z0sa]

It's a fallacious argument. It's akin to saying, "We're going to let women vote? Can you imagine George Washington, John Adams and Benjamin Franklin talking about that?

:lol :tu

Of course, this argument doesn't include (or ignores) the obvious fact that none of us are all-time great basketball minds (as much as h2b deludes himself into thinking he is) at a round table with years and years of pro experience with pro players first hand. Although considering 2b has overlooked that, maybe it's not so obvious...

[history2b]

You realize, of course, this is a compliment.

Thank you.



You, in your shortness of rationality, fail to understand that shouldering a huge load on offense tires you out. Shouldering the load on both ends is definitely worthy of consideration and is definitely a factor. Conversely, a second factor is the concept Rodman was focused only on defense and rebounding, and never was an offensive option.

Tim had to do much, much more than Rodman on the basketball court.

You fail.


No you twit, it's not that I don't understand what you were trying to rationalize, it is that the concept is absurd.

Lets pretend for a second that defense was quantitative...

Lets say Tim Duncan overall is a 89 defensively and Dennis Rodman is a 91. Your rationalization is that 89 is actually higher than 91 because Duncan shoulders more responsibility on offense.

You really don't understand how stupid that is?

[z0sa]

Defensive isn't quantitative, though, obviously. It's the hardest thing to quantify in basketball, in fact.

Additionally, I never based my argument on that - it's just one part. Reading comprehension check.

[history2b]

Great! Now we're getting somewhere. Now, let's see where you go with this opening statement.



Ok, so you've stated that Defensive Win Shares agrees with your contention that Bill Russell was a great defender, but you still think Defensive Win Shares are a dumb stat. Let's read on. (Also, it's not "my" statistic. I would be making alot more money if I came up with it.)



Fair enough. What defenders in particular are glaring deficiencies in Defensive Win Shares? Do you think that other statistics have examples that might point to a flawed reasoning behind them? (For instance, has there ever been a good rebounder/steal/block player who was a poor defender?)



Just because they didn't talk about it back in the day doesn't mean it's a poor stat. Do you think that the great coaches in baseball talked about on-base percentage, VORP, or any number of advanced metrics? Of course not. That doesn't mean they are bad statistics though; many GM's/coaches use those statistics today in baseball.

It's a fallacious argument. It's akin to saying, "We're going to let women vote? Can you imagine George Washington, John Adams and Benjamin Franklin talking about that?

Lol what a moronic analogy. And typical of a advanced stats geek moron.

Perhaps you'd like to share how the game of basketball has evolved in the last 20 years to involve more people by utilizing more statistics.

I love when people who aren't smart make stupid analogies that have no logical foundation, lol.

Coaches talk about the game from a fundamental perspective, one of deep understanding of what individual players want to achieve singularly and as a unit. Stats attempt to measure these things but will never ever ever in a million years do so conclusively. Far too many intangible factors.

Take the coaches from today; Larry Brown, Pop and Phil... according to you they are talking about advanced stats like Defensive win shared in order to arrive at their conclusions. If you or anyone actually believes that, lol, I feel sorry for you.

[z0sa]

I think I'm an actual employee in the NBA.

[ElNono]

LOL once a wingman, always a wingman
LOL dumb, blind and stupid

[history2b]

Defensive isn't quantitative, though, obviously. It's the hardest thing to quantify in basketball, in fact.

Additionally, I never based my argument on that - it's just one part. Reading comprehension check.


Of course it isn't, which is why I said "pretend for a minute" as a hypothetical situation to highlight what you were attempting to rationalize.

And you are wrong to say "I never based my argument on that." You did. It was one of two parts. You could have said "I never based my argument entirely on that" and that would be accurate. Be accurate.

Here is your quote:

"...but factoring in help and the fact Tim always had a huge load on offense as well, it's pretty obvious who the answer is."

"Factoring in help" and "Tim had a huge load on offense" = "pretty obvious who the answer is...

Obvious. Something that is clear and without any real consideration? Because of "help" and "a huge offensive load."

Absolute failure.

[tbonewalker]

You, in your shortness of rationality, fail to understand that shouldering a huge load on offense tires you out. Shouldering the load on both ends is definitely worthy of consideration and is definitely a factor. Conversely, a second factor is the concept Rodman was focused only on defense and rebounding, and never was an offensive option.

Tim had to do much, much more than Rodman on the basketball court.



You, in fools paradise (aka Spur fandom), fail at being able to objectively evaluate/compare defensive talents of basketball players because you have the Timmy thong riding above your shoulders.

:flag::flag::flag:http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:n7irt89I86IJ5M:http://www.amcgltd.com/archives/thong2.jpg&t=1:flag::flag::flag:



If you could relieve the thong straps from your shoulder and take the Spur homer goggles off, you might see the topic is Better Defender. Having to carry a load on the other side of the ball does not make a player a better defender.

Your logic is completely flawed. Your unhealthy affinity for everything Spurs is what gets in the way of you understanding how your logic is flawed.

"Huhh huhh.. snort... listen to me reasoning... Me thinks Tim Duncan better defensive backsetbawl pwayer becwoz.. snort... he play good offense."

"Shouldering the load on offense" has absolutely nothing to do with who is the better defender between Rodman and Duncan.

It is very telling when Spur fans can't come up with any better reasoning behind pumping their daddy Duncan up than this junk.

[history2b]

Duncan is not even recognized as a great defensive stopper. In fact, he was great at nothing. He was just a good solid player for 8-10 years.

EXACTLY.

This is what I've been saying for freakin' years. Does nothing exceptionally. Nothing.

He's that solid B average guy at almost everything but did not well. All of the true great ones did at least 1 thing really well.

Lakaluva, I am glad you are on this board to help me maintain some semblance of balance to these fuckin homers' irritating delusions.

[tbonewalker]

Just think about this for a sec.

Is he a great shot blocker? No
Is he a great scorer? No
Is he a great FT shoter? No
Is he a great rebounder? No
Is he a great defender? No, in fact he was usually protected and avoided guarding the other teams great big man.
Is he great at making his teammates better? No

What's the argument here?


LOL, well said. The only arguments are coming from the Duncan fanboy camp.

Should I compile a list of all their reasons why they think Duncan was a better defender than Rodman? It would be hilarious

[z0sa]

Of course it isn't, which is why I said "pretend for a minute" as a hypothetical situation to highlight what you were attempting to rationalize.

You can't pretend for a minute about something that's impossible to quantify.

There is no way one can pretend "Tim is a 91 and Rodman is an 89", or whatever you said. That's actually, one of the most retarded things ever said on these here interwebs.


And you are wrong to say "I never based my argument on that."

No, I wasn't. Reading comprehension, your biggest foe. :lol


"Factoring in help" and "Tim had a huge load on offense" = "pretty obvious who the answer is...

:lmao :lmao That's not my whole post, dumbass. :lmao :lmao

Only idiots would think carrying the load on offense has no effect on your defense. So, you and tbone. :lol

[history2b]

just think about this for a sec.

Is he a great shot blocker? No
is he a great scorer? No
is he a great ft shoter? No
is he a great rebounder? No
is he a great defender? No, in fact he was usually protected and avoided guarding the other teams great big man.
Is he great at making his teammates better? No

what's the argument here?



hal-lel-u-jah!!

[ohmwrecker]

If you could relieve the thong straps from your shoulder and take the Spur homer goggles off, you might see the topic is Better Defender. Having to carry a load on the other side of the ball does not make a player a better defender.

Your logic is completely flawed.

Isn't the whole subject flawed? Putting aside the obvious anti-Spurs agenda for a minute . . . the comparison is flawed. You just admitted as much . . . on the thread you started.

At least you can start threads . . .

[z0sa]

Just think about this for a sec.

Is he a great shot blocker? No
Is he a great scorer? No
Is he a great FT shoter? No
Is he a great rebounder? No
Is he a great defender? No, in fact he was usually protected and avoided guarding the other teams great big man.
Is he great at making his teammates better? No

What's the argument here?

:rollin @ how quick tbone and 2b slurpied this inaccurate shit post. "Logic" escapes all 3 of you quite easily.

[history2b]

You can't pretend for a minute about something that's impossible to quantify.

There is no way one can pretend "Tim is a 91 and Rodman is an 89", or whatever you said. That's actually, one of the most retarded things ever said on these here interwebs.



No, I wasn't. Reading comprehension, your biggest foe. :lol



:lmao :lmao That's not my whole post, dumbass. :lmao :lmao

Only an idiot would think carrying the load on offense has no effect on your defense. So, you and tbone. :lol


Oh boy, we got an exceptionally dumb one here.

You could have said "I never based my argument ---->entirely<---- on that" and that would be accurate. Please be accurate.

Lol, you don't even understand what you wrote.

And for the record the question was never whether or not shouldering more of the offensive load affects your defense. I think most people understand that it does.

The question is whether that means your defense should be considered superior to someone elses based on this factor. I say no and that is the objection that eludes your brain.

[ohmwrecker]

What they'll come back with is, "oh, but in limited minutes... yada yada yada.".

Pretty sure this is more of a career discussion, but good try there, spanky.

[tbonewalker]

Nice to see loincloth and history still have a hard on for Duncan and anything Spurs. Hilarity.

Duncan has been a better defender in every way you can measure it, including the "eye test". The only part of Rodman's game I give him a nod would be perimeter defense. Protecting the paint and the rim, which has the most effect on the game is where the comparision's end. Rodman wasn't on the same level as Duncan.

http://fc02.deviantart.com/fs5/i/2005/131/f/a/Crying____by_Hahnsel.jpg

[z0sa]

. And for the record the question was never whether or not shouldering more of the offensive load affects your defense. I think most people understand that it does.

LOL @ you ceding it graciously now.

Now we can move onto the second part where I make you my bitch once again for perhaps the 30th or 40th time total. Answer me this hypothetical (a real one, unlike the fantastical unrealistic one you laughably attempted):

Player A is the focal point of their offense and expels at least 50% of their energy on that side of the floor.

Player B rarely touches the ball and expels 10% of his energy on offense.

Do you hold both to the same standard on defense? A simple yes or no will suffice - either way you're a dumbass.

[history2b]

LOL @ you ceding it graciously now.

Now we can move onto the second part where I make you my bitch once again for perhaps the 30th or 40th time total. Answer me this hypothetical (a real one, unlike the fantastical unrealistic one you laughably attempted):

Player A is the focal point of their offense and expels at least 50% of their energy on that side of the floor.

Player B rarely touches the ball and expels 10% of his energy on offense.

Do you hold both to the same standard on defense? A simple yes or no will suffice - either way you're a dumbass.


Re-explaining what you failed to comprehend is not "conceding" lol.

You can't be this dumb... No way. I don't believe it.

[tbonewalker]

Wow, History2b, you have this z0sa chick pegged.

Exceptionally dumb, indeed. I'm beginning to see that 90% of Spur fans are delusional fans that began watching in June of 99, then you have the 10% exceptions.

I used to think the exceptions were the smart ones (even though I had never encountered one, I held hope) but now I'm beginning to see that the 10% are just the exceptionally dumb ones.

[tbonewalker]

You can't be this dumb... No way. I don't believe it.

He's in the 10 percent.

[LnGrrrR]

Lol what a moronic analogy. And typical of a advanced stats geek moron.

That's an ad hominem fallacy. You're attacking me, instead of the argument. Your previous argument that the statistics are flawed using certain players as examples is a decent one, and might have merit. Your argument that Defensive Win Shares are dumb because they are for "nerds" and you can't picture old coaches using them (because, uhm, they didn't exist back then) is laughable.


Perhaps you'd like to share how the game of basketball has evolved in the last 20 years to involve more people by utilizing more statistics.

Don't feel the need to make that argument, since it has no bearing.


I love when people who aren't smart make stupid analogies that have no logical foundation, lol.

Another ad hominem fallacy. You're not very good at this debating thing.


Coaches talk about the game from a fundamental perspective, one of deep understanding of what individual players want to achieve singularly and as a unit. Stats attempt to measure these things but will never ever ever in a million years do so conclusively. Far too many intangible factors.

So why are the statistics that you cite (rebounding) more important/better than the statistics others cite (defensive win shares)? If you're using something other than statistics


Take the coaches from today; Larry Brown, Pop and Phil... according to you they are talking about advanced stats like Defensive win shared in order to arrive at their conclusions. If you or anyone actually believes that, lol, I feel sorry for you.

Actually, I never said that Larry Brown, Pop and Phil are talking about Defensive Win Shares. They might be though. Do you have something to prove that they aren't, other than your beliefs?

[midnightpulp]

Just think about this for a sec.

Is he a great shot blocker? No
Is he a great rebounder? No
Is he a great shooter? No
Is he a great FT shooter? No
Is he a great defender? No, in fact he was usually protected and avoided guarding the other teams great perimeter player.
Is he great at making his teammates better? No

What's the argument here?

Nice analysis of Kobe Bryant, Luva. :tu

[history2b]

Hakeem, who was a much better player than Duncan I might add never made up such excuses for himself.

MJ never made up such excuses.

Yet, both of those guys were more of the focal point on offense than Duncan was. Duncan has been playing alongside a Big three for some time now. Before that, he had DRob. He never was the focal point of shit, which is why Parker won the finals MVP while Duncan was still in his prime. If it hadn't been for Manu ( who has been the Spurs best all around player for some time now) coming off the bench when he should have been starting, Duncan's numbers would look even more average when compared to other greats than they already do.


Stop speaking the truth Luva, it's too much for one brain in one day.

This numb nut doesn't understand that I was never conceptually objecting to what he inferred; it was always a matter of whether it logically held up. It does not.

Is Duncan a better overall player than Rodman? Sure. That's when you factor the offense. That should be obvious.

But when we're talking exclusively about defensive abilities and a Dildo dipping Duncan douche rationalizes Duncan's heavier offensive load means his defense is actually more worthy somehow.

[history2b]

That's an ad hominem fallacy. You're attacking me, instead of the argument. Your previous argument that the statistics are flawed using certain players as examples is a decent one, and might have merit. Your argument that Defensive Win Shares are dumb because they are for "nerds" and you can't picture old coaches using them (because, uhm, they didn't exist back then) is laughable.



Don't feel the need to make that argument, since it has no bearing.



Another ad hominem fallacy. You're not very good at this debating thing.



So why are the statistics that you cite (rebounding) more important/better than the statistics others cite (defensive win shares)? If you're using something other than statistics



Actually, I never said that Larry Brown, Pop and Phil are talking about Defensive Win Shares. They might be though. Do you have something to prove that they aren't, other than your beliefs?


I'm just pointing out how absurd and off base your analogy is. Do I really want to construct a 2-3 paragraph analysis breaking down the absurdity to correlate Washington politics to modern day politics and the absence of advanced stats in basketball of yesteryear and basketball today. No. I choose to just call you an idiot for doing it. Just stick to basketball and we'll be ok.

As for why statistics like rebounds (which I never cited once btw) and scoring for that matter "count" whereas "defensive wins shared" do not is pretty obvious.

A rebound is a tangible measure of something that took place on the floor, a loose ball retained after a missed shot attempt.

Your advanced stat is not measured in a tangible way. It is based on a formula.

[z0sa]

Re-explaining what you failed to comprehend is not "conceding" lol.

You ceded the point I made, whether you realize it or not.

Now answer the question with a "Yes" or "no" so we can further specify which camp of stupidity you're in.

as for tbone calling me a chick ... he must be used to referencing his faggot lovers (luva, 2b, koolaid?) as such. I'm afraid I don't swing that way, guy.

[z0sa]

Your advanced stat is not measured in a tangible way. It is based on a formula.

Umm, that formula is based on the very stats you agree are tangible.

Either dispute, specifically, which players the advanced metrics have trouble with, and why, and how those players, and furthermore the shortcomings of the metric they expose, are relevant to this discussion, or STFU already.

[z0sa]

Hakeem, who was a much better player than Duncan I might add never made up such excuses for himself.

MJ never made up such excuses.

Yet, both of those guys were more of the focal point on offense than Duncan was. Duncan has been playing alongside a Big three for some time now. Before that, he had DRob. He never was the focal point of shit, which is why Parker won the finals MVP while Duncan was still in his prime. If it hadn't been for Manu ( who has been the Spurs best all around player for some time now) coming off the bench when he should have been starting, Duncan's numbers would look even more average when compared to other greats than they already do.

:lol wtf are you rambling about?

No one made an excuse for Duncan, faggot. No one (IE, you) has specified which part of the outrageously long span of time he's been dominating we're even talking here, if you want to start mentioning teammates.

[z0sa]

Ok, let me make this as simple as possible. Rodman could guard player from Hakeem, Barkley, Magic, MJ, Pippen, Drexler, Shaq and Ewing. Can Duncan do that even on his best day?

LOL @ appealing to a hypothetical for your evidence. Tim Duncan never played any of those players in their prime except Shaq, and had multiple dominating performances on both ends against him. Your argument is more shitstained than your dick after a nightcap with Kool's "chocolate pussy".

btw, nice lane change after that last post. Deflection is worth a few troll points.

[z0sa]

:lol completely oblivious to the fact you just proved one point I've been arguing this thread.

Why do you think Tim many times played help D on the opposing best big man? Besides the obvious fact that he is a monstrous help defender, of course?

Foul trouble. Since Tim is the focal point of the offense (#1 or #2 throoughout his entire career to this season), he couldn't afford sitting out long stretches. Our offense needed him too badly to take any risk of ticky tack calls.

Luva FTW.

[ElNono]

Who made Kobe cry? Answer the damn question!

:lmao

[ohmwrecker]

The Spurs.:toast That was a great year for you guys, you should be proud, even though it has nothing to do with this thread.

All of a sudden he gives a shit about the integrity of the thread.

[z0sa]

A better comparison would be Rodman vs. say, Ben Wallace or some other no O role player, not a two way dominant superstar like Tim. It's just apples to oranges completely.

Credit tbonefailure.

[jsandiego]

If the only "legit" stats are ones that aren't based on a formula, then I guess:

1) Duncan's edge in the steals-per-game category indicate perhaps he was a better 1-on-1 & post defender.

2) Duncan's advantage in blocks show he's a better weakside help & dribble-penetration defender.

3) Rodman's advantage in rebounds indicates he's a better rebounder.

Rodman's 14-year career:
1st Team All-Defense: 7
2nd Team All-Defense: 1
Rodman named a top defender in 8 of his 14 seasons.

Duncan's 13-year career:
1st Team All-Defense: 8
2nd Team All-Defense: 5
Duncan named a top defender in EVERY SINGLE ONE of his 13 seasons.

[ohmwrecker]

A better comparison would be Rodman vs. say, Ben Wallace or some other no O role player, not a two way dominant superstar like Tim. It's just apples to oranges completely.

Credit tbonefailure.

That's why it's not a legit argument. It's an agenda driven flimflam.

[tbonewalker]

:lol completely oblivious to the fact you just proved one point I've been arguing this thread.

Why do you think Tim many times played help D on the opposing best big man? Besides the obvious fact that he is a monstrous help defender, of course?

Foul trouble. Since Tim is the focal point of the offense (#1 or #2 throoughout his entire career to this season), he couldn't afford sitting out long stretches. Our offense needed him too badly to take any risk of ticky tack calls.

Luva FTW.


Wow, you just don't get it. You are truly the 10% exception.

Now you try to claim Duncan is the better defender because foul trouble? Absolutely pathetic.

Let me get this straight, ol lady...



"Duncan is a better defender than Rodman because of foul trouble."

"Duncan is a better defender than Rodman because he couldn't afford to sit out for long stretches."

"Duncan is a better defender than Rodman because he didn't/coudln't guard the opposing teams best big man consistently."

"Duncan is a better defender than Rodman because he couldn't pick up ticky-tack fouls...his offense needed him badly."

:lmao

[tbonewalker]

A better comparison would be Rodman vs. say, Ben Wallace or some other no O role player, not a two way dominant superstar like Tim. It's just apples to oranges completely.

Credit tbonefailure.


LMAO!!!

It's a better comparison FOR YOU because it doesn't involve putting another player above your daddy Duncan. Good job exposing yourself as the #2 Duncan fanboy of the board.

You are too easy, ladybug.

[z0sa]

I accept your omission of defeat.

lol

[tbonewalker]

lol

"Duncan is a better defender than Rodman because of foul trouble."

"Duncan is a better defender than Rodman because he couldn't afford to sit out for long stretches."

"Duncan is a better defender than Rodman because he didn't/coudln't guard the opposing teams best big man consistently."

"Duncan is a better defender than Rodman because he couldn't pick up ticky-tack fouls...his offense needed him badly."




Can you explain yourself?

[LnGrrrR]

I'm just pointing out how absurd and off base your analogy is. Do I really want to construct a 2-3 paragraph analysis breaking down the absurdity to correlate Washington politics to modern day politics and the absence of advanced stats in basketball of yesteryear and basketball today. No. I choose to just call you an idiot for doing it. Just stick to basketball and we'll be ok.

I'm sorry, your original idea that because Red Auerbach didn't talk about Defensive Win Shares made it a stupid statistic was so asinine that I had trouble coming up with an equally retarded example. Forgive me.


As for why statistics like rebounds (which I never cited once btw) and scoring for that matter "count" whereas "defensive wins shared" do not is pretty obvious.

Feel free to explain why. "It's pretty obvious" is not a strong argument.


A rebound is a tangible measure of something that took place on the floor, a loose ball retained after a missed shot attempt.

Your advanced stat is not measured in a tangible way. It is based on a formula.

Fair enough. So, we are only counting statistics that are directly measurable then. Are we only going by individual statistics as well? (For instance, if Team A lowers the amount of points Team B scores by an average of 10 pts when Player X is in, do you count that?)

Also, I don't see how you can discount Defensive Win Shares as something "not mentioned in a tangible way" without also noting that man-to-man defense is not measured in a tangible way either.

Finally, just because a stat is based off a formula doesn't necessarily make it a poor stat. You'll need better evidence for this. What happened to your argument that certain players have Defensive Win Shares that don't seem to match up? That point seemed stronger. (I will say that statistics like rebounds/steals/etc are certainly easier to see the effect of.)

[z0sa]

LMAO!!!

It's a better comparison FOR YOU because it doesn't involve putting another player above your daddy Duncan.

Incorrect. Rodman certainly has a debatable case. Yet it's a foolish comparison - he was a defensive roleplayer who shouldered little if any load offensively.

You're a fool.

It's a better comparison for several reasons listed throughout this thread. Some by me, some by others.

Stick to the little girl chat when you're in the womens' with luva and 2b.

[tbonewalker]

I'm sorry, your original idea that because Red Auerbach didn't talk about Defensive Win Shares made it a stupid statistic was so asinine that I had trouble coming up with an equally retarded example. Forgive me.



Feel free to explain why. "It's pretty obvious" is not a strong argument.



Fair enough. So, we are only counting statistics that are directly measurable then. Are we only going by individual statistics as well? (For instance, if Team A lowers the amount of points Team B scores by an average of 10 pts when Player X is in, do you count that?)

Also, I don't see how you can discount Defensive Win Shares as something "not mentioned in a tangible way" without also noting that man-to-man defense is not measured in a tangible way either.

Finally, just because a stat is based off a formula doesn't necessarily make it a poor stat. You'll need better evidence for this. What happened to your argument that certain players have Defensive Win Shares that don't seem to match up? That point seemed stronger. (I will say that statistics like rebounds/steals/etc are certainly easier to see the effect of.)


Dude, just shot your pie hole about Defensive Win Shares. You make yourself out to be more of an advanced statgeek that knows next to nothing about the game.

You have probably never stepped foot on a court with men.

[z0sa]

Dude, just shot your pie hole about Defensive Win Shares. You make yourself out to be more of an advanced statgeek that knows next to nothing about the game.

You have probably never stepped foot on a court with men.

Do you have any actual argument against it (besides ad hominem attacks) or is it the same pansy, runaway from any opposition in thought, white flag waving bullshit for you, too?

[z0sa]

I think I actual know what John Wooden, Red Auerbach, or any other NBA/pro coach would say about advanced metrics.

[LnGrrrR]

Dude, just shot your pie hole about Defensive Win Shares. You make yourself out to be more of an advanced statgeek that knows next to nothing about the game.

You have probably never stepped foot on a court with men.

I accept your admission of failure. :toast You've resorted to ad hominem attacks with no actual rebuttal. Congratulations.

Also, if you had read upthread, I said I agreed that Rodman was a bit better than Duncan. But I guess the idea that someone who agreed with you might actually call you on all the bullshit suppositions you put into your argument didn't process.

[tbonewalker]

Incorrect. Rodman certainly has a debatable case. Yet it's a foolish comparison - he was a defensive roleplayer who shouldered little if any load offensively.

You're a fool.

It's a better comparison for several reasons listed throughout this thread. Some by me, some by others.

Stick to the little girl chat when you're in the womens' with luva and 2b.


No, it's completely accurate.

You begging me to create a new thread comparing Rodman to Ben Wallace is a concession of defeat among other things.

You are exposing yourself more and more as a Duncan fanboy that can't stand to speak up for the TRUTH if it means putting somebody else over Duncan.

It wouldn't even matter if we were debating who was better at chewing gum, you would have a problem putting anybody over Duncan at anything.

He's your man.

[z0sa]

No, it's completely accurate.

You begging me to create a new thread comparing Rodman to Ben Wallace is a concession of defeat among other things.

You are exposing yourself more and more as a Duncan fanboy that can't stand to speak up for the TRUTH if it means putting somebody else over Duncan.

It wouldn't even matter if we were debating who was better at chewing gum, you would have a problem putting anybody over Duncan at anything.

He's your man.

:lol no, he's YOUR man. Tim Duncan's untouchable legacy haunts you and 2b, obviously.

I already suggested a psychiatrist for this obsession to 2b. Maybe you two can have duel sessions some time and cry about Tim together to someone else who doesn't give a shit but at least gets paid?

[jsandiego]

The first 4-5 years, Rodman came off the bench, and his last two years he only played 12/24 games. Keep reaching.
Not reaching at all. Rodman is one of the best rebounders to ever lace them up. But no one in the history of the NBA has the defensive longevity of Duncan.

This should be a thread about defensive specialists. Go compare Rodman to Bowen, Ben Wallace, or Mark Eaton.

To me, I view Rodman as the frontcourt counterpart to Bruce Bowen. Bowen often played the SF, but routinely guarded the perimeter guards on defense, and was an absolute PEST, just as Rodman was to opposing big men. When you're guarding the perimeter, you want a 1-on-1 pest defender. When you're down low, you love a pest defender, but you also want a big man that controls the paint.

Rodman's a great athlete and world-class defender, but he wasn't an intimidating shot-blocker that deterred the dribble penetration. The Duncan's, Robinsons, Olajuwons, and Howards of the world are great 1-on-1 defenders, but they also anchor the defense by controlling the paint. Unless you're Ben Wallace, you have to be 6'10" or taller to do that; but that just wasn't in the realm of Rodman's role or skill-set.

[tbonewalker]

I accept your admission of failure. :toast You've resorted to ad hominem attacks with no actual rebuttal. Congratulations.

Also, if you had read upthread, I said I agreed that Rodman was a bit better than Duncan. But I guess the idea that someone who agreed with you might actually call you on all the bullshit suppositions you put into your argument didn't process.

I can resort to ad hominem attacks all I want now as the war (debate) is over, whether or not you agreed with me. When the Nazi's lost the war, did the Russians/American's simply back out of their country and let all of the supporters off scott-free? No. They burned and destroyed buildings and raped widows.

Did they give a flying frisbee what the supporters thought?

The Spurs lost the war in 08 and their grave has been repeatedly pee'd and poo'd on by their former enemies ever since. I have no problem participating in this ongoing grave party.

[LnGrrrR]

I can resort to ad hominem attacks all I want now as the war (debate) is over, whether or not you agreed with me. When the Nazi's lost the war, did the Russians/American's simply back out of their country and let all of the supporters off scott-free? No. They burned and destroyed buildings and raped widows.

Nice non-sequitur.


The Spurs lost the war in 08 and their grave has been repeatedly pee'd and poo'd on by their former enemies ever since. I have no problem participating in this ongoing grave party.

Nice to see you admit your trolling in this thread, troll.

[z0sa]

:lol Only a truly stupid person would readily associate themselves with grave defiling.

Oh, and that "corpse" in the grave is currently #1 in the League - over your Lakers.

Can you taste the dirt?

[LnGrrrR]

I should've figured a homer Lakerfan couldn't intelligently debate.

[Zelophehad]

Dennis Rodman is by far a better defender than anyone who's ever played for the Lakers tbh.

[ElNono]

I should've figured a homer Lakerfan couldn't intelligently debate.

lol intelligent Lakerfan oxymoron
lol debate

[ElNono]

The Spurs.:toast That was a great year for you guys, you should be proud, even though it has nothing to do with this thread.

lol lakerfan answering my question on a troll thread

[Zelophehad]

Which Laker does lakaluva or tbonewhatever think was a better defender than Rodman?

[LnGrrrR]

What's funny is that his ultimate reason for not liking Defensive Win Shares was because a) they weren't tangible (although they are based off tangible statistics) and b) Red Auerbach/Phil Jackson didn't talk about them (to his knowledge).

[Veterinarian]

lol @ that newb Zelo trying to reason with lakaluva. That paki can't reason, all he can do is troll spurfans with sub 80 IQs.

[HarlemHeat37]

The worst posters are the posters that will shoot down advanced stats or whatever, with their only counter-argument being, "advanced stats HAHA! you don't know anything about the game!"..

Posters like tbonewalker and history2b have absolutely no ability to argue or back up their points..all their arguments are unquantifiable and they don't provide any evidence to prove their arguments..I would absolutely love to watch either of these guys play basketball, considering how much they talk about "the game"..if either of you guys are ever in NY, private msg me, please:lol..

As for advanced stats, none of them can be used as primary arguments(just like anything else), stats like PER are over-used and are pretty weak, but they provide some evidence and give a different view..

It's not a surprise that the NBA's front offices are starting to use advanced stats more often as they expand, most teams are hiring advanced stats guys to put on the payroll, as even Gregg Popovich said, just last week..

[Cry Havoc]

:lol LnGrrrR and Jamstone wrecking this thread

[Koolaid_Man]

:lol LnGrrrR and Jamstone wrecking this thread


Only thing Lngrrr wrecking is his right hand...advanced stat guy is like the guy who takes Extenze...

They're usually the guys that say my dick may not be big as yours but...or my balls are not that small compared to my sons...or when my dick is hard I can compete with you flaccid...they're the guys that won't watch porn with their ladies because they have big penis envy.....that's all you need to know about advanced stat guy...:lol

[BRHornet45]

Rodman by far. not even close

[BoricuaCJA]

The first 4-5 years, Rodman came off the bench, and his last two years he only played 12/24 games. Keep reaching.
and who's fault is that?

[LnGrrrR]

Only thing Lngrrr wrecking is his right hand...advanced stat guy is like the guy who takes Extenze...

They're usually the guys that say my dick may not be big as yours but...or my balls are not that small compared to my sons...or when my dick is hard I can compete with you flaccid...they're the guys that won't watch porn with their ladies because they have big penis envy.....that's all you need to know about advanced stat guy...:lol

Except I never actually defended Defensive Win Shares. I didn't even have to get to that point. Dumbasses couldn't even defend why they thought DWS were "stupid".

Of course, I don't expect you to understand advanced stats when you can't even write a proper sentence.

[jsandiego]

I guess their strategy is to comment on enough different threads to bury this on page 2 so no one will call them out on their lack of analysis?

Rebounding
Rodman > Duncan

Everything else
Duncan > Rodman

[nkdlunch]

Rebounding
Rodman > Duncan

Everything else
Duncan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rodman

fixed

[jsandiego]

fixed
:toast thanks

[BigTex342006]

Everyone cites Rodman's superior rebounding over Duncan, but actually where it counts the most, the playoffs, Duncan outrebounded Rodman.

Even when you adjust for per 36, the rebounding is almost the same, which basically means Rodman's main fortay, rebounding, went down in the playoffs, while Duncan's has always gone up.

You have to go back a long way to find a player that rebounded more than Duncan in the 03 finals or had more blocks per game.

Again, the number one job of an NBA "big" defensively, is rim protection. Duncan blocked over 5 shots a game in 03, and almost 3 a game for 170 playoff games.

Not one GM would have taken Rodman over Duncan, even if you ignore Duncan's offensively prowess. Elite 7' foot dominant bigs are just too rare.

Hell Chicago would have traded Rodman for Duncan in a second had they played at the same time....

[rickross]

lmao at dis thread. Wyrm dont hold a candle to duncan.

[poop]

its apparently fashionable right now to try to downgrade tim.

combine this with the tendency to over-inflate retired/old players.

Rodman was a great defender when he wanted to be. which was about 40-60% of the time. duncan was and is a great defender 100% of the time. and duncan in his early years was so vastly superior to rodman its not even funny

[tbonewalker]

Everyone cites Rodman's superior rebounding over Duncan, but actually where it counts the most, the playoffs, Duncan outrebounded Rodman.

Even when you adjust for per 36, the rebounding is almost the same, which basically means Rodman's main fortay, rebounding, went down in the playoffs, while Duncan's has always gone up.

You have to go back a long way to find a player that rebounded more than Duncan in the 03 finals or had more blocks per game.

Again, the number one job of an NBA "big" defensively, is rim protection. Duncan blocked over 5 shots a game in 03, and almost 3 a game for 170 playoff games.

Not one GM would have taken Rodman over Duncan, even if you ignore Duncan's offensively prowess. Elite 7' foot dominant bigs are just too rare.

Hell Chicago would have traded Rodman for Duncan in a second had they played at the same time....


Absolutely pathetic statgeek. Per 36? LMAO!!!!

[poop]

tboner, keep trying.

[BigTex342006]

Absolutely pathetic statgeek. Per 36? LMAO!!!!




Don't want to use Per 36?? That's fine. Lets look at the facts then shall we?? What is more important, regular season or playoffs??

(seeing how you think Karl Malone was greater than Duncan - you probably vote for regular season)

Playoff stats:

Rodman - 169 gms 6.4 pts 9.9 rbs 1.2 asts .6 blks
Duncan - 170 gms 23.0 pts 12.4 rbs 3.5 asts 2.6 blks

Rodman - 8 All D Top 5 voting for DPOY - 7
Duncan - 13 All D Top 5 voting for DPOY - 7

Winning DPOY is a nice accolade for Rodman, it doesn't make him the better defender.....unless you would consider Artest better than Duncan?? OR even Camby??

These are facts private pile. What do you have that is not just your 'opinion'??

[LnGrrrR]

Absolutely pathetic statgeek. Per 36? LMAO!!!!

Shitty troll is shitty troll.

[jsandiego]

Absolutely pathetic statgeek. Per 36? LMAO!!!!
lather, rinse, repeat.. your M.O. is getting kinda old

[tbonewalker]

Tim Duncan can't even guard an out of shape Bynum. He fell off as a good defender years ago. He's merely serviceable now on that end. He's still above average on the other end because of his experience.

Rodman was an elite defender from Day 1 to his last game. Duncan could never dream of keeping up such defensive play.

[ElNono]

lol ESPN forums

[midnightpulp]

lol ESPN forums

:lol

[tbonewalker]

You guys can't hang with me on ESPN either. I never lose, ladies.

Always one or two steps ahead of you paddie waddies.

[midnightpulp]

You guys can't hang with me on ESPN either. I never lose, ladies.

Always one or two steps ahead of you paddie waddies.

Yeah, we really can't hang with your shitty trolling that consists of retarded shit like making a thread declaring "Blake" is a better player than Tony Parker, only to reveal, after a few replies, that "Blake" is Blake Griffin and not Steve Blake.

How fuckin clever. :sleep

[tbonewalker]

Blake Griffin is a better basketball player than Tony Parker any day of the week and twice on Sunday. If you don't agree, you probably don't watch basketball. You are too busy trolling message boards and getting yanked around by Laker trolls.

You are probably the easiest Spur fan of all on these boards.

[LnGrrrR]

Tim Duncan can't even guard an out of shape Bynum. He fell off as a good defender years ago. He's merely serviceable now on that end. He's still above average on the other end because of his experience.

Rodman was an elite defender from Day 1 to his last game. Duncan could never dream of keeping up such defensive play.

Shitty troll is shitty troll.

[LnGrrrR]

Blake Griffin is a better basketball player than Tony Parker any day of the week and twice on Sunday. If you don't agree, you probably don't watch basketball. You are too busy trolling message boards and getting yanked around by Laker trolls.

You are probably the easiest Spur fan of all on these boards.

Shitty troll is shitty troll.

[midnightpulp]

Blake Griffin is a better basketball player than Tony Parker any day of the week and twice on Sunday. If you don't agree, you probably don't watch basketball. You are too busy trolling message boards and getting yanked around by Laker trolls.

You are probably the easiest Spur fan of all on these boards.

I watch a lot of basketball. More than 17 years worth, actually.

lol 70 year old who's been a Lakers fan for 17 years.

[ElNono]

lol stat geeks

[ElNono]

lol Shaolin

[ElNono]

lol Kung Fu Master

[tbonewalker]

So I've just been informed by the resident "Easy Elaine" that I'm more knowledgable about the game than he is despite watching basketball less years total than him.

Seems Easy Elaine has a learning disability. Can't help him.

MidnightPulp, I'm not 70 yrs old either. Chop that in half and you'll be warmer.

I've got this thread dominated with facts and logic. Nobody has offered up a legitimate response without getting shot down.

[midnightpulp]

So I've just been informed by the resident "Easy Elaine" that I'm more knowledgable about the game than he is despite watching basketball less years total than him.

Seems Easy Elaine has a learning disability. Can't help him.

MidnightPulp, I'm not 70 yrs old either. Chop that in half and you'll be warmer.

I've got this thread dominated with facts and logic.

You ain't close to 35. No 35-40 year old would use weak ass smack like "Easy Elaine." That's old man dialect.

But I believe you've been only watching basketball for 17 years despite being much older. Most transplants from bumfuck towns that have no pro sports teams move out here to pursue their pipedreams of fame and fortune and automatically bandwagon the Lakers.

Lemme guess. You moved out here to become a "musician?"

[LnGrrrR]

I've got this thread dominated with facts and logic. Nobody has offered up a legitimate response without getting shot down.

People who claim victory online are usually losers.

Feel free to explain why Defensive Win Shares are a poor stat.

[ElNono]

lol dominated
lol bitchslapped back to the ESPN forums
lol Shaolin

[tbonewalker]

People who claim victory online are usually losers.

Feel free to explain why Defensive Win Shares are a poor stat.


Excuse me for a second... LMAO!!! :lmao


Ok, did a Boston Celtic fan just ask somebody to explain something to him?

The equivalent of explaining to a mother Grizzly Bear that I'm going to have to take her cubs from under her nose. Or maybe like explaining to a toddler how to have kids. Waste of life and time.

[tbonewalker]

You ain't close to 35. No 35-40 year old would use weak ass smack like "Easy Elaine." That's old man dialect.

But I believe you've been only watching basketball for 17 years despite being much older. Most transplants from bumfuck towns that have no pro sports teams move out here to pursue their pipedreams of fame and fortune and automatically bandwagon the Lakers.

Lemme guess. You moved out here to become a "musician?"


Moved out where? Are you under the impression I've moved somewhere?

Easy Elaine still nipping at my ankles. :lmao

[ElNono]

The equivalent of explaining to a mother Grizzly Bear that I'm going to have to take her cubs from under her nose. Or maybe like explaining to a toddler how to have kids. Waste of life and time.

Sound like you just gave an explanation to a Celtics fan, tbh

[midnightpulp]

:cry I have no answer. But, but, the fact that Rodman repeated and has 5 rings as a roleplayer is an important "stat" to mention when comparing his defense to Tim Duncan!

[midnightpulp]

Moved out where? Are you under the impression I've moved somewhere?

Easy Elaine still nipping at my ankles. :lmao

To LA, or somewhere in California.

Or are you a pathetic asshole who had to bandwagon the Lakers from someplace like Des Moines, Iowa?

[tbonewalker]

To LA, or somewhere in California.

Or are you a pathetic asshole who had to bandwagon the Lakers from someplace like Des Moines, Iowa?


No way. Was born and raised a Laker fan by my father. It's in my blood, bambino.

[tbonewalker]

But nice attempt at getting out from underneath my huge bear paw. You are going nowhere!!

[ElNono]

But nice attempt at getting out from underneath my huge bear paw. You are going nowhere!!

http://knowyourmeme.com/system/icons/5/original/pedobear.jpg?1229148177

[midnightpulp]

No way. Was born and raised a Laker fan by my father. It's in my blood, bambino.

So your father was a bandwagoner, too?

Quite a legacy of fandom you got there :tu

And another clue that you're a bandwagoning fuckstick from some small town hellhole is the fact you've only been to 4 Lakers game at the Staples Center in your life. Most SoCal Lakers fans, even the bandwagoning ones, have been to dozens or more.

[tbonewalker]

Did you miss the part where I said I don't live in LA? Or should I let that slip as you still seem to be reeling from the bear paw to the face? :lmao

[tbonewalker]

Plus, if you must know, my thing is going to away games. I've been to about 15-20 away games just in the past few years with Kobe/Pau. It's fun watching the opposing crowd squirm.

[midnightpulp]

Did you miss the part where I said I don't live in LA? Or should I let that slip as you still seem to be reeling from the bear paw to the face? :lmao

So you're a bandwagoner? Are you from California (although a Northern Californian would have to be considered a bandwagoner, since Northern Californians generally despise the culture and lifestyle of their SoCal counterparts) or aren't you? Simple question.

Keep declaring victory for yourself. I deduced that you are a bandwagoner (at the very least taught to be a bandwagoner by your father) and was correct, until proven otherwise.

[midnightpulp]

Plus, if you must know, my thing is going to away games. I've been to about 15-20 away games just in the past few years with Kobe/Pau. It's fun watching the opposing crowd squirm.

Bingo!

Translation: I live in Portland, Sacramento, etc, and catch the Lakers at my hometown team's arena.

[tbonewalker]

I've been a fan of one team longer than you've been watching basketball, bambino. You became a fan when Duncan got drafted or maybe even in 1999 when the lockout shortened season resulted in a Spurs asterisk title.

I actually met James Worthy at a trading card store as a young chap with my father. Only thing I understood about the Lakers was that they were a basketball team and had golden uniforms. Worthy autographed a polaroid for me and I've been a fan since.

Without my father being a Laker fan and bringing me to meet Worthy, I would have never became your master that I am today.

Blame James. :lmao

[LnGrrrR]

Excuse me for a second... LMAO!!! :lmao


Ok, did a Boston Celtic fan just ask somebody to explain something to him?

The equivalent of explaining to a mother Grizzly Bear that I'm going to have to take her cubs from under her nose. Or maybe like explaining to a toddler how to have kids. Waste of life and time.

Shitty troll is shitty troll.

[tbonewalker]

And you struck out. No on LA, Nope on Portland, and nope on Sacramento.

I catch live Laker games when I can. Usually a handful per season.

[tbonewalker]

Shitty troll is shitty troll.


Because the Lakers sent your beloved Celtics home crying after Game 7?

You still mad?

[LnGrrrR]

No way. Was born and raised a Laker fan by my father. It's in my blood, bambino.

Bambino is a word many LA fans use.

[LnGrrrR]

Because the Lakers sent your beloved Celtics home crying after Game 7?

You still mad?

No, I said you're a shitty troll because you're an obviously shitty troll.

[tbonewalker]

Bambino is a word many LA fans use.

Because there are many Italians in LA? Did you recieve an "edumacation" from Boston or Texas? If so, I'm starting to understand why your brain cells fire up about as good as a car with a banana in the tail pipe.

Try to stay on topic, pal. We've already gone over your silly Defensive Win Shares stat. Take you head out of the stat sheet and watch a game.

[tbonewalker]

No, I said you're a shitty troll because you're an obviously shitty troll.

Because you can't watch a game and critique a players defense without looking past Defensive Win Shares?

You aren't making sense, Boston boy.

[LnGrrrR]

Because you can't watch a game and critique a players defense without looking past Defensive Win Shares?

You aren't making sense, Boston boy.

You're the one who can't even explain why you don't like Defensive Win Shares without using logical fallacies. Bravo.

[LnGrrrR]

Because there are many Italians in LA? Did you recieve an "edumacation" from Boston or Texas? If so, I'm starting to understand why your brain cells fire up about as good as a car with a banana in the tail pipe.

Try to stay on topic, pal. We've already gone over your silly Defensive Win Shares stat. Take you head out of the stat sheet and watch a game.

Actually, you just made fun of it. You never provided a real reason why it's not a good stat. 17 pages and we are still waiting.

Oh, and making fun of someone from Boston with education smack :lol Yeah, it's not like Boston is known for having good schools or anything.

[tbonewalker]

Actually, you just made fun of it. You never provided a real reason why it's not a good stat. 17 pages and we are still waiting.

Oh, and making fun of someone from Boston with education smack :lol Yeah, it's not like Boston is known for having good schools or anything.


That's like saying there's no real reason for the Earth not being flat. I'm not going to waste time explaining to a wild Eagle that it can't fly. It just can.

Your Defensive Win Share stat is flawed. 17 pages of reasons and you still can't hop off the DWS wagon. Is that your only straw?

Rodman > Duncan defensively

Boston has good higher education, not good lower education which I presume you either didn't finish or stopped directly after. Bostons probably know how to peel a potato better than I do, I'll give them that.

[LnGrrrR]

That's like saying there's no real reason for the Earth not being flat. I'm not going to waste time explaining to a wild Eagle that it can't fly. It just can.

Your Defensive Win Share stat is flawed. 17 pages of reasons and you still can't hop off the DWS wagon. Is that your only straw?

Rodman > Duncan defensively

Boston has good higher education, not good lower education which I presume you either didn't finish or stopped directly after. Bostons probably know how to peel a potato better than I do, I'll give them that.

It's flawed because you say so. And it's so obvious but you can't explain. Plus, I already said I thought Rodman was better upthread.

Who needs the education again?

[LnGrrrR]

Of course, if you were educated, you'd probably see how poor your debate skills are.

[BoricuaCJA]

TBone show us a post that YOU posted that proved defensive shares is flawed? Not what other people posted. Every time someone ask you this, you just post bs that doesn't answer the question. Stop evading on answering.

[DMC]

18 goddamned pages of this shit?

Tim Duncan and Dennis Rodman...

The only thing these two have in common is they both played for SA.

Otherwise, no. Rodman great rebounder, good defender, annoying as hell, cool guy.

Duncan, best PF of all time, best player in the league by his 2nd year. Making comparisons between the two is the folly of fools.

Please continue.

[HarlemHeat37]

:lol Not only is tbone unable to back up his argument, as expected, this is the same guy that said Steve Blake is a good defender:lol:lol:lol..

[DMC]

Well this place is a pyramid of trolls, so it's not surprising.

[dirkdirkastan]

Chandler is a better defender than both you mama's ass troll. Willie Wonka just wants acknowledgement that Rodman is a better defender than Duncan. The truth is he put more time into dying his hair and running back and forth to the casino than he did about playing basketball.

[Nathan Explosion]

Rodman was a good defender. No one will dispute that. However, he played with some of the best defensive teams in the league, the Bad Boy Pistons which beat teams up, and alongside Jordan and Pippen, two of the greatest perimeter defensive players to every play.

Tim Duncan was the cornerstone of one of the greatest defensive teams ever, the Spurs of the 00's. He led some of the best defensive teams in NBA history. Rodman can't claim that.

If you want expert opinions, NBA coaches voted Rodman to the All NBA Defensive Team (1st, 2nd or 3rd) 10 times according to his bio on NBA.com.

Duncan has been named to the team EVERY SINGLE YEAR OF HIS CAREER.

Is that a good enough stat for you?