IN THEIR PRIME, which big man was the best?

[Bob Lanier]

McHale was absolutely a big man. The most complete post game in the history of basketball, a good rebounder, and a great defender. Hardly a seven-foot guard like Garnett or Robinson, and far more skilled than Shaq.

But he wasn't better than Shaq, and like everyone else on the list is a shadow of Hakeem's glory.

[DirkAB]

BAkriD, no offense man, but it's not like you're a fountain of information yourself.

You specialize in put downs, calling anyone "homers" or "fools" if they dare disagree that avg. career points decide who is the best.

As I said before, if people want a serious discussion, we need a consensus of:

• What time periods cons ute "Prime" for each big

• What factors determine what is "best"

Of course, we won't ever get consensus on those factors, so this whole debate becomes a pissing contest.

Hey, I know what I call people, and I don't think that Homer is really a put down, it is just something that many fans are. I will admit I do get frustrated with people's bias toward their own team, and I know WTF do I expect from another teams fan site? That is one of my biggest flaws when it comes to being a basketball fan, I'm very critical of my own team, and I guess I expect others to be the same toward their own team.

As far as me calling people idiots and fools, honestly I only do that to spark responses and to get the thread moving, sometimes a thread needs a catalyst. I guess I don't mind playing the asshole in order to get a thread that I find very interesting going. I'm sure plenty of you think that is a crock, but whatever, everytime I've thrown out any kind of insult the thread has really picked up. So don't take offense to my bull .

The insults that I sprinkle in every now and again are nothing compared to the self-serving long-winded condescending rants that whottt goes off on. I've read enough of his posts to figure out that is the guy's shtick, and that he probably really believes it. I don't find it offensive, I find it sad and pathetic.

[whottt]

I'm not self serving and condescending, you're just annoyingly ingorant and unqualified to debate me on this subject...seriously, it's like you are asking for a link to prove the sky is blue...it's that stupid.


I don't mean to be rude about it, but you are ing incredibly stupid on this topic. I am sorry it's just the truth. And I'm not gonna go do a bunch of googling because you are ing stupid...do it yourself, and stop digging the hole even deeper. IT's not that I am full of here, it's that you are stupid. Really stupid, deeply stupid, seriously stupid and you are asking for proof of commonly known, easily verifiable stuff, known stuff. You are the stupid one, it's you that is stupid, you are the one that is reeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaallllllly ing stupid here. I can't and won't help you here. Because not only are you stupid, you were a while you were being stupid.


Look at my registration date, look at the name of the board, look at my team, then take a look at yourself...and realize which one of the two of us is likely to be the less informed on this topic. And the more open your mouth about it, the stupider you get.; Realize it, then shut up and then go googling.

[baseline bum]

And don't act like he didn't have any talent around him, AJ, Rodman, Del Negro and company were a pretty damn good supporting cast.

You gotta be kidding me. AJ was a good supporting guy, very flawed, but still a solid player.

Del Negro was one of the most worthless players the Spurs ever had. He could never even get into a team's rotation once the Spurs let him walk in 99. He never got any minutes in Milwaukee or Phoenix after. Del Negro was the kind of guy who could put up 18 on the Hawks in February, but anytime a game meant anything he was a complete no-show.

Rodman was a huge part of the Spurs blowing the '95 WCF. Did you watch that series? Rodman would get pissed, go sit on the baseline with his shoes off, and refuse to come into games. He refused to ever run back in transition, thereby letting Horry get constant dunks and layups on the break. Rodman was the ultimate stat-padder. He would just wait under the basket to grab offensive boards while Horry went nuts on the other end of the floor. All he cared about was grabbing rebounds, and he never tried to be the complete defensive player he was in Detroit in San Antonio. He cost the Spurs game 1 when he gave Horry a wide-open shot from about 15 feet when he ran under the basket to try to get another board for his total instead of try to help the Spurs try to win the game. In game 2 that POS shot three ridiculous three pointers in the first quarter while Horry scored off lob after lob, prompting the Spurs to noever play him significant minutes again the rest of the night. Rodman was the ultimate cancer, and the worst player in the history of the franchise.

[DirkAB]

I'm not self serving and condescending, you're just annoyingly ingorant and unqualified to debate me on this subject...seriously, it's like you are asking for a link to prove the sky is blue...it's that stupid.


I don't mean to be rude about it, but you are ing incredibly stupid on this topic. I am sorry it's just the truth. And I'm not gonna go do a bunch of googling because you are ing stupid...do it yourself, and stop digging the hole even deeper. IT's not that I am full of here, it's that you are stupid. Really stupid, deeply stupid, seriously stupid and you are asking for proof of commonly known, easily verifiable stuff, known stuff. You are the stupid one, it's you that is stupid, you are the one that is reeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaallllllly ing stupid here. I can't and won't help you here. Because not only are you stupid, you were a while you were being stupid.


Look at my registration date, look at the name of the board, look at my team, then take a look at yourself...and realize which one of the two of us is likely to be the less informed on this topic. And the more open your mouth about it, the stupider you get.; Realize it, then shut up and then go googling.

Wow.........just wow. I admit that you know more about the life of David Robinson, never did I claim otherwise. All I asked for is verification of a very bold statement you made, Robinson didn't work hard at developing his game, and you claim it is "easily verifiable" or "easily provable," yet you can't verify it for me. Why would you have to do a bunch of googling to verify such an easily provable fact? Maybe I am stupid, because that makes no sense whatsoever. I'm pretty sure that I could google my in' ass off all day long and not find that little bull statement, that you presented as fact.

I'm not qualified to debate wheter Shaq or David Robinson was better player in their prime? Because you obviously know so much about both players and have no bias in this debate, right? Oh, I forgot you already admitted that you were a huge "Drob" homer.

LOL! I am the ultimate Drob homer but I promise I didn't have any preconceived ideas for that simplistic little ranking...and I didn't expect Drob to lead it by that much under any cir stances...

Is that what qualifies you to be a fair and partial judge of who is a better player? If it is then you've got me there, because I'm not a Shaq or Robinson homer. Personally, I couldn't stand either one of them, but I damn well respected both of them and what they could do on the court.

Or is it your obvious hate of Shaq that somehow qualifies you to rate the two in such an unbiased way. In no way do I believe that you have any respect for Shaq, quite the opposite, it is obvious after reading through this thread. You refered to him as a big fat stupid mother er, you said he charged his way to all his points, and you acted as if both players were in their prime during their early matchups.

Well, Shaq was still a very young guy in the NBA when Robinson in his prime, plus Robinson didn't shut him down anyways, which you so boldly implied. If you think Shaq putting up approximately his season averages on him was shutting him down, then I guess you are right. Truth is, their primes were years apart, so you can't really use their early matchups to support your arguement considering the premise of this thread. So considering that this was the basis of your whole arguement, and it is now thrown out the window because it isn't a legit basis to judge these two greats, what do you have left?

You know what, forget the Shaq v. Robinson arguement for now if you want and answer me this: Who is better, Duncan or Robinson? I'm very curious about your opinion on this, please answer.

[MadDog73]

Is that what qualifies you to be a fair and partial judge of who is a better player? If it is then you've got me there, because I'm not a Shaq or Robinson homer. Personally, I couldn't stand either one of them, but I damn well respected both of them and what they could do on the court.

I call Bull .

[b]Shaq was the most unguardable player to ever play in the modern era, at one time triple teams couldn't even stop him from scoring. Has anybody else in the modern age commanded such attention on the defensive end, and still been unstoppable? Not even close. [b]David Robinson was a ing role player for his second le, and he wasn't even the best player on his team during his first le...

Come on. "The most unguardable player to ever play in the modern era"? Can you say, hyperbole? We already proved that David owned Shaq plenty of times, Hakeem owned Shaq, the Spurs owned Shaq in '99, '03, and the Pistons owned Shaq in '04.

So when was he "unguardable"? In 2000, 2001, and 2002? Three years?

Even then, Kobe had higher numbers than Shaq most nights. If Shaq was truly unguardable, he would have the most Laker points every night, and have more than 3 Rings.

I fully admit I'm a Spurs Homer. I don't know why you are a Shaq homer, maybe you felt by putting Shaq up on a pedestal, the Kings' embarrassing collapse could be assuaged.

I honestly don't know, but you are not infallible.

[Bob Lanier]

he never tried to be the complete defensive player he was in Detroit in San Antonio. ... ultimate cancer

Worm was a true Piston patriot. It's a disgrace he hasn't had his number retired.

You're definitely right (and BAkriD definitely wrong) about Robinson's supporting cast overall, though. Del Negro was worthless, and Avery Johnson, Person, etc. were average at best. Sean Elliott wasn't bad in '95.

[DirkAB]

You gotta be kidding me. AJ was a good supporting guy, very flawed, but still a solid player.

Del Negro was one of the most worthless players the Spurs ever had. He could never even get into a team's rotation once the Spurs let him walk in 99. He never got any minutes in Milwaukee or Phoenix after. Del Negro was the kind of guy who could put up 18 on the Hawks in February, but anytime a game meant anything he was a complete no-show.

Rodman was a huge part of the Spurs blowing the '95 WCF. Did you watch that series? Rodman would get pissed, go sit on the baseline with his shoes off, and refuse to come into games. He refused to ever run back in transition, thereby letting Horry get constant dunks and layups on the break. Rodman was the ultimate stat-padder. He would just wait under the basket to grab offensive boards while Horry went nuts on the other end of the floor. All he cared about was grabbing rebounds, and he never tried to be the complete defensive player he was in Detroit in San Antonio. He cost the Spurs game 1 when he gave Horry a wide-open shot from about 15 feet when he ran under the basket to try to get another board for his total instead of try to help the Spurs try to win the game. In game 2 that POS shot three ridiculous three pointers in the first quarter while Horry scored off lob after lob, prompting the Spurs to noever play him significant minutes again the rest of the night. Rodman was the ultimate cancer, and the worst player in the history of the franchise.

What about Elliott, did he suck too? He was an all-star if I'm not mistaken.

BTW, Rodman isn't just a stat padder, how many rings does the guy have? Volitile yes, but playing along other greats and great team leaders he was kept in check. Great role player, one of the best role players of all-time.

Del Nego not getting into another teams rotation after leaving the Spurs, don't you suppose that had anything to do with his age? I suppose that some guys aren't near as effective after they get to 32 or 33. Not a great player, but a good role player.

AJ was a very underrated PG, flawed? I suppose, he wasn't much of a shooter, but he made up for it in other areas. His penetration, passing and defense were excellent, and what about his leadership? He was a very nice fit at the point for this team, they didn't need another shooter, they needed a guy who could penetrate. They had Person, Elliot, and Del Negro to do the outside shooting. And Doc Rivers wasn't a bad backup PG either.

I don't see how anybody could call that a terrible supporting cast.

[MadDog73]

I don't see how anybody could call that a terrible supporting cast.

So, it's Robinson's fault the Spurs never won a Ring before Tim, eh?

I guess that means Tim > all. Because if Robinson is a scrub, it's Shaq and Kobe being swept by just Tim in 1999.

[DirkAB]

I call Bull .



Come on. "The most unguardable player to ever play in the modern era"? Can you say, hyperbole? We already proved that David owned Shaq plenty of times, Hakeem owned Shaq, the Spurs owned Shaq in '99, '03, and the Pistons owned Shaq in '04.

So when was he "unguardable"? In 2000, 2001, and 2002? Three years?

Even then, Kobe had higher numbers than Shaq most nights. If Shaq was truly unguardable, he would have the most Laker points every night, and have more than 3 Rings.

I fully admit I'm a Spurs Homer. I don't know why you are a Shaq homer, maybe you felt by putting Shaq up on a pedestal, the Kings' embarrassing collapse could be assuaged.

I honestly don't know, but you are not infallible.

Defined owned? That is laughable, the Spurs held Shaq to numbers that more closely resemble their numbers instead of his. Do you call letting a guy average like 24,13,2,&2 owning or stopping? Please.

[MadDog73]

Defined owned? That is laughable, the Spurs held Shaq to numbers that more closely resemble their numbers instead of his. Do you call letting a guy average like 24,13,2,&2 owning or stopping? Please.

, dude, you're the one saying he's "unguardable" not me.

You tell me why he's not averaging 40 points a night.

Is your argument seriously, "Shaq can make 24 points versus the Spurs, so he's the best"?

[DirkAB]

So, it's Robinson's fault the Spurs never won a Ring before Tim, eh?

I guess that means Tim > all. Because if Robinson is a scrub, it's just Shaq and Kobe being swept by Tim in 1999.

Seriously, why are you reading into my posts more than necessary? Acting like I'm making these lame-ass assumptions, implying that I'm making statements and using reasoning that I'm not. WFT?

[DirkAB]

, dude, you're the one saying he's "unguardable" not me.

You tell me why he's not averaging 40 points a night.

Is your argument seriously Shaq can make 24 points versus the Spurs, so he's the best?

No you have it backwards, your arguement is since the Spurs kept him to 24pts, 13rbs, 2bl, 2as means that they owned him. That isn't owning, and that is as close as anybody ever came to owning him. What did he do to other teams? Remember? I do.

[MadDog73]

Seriously, why are you reading into my posts more than necessary? Acting like I'm making these lame-ass assumptions, implying that I'm making statements and using reasoning that I'm not. WFT?

Because you're not making any sense. You say Robinson had a great supporting cast. That implies you believe Robinson should have won a le before Tim. Then, when he does win a le, you say he's a "role-player", but yet, Shaq is praised for being able to avg. 24 points against him.

I mean, are you blind towards your own prejudice? Shaq is not all that you think he is. He only has 3 rings, the same as Tim. Robinson has 2, and that was not during his peak.

I just don't see how you can say Shaq > all modern big men based on avg. ppg alone.

[Bob Lanier]

What did he do to other teams? Remember? I do.

By "other teams", you mean the 38&15+3 blocks he put up against the Queens' front line in Games 6 and 7 in 2002?


DEEEE-FENSE! DEEEE-FENSE!

So David Robinson might be just a little bit better than Scot Pollard?

[DirkAB]

Becuase you're not making any sense. You say Robinson had a great supporting cast. That implies you believe Robinson should have won a le before Tim. Then, when he does win a le, you say he's a "role-player", but yet, Shaq is praised for being able to avg. 24 points against him.

I mean, are you blind towards your own prejudice? Shaq is not all that you think he is. He only has 3 rings, the same as Tim. Robinson has 2, and that was not during his peak.

I just don't see how you can say Shaq > all modern big men based on avg. ppg alone.

Jesus Christ, you're talking out your ass! I never said they were a great supporting cast, I said that they were a pretty good supporting cast. Did I say that Robinson should have won a le before Duncan? No, but I stated that he certainly did not, and may have underachieved at times in the playoffs. I said he didn't have the killer instinct that Duncan and Shaq have. I believe that Utah took them out a couple of times with no problems at all, when San Antonio was probably the better team. And I did say that Robinson was a role player for his second ring, is that inaccurate in any way? I'm not praising Shaq for his performance against the Spurs in the playoffs those 2 years, but I certainly don't think that is anywhere near being stopped.

BTW, I won't argue with anybody that puts Hakeem ahead of Shaq, even though I put it the other way around. It is a very close call, IMO.

[DirkAB]

By "other teams", you mean the 38&15+3 blocks he put up against the Queens' front line in Games 6 and 7 in 2002?


DEEEE-FENSE! DEEEE-FENSE!

So David Robinson might be just a little bit better than Scot Pollard?

Got me there, like my team is the only team he was doing it to back then, sorry don't think so.

[baseline bum]

.

[baseline bum]

What about Elliott, did he suck too? He was an all-star if I'm not mistaken.

BTW, Rodman isn't just a stat padder, how many rings does the guy have? Volitile yes, but playing along other greats and great team leaders he was kept in check. Great role player, one of the best role players of all-time.

Del Nego not getting into another teams rotation after leaving the Spurs, don't you suppose that had anything to do with his age? I suppose that some guys aren't near as effective after they get to 32 or 33. Not a great player, but a good role player.

AJ was a very underrated PG, flawed? I suppose, he wasn't much of a shooter, but he made up for it in other areas. His penetration, passing and defense were excellent, and what about his leadership? He was a very nice fit at the point for this team, they didn't need another shooter, they needed a guy who could penetrate. They had Person, Elliot, and Del Negro to do the outside shooting. And Doc Rivers wasn't a bad backup PG either.

I don't see how anybody could call that a terrible supporting cast.

I said AJ was a solid player for the Spurs, and yes, a very flawed player. He was a of a penetrator, and he had an a great hook off the run that he scored a lot of points with. He was also a terrible defender and his jumpshot was crap until 1998 or so. AJ's lack of a jumper killed this team for many years. To his credit, he busted ass and improved it tremendously late in his career.

Rodman was a complete stat-padder in San Antonio. I also used to think this was just Spurs fans whining and re-writing history to make David look better, until I went and downloaded the games and saw how worthless Rodman was. He was a huge negative impact on the Spurs. He was an amazing player on the Bad-Boys, but he became a nut and was traded for it. If you don't believe me that Rodman was such a negative impact on the Spurs, then how about believing NBA GMs since no GM would give the Spurs anything better than Will Perdue in exchange for him. Please remember this was before the salary cap was such a huge issue, so don't try to compare it to trading Vince Carter for Mourning's expiring contract.

I can't respect any argument that tries to paint Del Negro as a good player. He would never be a starter on any other contender. He was on the Spurs because Red McCombs was too cheap to re-sign Rod Strickland, and Del Negro was his bargain basement bandaid.

Elliott was a good player, and if Rodman showed up you could call that a great supporting cast. But he didn't and you can't.

[MadDog73]

Jesus Christ, you're talking out your ass! I never said they were a great supporting cast, I said that they were a pretty good supporting cast. Did I say that Robinson should have won a le before Duncan? No, but I stated that he certainly did not, and may have underachieved at times in the playoffs. I said he didn't have the killer instinct that Duncan and Shaq have. I believe that Utah took them out a couple of times with no problems at all, when San Antonio was probably the better team. And I did say that Robinson was a role player for his second ring, is that inaccurate in any way? I'm not praising Shaq for his performance against the Spurs in the playoffs those 2 years, but I certainly don't think that is anywhere near being stopped.

Bottom line: Why do you think Shaq is the greatest? Because he won 3 in a row? Because his career avg. is 26 points a game?

If you think that makes him the best, I can't argue with you. But the very fact that Tim, David, and Hakeem all beat Shaq in different occasions at least proves to me that Shaq is fallible, and not "the most dominant player in the modern age."

, I think winning 3 rings over 7 years is much more impressive. But I can't convince you Tim > Shaq, so I won't even bother trying.

I lied. I will try to convince you. Do you think Tim is in his prime now? How about Shaq?

Who do you predict will end up with more Rings? And will that sway your opinion at all?

[bobbyjoe]

You gotta be kidding me. AJ was a good supporting guy, very flawed, but still a solid player.

Del Negro was one of the most worthless players the Spurs ever had. He could never even get into a team's rotation once the Spurs let him walk in 99. He never got any minutes in Milwaukee or Phoenix after. Del Negro was the kind of guy who could put up 18 on the Hawks in February, but anytime a game meant anything he was a complete no-show.

Rodman was a huge part of the Spurs blowing the '95 WCF. Did you watch that series? Rodman would get pissed, go sit on the baseline with his shoes off, and refuse to come into games. He refused to ever run back in transition, thereby letting Horry get constant dunks and layups on the break. Rodman was the ultimate stat-padder. He would just wait under the basket to grab offensive boards while Horry went nuts on the other end of the floor. All he cared about was grabbing rebounds, and he never tried to be the complete defensive player he was in Detroit in San Antonio. He cost the Spurs game 1 when he gave Horry a wide-open shot from about 15 feet when he ran under the basket to try to get another board for his total instead of try to help the Spurs try to win the game. In game 2 that POS shot three ridiculous three pointers in the first quarter while Horry scored off lob after lob, prompting the Spurs to noever play him significant minutes again the rest of the night. Rodman was the ultimate cancer, and the worst player in the history of the franchise.

Rodman isn't the one who got killed everynight by Hakeem, which by far and away is the #1 reason the Spurs lost that series. When you let the other team's best player drop 35-40 a night and shoot in the high 50's % wise, you are going to lose 99 times out of 100.

Why does Rodman have 5 rings if he was such a cancer? He was a HUGE part of both the Pistons and Bulls le runs. One of the best rebounders in NBA history and an excellent defender.

Rodman defending guys like Horry on the perimeter is an unrealistic expectation. That would be like chastising Parker for not defending Nowitzki well. When you have the best rebounder in the game you want a guy like that playing down low so he can use his best assets. From that perspective, the Spurs just matched up very poorly with Houston. DRob was no answer for Hakeem and who was there for Rodman to cover. It was probably better to just put Rodman on Hakeem in retrospect.

Blaming that series on him though is crazy when it's DRob who was just lit up like a Christmas tree from the tip of Game 1 to the final buzzer of Game 6.

[bobbyjoe]

I said AJ was a solid player for the Spurs, and yes, a very flawed player. He was a of a penetrator, and he had an a great hook off the run that he scored a lot of points with. He was also a terrible defender and his jumpshot was crap until 1998 or so. AJ's lack of a jumper killed this team for many years. To his credit, he busted ass and improved it tremendously late in his career.

Rodman was a complete stat-padder in San Antonio. I also used to think this was just Spurs fans whining and re-writing history to make David look better, until I went and downloaded the games and saw how worthless Rodman was. He was a huge negative impact on the Spurs. He was an amazing player on the Bad-Boys, but he became a nut and was traded for it. If you don't believe me that Rodman was such a negative impact on the Spurs, then how about believing NBA GMs since no GM would give the Spurs anything better than Will Perdue in exchange for him. Please remember this was before the salary cap was such a huge issue, so don't try to compare it to trading Vince Carter for Mourning's expiring contract.

I can't respect any argument that tries to paint Del Negro as a good player. He would never be a starter on any other contender. He was on the Spurs because Red McCombs was too cheap to re-sign Rod Strickland, and Del Negro was his bargain basement bandaid.

Elliott was a good player, and if Rodman showed up you could call that a great supporting cast. But he didn't and you can't.

AJ was an underrated PG. He penetrated well and was very effective at pushing the ball in transition and finding shooters in rhythm. Defensively he was average and he obviously lacked an outside Jumper. Overall though, he was certainly an above average PG. You don't need your PG typically to be a pure shooter but a pure passer instead, which AJ was.

2 Guard was the position which really held the Spurs back most of the Robinson era. At one point, the school of thought was to trade the #1 pick for Mitch Richmond and others.

[strangeweather]

i also know who took three different teams to the finals.

Tim has never signed with another team, but the 2005 Spurs and the 1999 Spurs had only one player in common: TD.

[miss paxton]

this is shaqs 6th or 7th trip to the finals, over a timespan of what, 13-14 years? maybe evn more.

To answer your questions, mavs4ever, Shaq was drafted in 1992. Tim Duncan was drafted in 1997. So Shaq's been in the league five more years than TD.

Shaq made it to the Finals in Orlando once, and was swept by Hakeem's Rockets. That's one. He won three consecutive les in 2000-2002. That's another three, for four total. He made the Finals in 2004 and now in 2006. That's six. I don't think I'm missing any, but anyone can feel free to correct me.

So Shaq's winning percentage (so far) in the Finals is 60% (3/5), and could rise to 4/6 this year. Duncan's is 100% (3/3), in five fewer years.

[baseline bum]

Rodman isn't the one who got killed everynight by Hakeem, which by far and away is the #1 reason the Spurs lost that series. When you let the other team's best player drop 35-40 a night and shoot in the high 50's % wise, you are going to lose 99 times out of 100.

Why does Rodman have 5 rings if he was such a cancer? He was a HUGE part of both the Pistons and Bulls le runs. One of the best rebounders in NBA history and an excellent defender.

Rodman defending guys like Horry on the perimeter is an unrealistic expectation. That would be like chastising Parker for not defending Nowitzki well. When you have the best rebounder in the game you want a guy like that playing down low so he can use his best assets. From that perspective, the Spurs just matched up very poorly with Houston. DRob was no answer for Hakeem and who was there for Rodman to cover. It was probably better to just put Rodman on Hakeem in retrospect.

Blaming that series on him though is crazy when it's DRob who was just lit up like a Christmas tree from the tip of Game 1 to the final buzzer of Game 6.

Rodman absolutely didn't give a in that series. Tell me when Dennis Rodman should shoot three three-pointers in one quarter. Tell me when it's not important to get back on D in transition. Tell me when it's acceptable for a guy to go sit in the corner and refuse to enter games.

If Rodman wasn't a cancer in San Antonio, then why was Will Perdue the best the Spurs could get in exchange for him? Why did he never sniff real NBA minutes again after the Bulls broke up despite his pathetic comebacks with LA and Dallas?

The guy was a ing loon who didn't accept Chicago's overtaking of the Pistons well (tell me a sane person pushes Scottie Pippen headfirst into the basket like he did). The guy plays for Tijuana right now.

Yeah, Robinson got his ass kicked in that series. That's not at all debateable... but what's horse is people coming in and saying he had such a great supporting cast because of Rodman. AJ and Elliott were solid players, but Rodman was the worst player on the team in that series.