Is there a place in the Hall for this man?

Had a nice debate with a few people over this one so I thought I'd bring it up for discussion at S.J. Com. Does Dennis Rodman deserve to be the basketball Hall of Fame? It's difficult to ignore his credentials.
* Five-time NBA champion (Detroit, 1989-1990; Chicago, 1996-98)
* NBA All-Star Team (1990, 1992)
* NBA Defensive Player of the Year Award (1990, 1991)
* NBA All-Defensive First Team (1989-93, 1995, 1996)
* Led NBA in Rebounds Per Game (1992-98)
* Led NBA in Rebound Rate for a record seven straight years (1991-98)
* Holds all-time NBA Top Rebound Rate: 23.4
* Led NBA in rebounds (1992-94, 1998)
* Led NBA in offensive rebounds (1991-94, 1996, 1997)
* Led NBA in defensive rebounds (1992, 1994, 1998)
* Led NBA in field goal percentage (1989)

 

Well, I mean he was a two-time All-NBA third team selection.

 

No.

 

No. And neither does Robert Horry, if I can further disparage outstanding role players. Rodman had fewer offensive skills than a former girls player who only played defense during the old 6-on-6 days of Iowa high school basketball.

 

Had he stayed the same Dennis Rodman and played like the same Dennis Rodman as he did in the Chuck Daly era, perhaps. Once he went bat-shit crazy when Daly left, no.

 

The biggest argument for Rodman is that there are scorers who couldn't play defense or rebound well who are in the Hall, yet Rodman was a great defender and rebounder who gets dinged because he couldn't play a lick of offense. And, oh yeah, was a freak.

 

I agree Bob, but in the end, as important as defense is and defense wins championships and gives Jeff Van Gundy erections, it's still ultimately about putting the ball in the basket. And Rodman was utterly inept. Michael Cooper was a dominant defensive player who could actually hit shots. Certainly not a Hall of Famer. Rodman won five titles, but if a team had Dennis Rodman as their best player, or even second-best player, they probably wouldn't even make the playoffs. You couldn't build a team around Rodman. I know you can say the same thing about other guys who actually are in the Hall, but to me he's simply a great role player - one of the best ever. But not a Hall of Famer.

 

He's pretty damn entertaining on VH1 these days.

 

There have been players like Rodman -- defense and rebounding specialists -- who didn't get Rodman attention because they weren't as flamboyant.

Rodman's rebounds per game is 11th all-time. Excellent, but everyone else around him on the list were all scoring forces as well as Rodman's equal or his superior defensively -- save perhaps Wes Unseld, who was not a scorer in the last two-thirds of his career (because Elvin Hayes was the Bullets' go-to inside scorer), but who was an excellent post defender.

I like rebound percentage as a statistic, but when the all-time top five is also comprised of Swen Nater and Larry Smith -- Smith, in particular, being a forerunner to the Rodman rebound-defense-no scoring template -- you have to take that stat with a grain of salt.

You know who should be in the Hall of Fame? Mel Daniels. Totally overlooked because he played in the ABA, but he was a stud.

 

Agreed on Mel Daniels. Terry Pluto's "Loose Balls" notes Daniels holds a record that will never be broken: his rookie year, he played in 75 games, and got in 75 fights.

Small Town Guy, you make a good point on Rodman as one of the great role players. I guess it's the same reason you don't find punters or Steve Tasker in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Also, I would agree that closers -- as role players -- need an especially high bar to get into baseball's Hall of Fame.

 

Sure, he can go in the hall with Brevin Knight, who was great at steals and assists and Steve Kerr, who hit threes and free throws.