Last Decade's Best Rebounders

[cavs4872]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_d ... nba,189290

[JaoSming]

dont just post a link, say something, copy something, do something to ignite discussion

[Fcuk Orlando]

Dampier in no way deserves to be in that list.

[vinceair]

I would say Shaquille O'neal.

[benji]

Not sure what rebound rate he was using, or if he was reordering it after the fact. Above 5000 Minutes gives you:
1. Danny Fortson (21.5%)
2. Reggie Evans (20.8%)
3. Dwight Howard (20.5%)
4. Marcus Camby (19.7%)
5. Dikembe Mutombo (19.6%)
6. Ben Wallace (19.3%)
7. Jahidi White (19.1%)
8. Jeff Foster (18.9%)
9. Tim Duncan (18.7%)
10. Emeka Okafor (18.5%)
11. Joe Pryzbilla (18.5%)

Times in the decade they led league using B-R.com qualifiers: (finished 2nd or 3rd)
Dwight Howard - 3 (1)
Danny Fortson - 1
Dikembe Mutombo - 1 (1)
Ben Wallace - 1 (4)
Kevin Garnett - 1 (3)
Marcus Camby - 0 (2)
Tim Duncan - 0 (2)

Jerome Williams (1999-2000), Dampier (2003-04) and Chandler (2006-07) are the other three league leaders this decade.

Dampier in no way deserves to be in that list.

Led the league three times in offensive rebounding, lead the league once in total rebounding. (2nd and 8th in active players career rebounding.)

I would say Shaquille O'neal.

Any reasons why?

[Lamrock]

I love how there are subjective lists about rebounding.

[Null17]

I read this last night. I didn't even realize Dampier was the league leader in rebounds then. All I know was he had a good year so he got that huge ass contract. (Rebounding leaders aren't really something I pay attention to)

[Fcuk Orlando]

i didn't know he had good years outside of Dallas, I thought he always sucked

[NovU]

I actually didn't know he wasn't going to improve Mavericks not that much. I mean his days as Warrior was impressive.

[benji]

He's been a huge factor in the Mavericks' success. His days as a Warrior were mediocre (or worse) until his contract yet.

[Martti.]

Agree with Wallace being number one. Although Camby should be higher, maybe 3rd or 4th.

[benji]

Why?

[NovU]

He's been a huge factor in the Mavericks' success. His days as a Warrior were mediocre (or worse) until his contract yet.

I don't know, but maybe you can show me how he helped the Mavericks. The Mavericks were already a contender, in need of a piece or two to be more complete, but addition of Dampier didn't help them getting them to a next level, I thought. Meanwhile, his contract year in GSW was pretty surprising, giving people ideas that he could be much needed true center which Mavericks were lacking of. Not to mention his ugly contract as well. I didn't really think that he was a good player in terms of bang for the buck as Maverick.

[Martti.]

benji, has averaged over 10 rebounds per game in 8 of the last 9 seasons, always in top 5 in rebounding per game and rebounding per 48 minutes. Also his fourth in what you posted above.

[J@3]

Yeah Ben's an awesome rebounder

[hova-]

He's been a huge factor in the Mavericks' success. His days as a Warrior were mediocre (or worse) until his contract yet.

I don't know, but maybe you can show me how he helped the Mavericks. The Mavericks were already a contender, in need of a piece or two to be more complete, but addition of Dampier didn't help them getting them to a next level, I thought. Meanwhile, his contract year in GSW was pretty surprising, giving people ideas that he could be much needed true center which Mavericks were lacking of. Not to mention his ugly contract as well. I didn't really think that he was a good player in terms of bang for the buck as Maverick.

Damp is a guy who works on the glass, has impressive off. reb. numbers - but meanwhile - does not use many possessions on offense i.e. he does not take away shot from guys like Dirk or Howard. Most of Damp's points come from under the basket after offensive rebounds or when he gets the ball near the rim. He almost never takes bad shots which really helps to keep the offense flowing.
That also explains why you dont see him as a good player. He is the prototypical non-highlight player who only shows up when he gets posterized. His defense is not the best but solid (average blocknumbers, many fouls). His height and weight allow him at least to be a solid post defender but his help D is not very good imo.

I also needed ben to show me the good things about Damp. His contract sucks though simply because it was too long and did not allow the Mavs to turn things around.

[Valor]

23 percent, and you're Dennis Rodman. My man retired with the highest rebound rate in NBA history.

man, Rodman should really be in HOF....looking at his stats again, one sick bastard we have here..and he's 6'8"
i'd love to see DH12 get 18.7 rpg and get a 26+ rebounding rate for a season...he isnt close to that and ppl are hailing him as the next rebounding god already...

The Bulls should retire his jersey immediately and he should be inducted into the next HOF inductions!

[NovU]

He's been a huge factor in the Mavericks' success. His days as a Warrior were mediocre (or worse) until his contract yet.

I don't know, but maybe you can show me how he helped the Mavericks. The Mavericks were already a contender, in need of a piece or two to be more complete, but addition of Dampier didn't help them getting them to a next level, I thought. Meanwhile, his contract year in GSW was pretty surprising, giving people ideas that he could be much needed true center which Mavericks were lacking of. Not to mention his ugly contract as well. I didn't really think that he was a good player in terms of bang for the buck as Maverick.

Damp is a guy who works on the glass, has impressive off. reb. numbers - but meanwhile - does not use many possessions on offense i.e. he does not take away shot from guys like Dirk or Howard. Most of Damp's points come from under the basket after offensive rebounds or when he gets the ball near the rim. He almost never takes bad shots which really helps to keep the offense flowing.
That also explains why you dont see him as a good player. He is the prototypical non-highlight player who only shows up when he gets posterized. His defense is not the best but solid (average blocknumbers, many fouls). His height and weight allow him at least to be a solid post defender but his help D is not very good imo.

I also needed ben to show me the good things about Damp. His contract sucks though simply because it was too long and did not allow the Mavs to turn things around.

I see your point, although I am still skeptical if his presence really has been only beneficial to the team. I am sure he has done his share in some ways to the success Maverick's been having, but due to his poor playoff performances, I think it hasn't worked out in a way or two. Besides, doesn't his poor offensive skills mean the defenders are more likely to focus on Dirk and other scorers resulting in Dampier to have more rooms to work on rebound. I really haven't watched Mavericks playing that much, but that's my two cents on this discussion.

[hova-]

I dont think that you can say the defenders can concentrate more on Dirk since Damp is a C and you always have to guard him because he can finish near the rim like everybody else in the league.
And you did not get it right: Damp does not have poor offensive skills (at least that was not my point), he just does not use many possessions. He knows when he should finish and when he has to give the ball to another player. That is quite important when you have guys like Dirk on your team who need many possessions and can also finish difficult plays.

[benji]

Throw out Dampier's two contract years in Golden State and he's shooting 44-50%, has off rebounding of 9-11%, usage rates of 18-19% and ORtg's of 86-100. During those two years it's 54-57%, 14-16%, 16-18% and 111-114.

Now, in Dallas, what is he doing? 53-66% shooting (58% in four of five seasons a new career high in each) and maintaining 13-17% off rebounding. He's doing this with usage rates of 10-16% and dropping each year as Dallas adds more weapons and he ages, while his shooting percentage continues to increase. Result? ORtg's of 108-129, which have grown each of the last three years.

You want to talk about "poor playoff performances"? But he's only had one. 2007-08. 2006-07 doesn't count because the team refused to play him. Look at the other three playoffs: 57-63% shooting. 13-18% off rebounding. 12-13% usage. What's the ORtg's? Last year it was 106. But in the two years when Dallas was a contender he gets 122 and 126, while blocking 4.5% of shots.

Is he overpaid? Maybe. But like I've said many times, find the players Dallas can realistically get that can replace him.

I've said this before, many times, there are finite possessions. Look at last season, Dirk uses 30%, Howard uses 27%, Terry uses 26%. Kidd uses 13.5%, leaving about 10.5% to use. Dampier last season was at 10.4%. Someone like Barea? 20%. Bass? 20%. Dampier is practically a perfect fit considering his ORtg of 129.

Last year he was first in the league for players over 1500 minutes. And that doesn't even count his "true" impact, since a lot of his possessions technically don't even happen since he "saves" so many possessions "wasted" by others.

[NovU]

Lol. It's hard to argue against figures like that. I can see that he's been extremely efficient as a Maverick. Thanks for sharing.

This might not be relevant, but what do you guys think of +/-/min stats? I think it's a result and good way to tell if a player was a good fit or not for certain year. The stat actually tells how the team performed while the player was on the floor. This might push the discussion bit farther, but with Dampier's +/- stat, I don't think you can say he has only been a perfect fit.

http://www.nba.com/statistics/plusminus ... =Mavericks

[Andrew]

I love how there are subjective lists about rebounding.

It does seem like the stats would make this list very straightforward. I'd hazard a guess and say certain players missed the cut because they're out of the league and probably largely forgotten (like Fortson) or have missed a large percentage of games (actually, he does admit that with Camby). Nevertheless, Ben's ranking according to rebounding rate seems the fair and objective way to do this.

[havasufalls]

23 percent, and you're Dennis Rodman. My man retired with the highest rebound rate in NBA history.

man, Rodman should really be in HOF....looking at his stats again, one sick bastard we have here..and he's 6'8"
i'd love to see DH12 get 18.7 rpg and get a 26+ rebounding rate for a season...he isnt close to that and ppl are hailing him as the next rebounding god already...

The Bulls should retire his jersey immediately and he should be inducted into the next HOF inductions!

I agree. I'm not sure if he is eligible or has been but it would be a crime if he didnt make it into the hall and his jersey should definitely be retired by the bulls. Of course I'm a little bias though... he's my fav. player of all time along with tim hardaway.

[Andrew]

I'm guessing he's eligible. Scottie Pippen's brief appearance in Sweden last year didn't affect his eligibility for next year so presumably Rodman would still be eligible despite his international appearances as he hasn't played in the NBA since 2000; the mandatory five years are well and truly up. No doubt his antics are keeping him out of the Hall which is a shame because they shouldn't overshadow his career, but I guess if they can keep Dennis Johnson and others out of the Hall year after year, they'll do the same with Rodman over his extra-curricular activities.

[benji]

To be fair, Dennis Johnson keeps missing because he loses votes, especially since there's two token slots for a woman and college person/ref/coach. He's rarely in a class where he can be expected to make the top three NBAers.

Rodman should be in the Hall the same reason Rose should be in the MLB one and so on. We're honoring what they did on the court as players.

Rodman's dominance on the glass is unheard of. And toppling him will be near impossible.

What other players dominate one statistic so totally? John Stockton with 7 of the top 8 assist % season, Manute Bol with seven of the top ten block % seasons. Stockton's assist dominance spans two decades, same as Bol's shotblocking.

Rodman and Stockton are obviously different from Bol, they at least did something else on the court, but I think there's a place to recognize players who are so incredibly dominate in one statistic even if they do nothing else. (And otherwise stink as a player in Bol's case.)