Robert Horry is a Hall-of-Famer (roundtable discussion)

by grungedave on Nov 25, 2008 11:55 AM CST in Discussions about Badasses Comment 38 comments

Because Robert Horry is in semi-retirement, a group of bloggers suggested we have a discussion on whether or not Horry should be inducted into the Hall of Fame. I think we all know my particular stance on the issue, so of course I joined them in this debate.

Here's the entire discussion.

Here's my opening statement:

Robert Horry is a Hall of Famer. The purpose of the Basketball Hall of Fame is to recognize the elite. Be it an elite scorer, an elite defensive player, or an elite distributor of the ball to teammates. There are no specific rules or requirements for "who" is qualified for the Hall. The facts are undeniable that Robert Horry was an essential and necessary piece of seven different championship teams. Without Horry, it is quite likely that none of these teams would have emerged victorious in that particular year. Furthermore, these seven championships were acquired by three different organizations.

In short, Robert Horry is the greatest winner of the modern era. Yes, even moreso than Michael Jordan. Horry has more championship rings than anyone not affiliated with the Celtics (whose own championships are watered-down given the fact that it was an 8-team league that intentionally limited the impact of African-American players).

Every single year Robert Horry played, his team made it to the playoffs.
And they never got bounced in the first round. Ever.

What made Horry great is he did whatever it took to win. Everyone knows about his penchant for clutch shooting. What is often overlooked is his willingness to do all the little things. Everything from a hockey assist, to taking a charge, to closing the passing lanes, to the flawless post-entry pass. These are not things that show up in a box score anywhere other than in the "W" and "L" columns. These just happen to be the most important statistics of all. And Horry made sure his teams filled the "W" columns every May and June.

It is no accident that Horry played in more playoff games than anyone in history. It was not just about picking the right teams or being aligned with the best players. Hakeem was never a champion until he met Horry. Same for Shaquille and Kobe. Tim Duncan admittedly would have 2 less rings if Horry was not there to bail him out in '05 and '07.

If being the greatest winner of your sport in a particular era is not enough, the Hall of Fame has problems.

-----

Discuss....

001088901_medium

0 recs | Comment 38 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Hey, I’m a huge fan of what Robert Horry did at Alabama, but if he gets into the Hall of Fame then just close it down because it will have lost all meaning.

He was a great role player but was not in any way instrumental in any of his teams winning a ring.

He played with Shaq, Kobe, Hakeem, and Duncan. Q.E.D.

Also, calling someone a “winner” is one of those things sportswriters do when they don’t have any facts to back up their point and just want to say things for the sake of saying them. It is totally unprovable.

by AstronautDinosaurFiretruck on Nov 25, 2008 12:40 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

"It is totally unprovable"

bullshit. I can count seven reasons… rings that is.

by grungedave on Nov 25, 2008 1:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

also

By that rationale,

are you saying that Mariano Rivera isn’t a hall-of-fame baseball player?
Is Adam Vinatieri not a hall-of-fame football player?

They have almost identical roles to their respective teams that Robert Horry did to his various championship teams. And without Horry, none of those teams win the ring except maybe the ’01 Lakers.

by grungedave on Nov 25, 2008 1:12 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Rivera yes, Vinatieri no

But only because Adam Vinatieri is fantastically overrated and has missed several field goals in Super Bowl games. Also, no kicker should ever go into the hall of fame.
I say Horry’s in, because you don’t hang around the league for 16 years averaging 7ppg unless you bring something special to the table, which Horry always did.

by H-Town Low Down on Nov 25, 2008 2:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

well, there are...

There is a punter in the NFL HOF.
And Vinatieri will make it one day…

by grungedave on Nov 25, 2008 3:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Ummm Ray Guy is just not any punter

Dude was like the Michael Jordan of punters. And he was taken in the 1st round which is unheard of now like it was then.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Nov 25, 2008 3:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Horry =/= Rivera

Mariano Rivera is the single best, maybe ever, at what he does. Robert Horry was never better than the fourth best player on any of his teams.

by AstronautDinosaurFiretruck on Nov 25, 2008 11:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Same could be said about Rivera

Jeter, ARod, Posada, Rivera is fourth

You could do something like that every year

by UofTOrange on Nov 26, 2008 2:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You are very confusing what I am saying deliberately. I’ve grown accustom to the fact that the only Rockets blog is wrong about everything, but you guys are so willing to ignore facts to strengthen your own point.

by AstronautDinosaurFiretruck on Nov 26, 2008 10:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

he deserves it, but he's still a punk

Yeah, he probably deserves to go in; as grungedave points out, anybody with seven championships to his name can’t realistically be overlooked. But it’s a good thing for him that his personality probably won’t figure into the decision. I’m not a Phoenix fan, but I don’t blame Suns fans for holding a grudge against Cheap Shot Rob.

by RedRyan on Nov 25, 2008 1:19 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I'm a Kings fan

I like Horry, although his shot in game 4 of the 2002 WCF was luck.

That being said, I agree with Kurt on the whole issue of whether Horry belongs. Role Players aren’t Hall of Famers. What they are are effective players whom fans hold onto for a long time. Ray Guy isn’t Robert Horry, he was a football player whose skill was so spectacularly one sided that the Raiders wouldn’t EVEN let him play another position.

Horry was an underrated shot blocker and post defender in my opinion, but he wasn’t Dennis Rodman. He couldn’t change the game with his rebounding/post defense like Rodman could. He couldn’t shut Shaq down for instance like Rodman did in 96. Horry is the most spectacular role player I can ever remember, and he deserves to be remembered for it. More players could use him as an example. I don’t think Horry needs to be listed ahead of Michael Jordan, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird and others because he won more rings than any of them. Obviously that isn’t the argument Dave, but still, I don’t think Horry belongs in the lower rung of players who were far better individual players than Horry was.

I think it’s an argument that needs to be had to give people idea’s of how valuable a guy like Horry is to winning a championship. But he’s that role player piece that most teams have had over the years to win rings, and what makes him more memorable is he was a role player his whole career. I’ve always spoken well of Big Shot Rob, but I can’t think of a single reason why the man belongs in the Hall of Fame.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Nov 25, 2008 3:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

one name

KC Jones. The dude is in the Hall of Fame. Just because he was a Celtic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K.C.Jones

(his bio even mentions Robert Horry’s candidacy)

by grungedave on Nov 25, 2008 3:58 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Are individual accomplishments

what gets you into the hall of fame? if so then rings should have no bearing on whether you are worthy or not. If this is true then what needs to be looked at is Horry’s individual numbers. I like Horry but it does not matter to me whether he gets in or not, How does his individual numbers stack up? is he worthy? or was he a very good, excellent role player? I may be wrong and probably am but i just did not view him as a team changer.

bags030404

by Phillip Baggett on Nov 25, 2008 4:20 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

you are a Cowboys fan, Phillip

you are clearly jaded!!!

Horry’s stats are not at all HOF worthy, this I will admit.

by grungedave on Nov 25, 2008 4:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Then why should he

get in other than to make you feel warm and fuzzy

bags030404

by Phillip Baggett on Nov 25, 2008 4:24 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Yes i am a

Cowboys fan but you will not here me screaming for Darryl Johnston to be inducted to the hall of fame! He was great but he was not Hall of Fame great.

bags030404

by Phillip Baggett on Nov 25, 2008 4:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

NO

To be in the Hall of Fame I think one should possess one or more of the following qualities:

1) A team can be built around you and be playoff and championship contenders
i.e. Hakeem, Kobe, Jordan, etc.
2) Your individual numbers are among the top ten for a majority of your career i.e.top 10 in scoring, rebounds, blocks, steals, etc.
3) Your individual total numbers reach a mark that only a few have achieved. i.e. total points in excess of 20,000.
4) You excel at your position (this will usually encompass numbers 2 and 3 as well)

What exactly did Robert Horry do?

1. He made some big shots to win big games. He was clutch.

And that’s about it. Horry was never a great forward. He was never top ten in anything for an extended period of time. His personal stats are nothing to write home about. He wasn’t the foundation to ANY of his championships. (Rockets = Olajuwon, Lakers – Kobe and Shaq, Spurs – Duncan, Robinson, Parker). Nothing was ever built around Robert Horry.

You can’t award someone a HOF spot because they were lucky to
1) Be on championship teams
2) Be in a situation to make a big shot in a big game.

K.C. Jones was also a great coach with some championships under his belt as well. You let me know when Horry accomplishes that and maybe I’ll change my tune.

by erod on Nov 25, 2008 4:58 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

oh you had me

You had me right up until “K.C. Jones was also a great coach”… then your argument died.

by grungedave on Nov 25, 2008 5:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

If he wasn't a great coach?

What kinda coach was he?

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Nov 25, 2008 5:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

not a good one

Everyone connected to those teams admits that KC Jones wasn’t exactly anything special as a coach… he got by on talent just like a certain Doc Rivers did last year.

by grungedave on Nov 26, 2008 8:20 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Love to see what exactly you're referring to

Everyone is quite a large number.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Nov 26, 2008 9:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

let's make it easier...

Find me one source/link that indicates that KC Jones was an elite or mastermind coach.

by grungedave on Nov 26, 2008 10:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

He led his team to the promise land

That’s all you can ask of a coach right?

But if you wanna say that he was just riding the coat tail of a stacked team, kind of sounds like Robert Horry’s career, doesn’t it?

by erod on Nov 26, 2008 10:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

and yet

He’s in the Hall of Fame, so in some circular way, KC Jones’ existence again proves my point.

by grungedave on Nov 26, 2008 10:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I wanna go watch "Double Clutch" again now

by BigTexBD on Nov 25, 2008 5:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Dave, your definitions are very flawed. You are insisting on this idea of “clutch” which is very poorly defined or at best an incredibly small sample size – too small for anything to be counted as any sort of special skill rather than luck.

Robert Horry was a decent player. He was on some teams that won rings and wasn’t worthless on them. That’s a plenty fine career, but to put him in the Hall of Fame would devalue everyone else who earned their place there.

by AstronautDinosaurFiretruck on Nov 25, 2008 11:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

what definitions?

You claim that Horry isn’t clutch?

by that rationale, you must also be making the case that Karl Malone and Chris Webber might still be “clutch”??

Come on… Horry has missed ONE (1) shot in a playoff game where he had a chance to tie/win the game. One. Every other opportunity he made. We’re talking in the 90% success range. That’s more than enough of a sample size to establish that Horry had one hell of a useful skill that few possess.

by grungedave on Nov 26, 2008 8:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You can’t seriously have just said that success rate means enough of a sample size. Do you know what these words mean?

Robert Horry never contributed anything to his teams winning, he was just sort of there.

by AstronautDinosaurFiretruck on Nov 26, 2008 10:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That's crazy, he clearly contributed in a major way to the Rockets

He also hit shots that no one else was as likely to hit for all of his other championship teams

by UofTOrange on Nov 27, 2008 12:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

There is, once again, no way to prove that he had any sort of special “clutch” ability beyond mere luck. And there were several people on his championship teams who were much more likely to hit shots than him, that’s why he was the one who ended up being open at the end and – once again – getting lucky.

by AstronautDinosaurFiretruck on Nov 27, 2008 1:24 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

We're just going to have to agree to disagree

It is absolutely inarguable to me whether or not he was clutch. No one has that much luck

by UofTOrange on Nov 27, 2008 7:06 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Forrest Gump

Sure, Horry was there and he was part of it all, but he didn’t make it happen. I really love the guy — his heart, his hustle, his play under pressure — but he was never the star of the show

Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. If they get mad, you're a mile away AND you have their shoes.

by Caradoc on Nov 26, 2008 10:06 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

The Hall of Fame is not what some of you want it to be

It is not a place of the elite of the elite. There are a lot of guys that got in because of what team they were on and not how good they actually were.

Robert Horry is a unique case. No one has EVER been quite like him as a player. His uniqueness on the court was always a positive. Game winning shots, playoff life saving, throwing stuff at that D-Bag Danny Ainge. It’s all good. His contributions helped other Hall of Famers get to the elite of the elite. Surely there is a spot in the ACTUAL Hall of Fame and not this mythical place that some of you think exists.

by UofTOrange on Nov 26, 2008 3:00 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

But surely we should hold it to some sort of higher standard.

This is such a dumb argument I cannot believe that there is anyone on the planet who believes Robert Horry is even in the group of people who should be discussed as one day being put on a list to be considered a possibility to be talked about to be candidates for being potential hall of famers.

by AstronautDinosaurFiretruck on Nov 26, 2008 10:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It's the Hall of "Fame", not the Hall of Elite

Just saying

by UofTOrange on Nov 27, 2008 12:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You are now making, almost exactly, the same argument once made by Mr. Colin Cowherd.

by AstronautDinosaurFiretruck on Nov 27, 2008 1:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

While I hate Cowherd with a passion

Even an idiot makes a point on occassion

by UofTOrange on Nov 27, 2008 7:06 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

so, basically

I guess the argument should be that after MJ and Hakeem and Shaq and Kobe and Tim Duncan… no one else from this era should even be considered for the Hall? WTF-ever.

by grungedave on Nov 27, 2008 9:27 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs