NBA Finals = Joke

[MrBug708]

How do you not defend that?

Robert Horry = Favorite NBA player

[korme]

How does Horry get left open like that? Just another classic, memorable shot by Robert Horry. You would expect him to miss one of these, honestly.

He just won the Spurs a championship, though.

[Solecismic]

Just tuned in. What are they trying to do, freeze the kicker? I haven't seen a single second of action, but plenty of commercials and time outs.

[Neuqua]

What a game. I want a Robert Horry jersey. The guy just continues to amaze. Wow.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Shorty3281

How does Horry get left open like that? Just another classic, memorable shot by Robert Horry. You would expect him to miss one of these, honestly.

He just won the Spurs a championship, though.

He has, but no Laker fan would ever hold that against him. He won 2 titles for the Lakers with shots like tonight.

[RGunner]

I think if you're the Pistons there, Horry is the one person no matter what that doesn't get left open after his past clutch shots he has made. He was rediculous in the 4th quarter and overtime, that man is amazing when it comes to big shots.

[Suicane75]

Ya know, it would be nice, if at the end of a big game like this, THE FUCKING BOARD WAS ACTUALLY WORKING!

[kingfc22]

All I can say about Horry is wow! He IS clutch.

[TLK]

I think this game was fixed.... but only the ending

[Eaglesfan27]

Horry IS clutch.

[duckman]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

He has, but no Laker fan would ever hold that against him. He won 2 titles for the Lakers with shots like tonight.

He wasn't too shabby with the Rockets either.

[jbmagic]

Robert Horry will be a hall of famer.

if the spurs win the championship, Horry will have 6 rings

he is the all time leader in 3 pointer in the playoff passing Michael Jordan.

[LloydLungs]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

You know, I don't believe in the clutch - but Robert Horry is making me believe.

I think it depends on the sport. In baseball I think it's mostly myth, but I definitely believe in clutch performance in basketball. You can absolutely let pressure affect your release point and your form on shots, and you can miss shots largely from letting pressure get to you.

But Horry is a robot.

[Pumpy Tudors]

If Robert Horry gets into the Hall of Fame, the NBA is a bigger joke than I thought. Of course he's a good player, and he's made some very important shots in his career, but he doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame.

[JeffNights]

Originally Posted by jbmagic

Robert Horry will be a hall of famer.

if the spurs win the championship, Horry will have 6 rings

he is the all time leader in 3 pointer in the playoff passing Michael Jordan.

Ummm, the guy hits big shots.

But Robert Horry is definately NOT a Hall of Famer.

[LloydLungs]

Originally Posted by JeffNights

Ummm, the guy hits big shots.

But Robert Horry is definately NOT a Hall of Famer.

Yeah, Bill Simmons suggested this ridiculous notion early this week too, coming up with the notion of some kind of "great role player wing" for the hall. But, no way. Let's not get crazy here.

[IMetTrentGreen]

to everyone who thinks they are too cool to watch the nba, nobody here is too cool to do anything

[duckman]

Originally Posted by IMetTrentGreen

to everyone who thinks they are too cool to watch the nba, nobody here is too cool to do anything

He lives!

[IMetTrentGreen]

and i think horry should be in the hall, but in like an seperate section like simmons said. they could just have a plaque with a bunch of names engraved on it. somebody needs to immortalize guys like him

as a straight up player, in a vaccuum, no. but its a team game, afterall, and he's an elite teammate

[Pacersfan46]

Originally Posted by LloydLungs

I think it depends on the sport. In baseball I think it's mostly myth, but I definitely believe in clutch performance in basketball. You can absolutely let pressure affect your release point and your form on shots, and you can miss shots largely from letting pressure get to you.

But Horry is a robot.

Sooo, pressure in a sport can make you lose track of your fundamentals ..... but it can't in another sport?

That makes no sense.

[Neon_Chaos]

Big Shot Rob. Simply amazing.

[Pumpy Tudors]

I say we immortalize Jack Haley and Will Perdue. Nobody could wave a towel like those guys, although Mark Madsen was getting close.

[Comey]

He probably deserves a display in the Hall about his clutch shots. But that would be a temporary one.

The guy is solely known for his clutch shooting (and that one dunk he had his rookie year, where he caught the oop pass from behind him, and he still made the dunk, despite the momentum change).

[Young Drachma]

That man is crazy. Wow...I didn't realize he had 5 rings until I thought about it and started counting. Damn, that's crazy to be that clutch for that many clubs. John Salley is only other player to win rings with 3 different teams. But he only has what, 4 rings?

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

If Robert Horry gets into the Hall of Fame, the NBA is a bigger joke than I thought. Of course he's a good player, and he's made some very important shots in his career, but he doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame.

I think he'll take all those rings as plenty compensation. Besides, with ESPN Classic, everyone can be a Hall of Famer in living colour.

[stevew]

I drew that play up in my head. Once i saw that Hunter was far too off of Horry, it was inevitable.

[LloydLungs]

Originally Posted by Pacersfan46

Sooo, pressure in a sport can make you lose track of your fundamentals ..... but it can't in another sport?

That makes no sense.

In basketball, if you shoot accurately, the ball goes in. In baseball, there are more factors involved and a lot more luck involved. If the pitcher throws an unhittable pitch, you're probably out. Or, you can kill a ball and still make an out. Or conversely, you might break your bat and have the ball float just over somebody's glove for a hit. In baseball more so than other sports, guys can do everything right and still fail, or look really bad and still succeed -- happens all the time, and makes "clutch" much more difficult to determine.

[MikeVick7]

Originally Posted by RendeR

You want to compare with NASCAR? Please. there isn't an NBA player than would last 48 minutes in a stock car before passing out from the heat and mental stress.

And I think the same can be said if you put Jeff Gordon on the basketball court for 48 minutes.

If you don't think that playing at least 20-30 minutes of basketball cannot wear a guy out then it's painfully obvious that you have never stepped foot on a basketball court and played competitively.

[Pacersfan46]

Originally Posted by LloydLungs

In basketball, if you shoot accurately, the ball goes in. In baseball, there are more factors involved and a lot more luck involved. If the pitcher throws an unhittable pitch, you're probably out. Or, you can kill a ball and still make an out. Or conversely, you might break your bat and have the ball float just over somebody's glove for a hit. In baseball more so than other sports, guys can do everything right and still fail, or look really bad and still succeed -- happens all the time, and makes "clutch" much more difficult to determine.

I'm a pitcher, played at a very high level. Let me just say that NO pitch is unhittable. I've seen a pitch that bounced get hit over the fence. If a hitter follows through with the fundamentals even a low and outside pitch off the plate can be hit hard the opposite way.

While I understand what you're saying, you have to realize exactly what it means. Taking it one step further, then you're saying numbers have no bearing on how good a player is either? I mean like you said ... Ichiro could have gotten lucky on 30 or 40 of his hits last year. Does that suddenly make him less of a player? How exactly can you judge that? Implementing a "lucky hit" stat? What you're implying just basically means that MLB hitters are lucky as often as they are good.

Which I can't say the numbers coincide with. Otherwise it would be a crapshoot on what players would be the best from year to year, and while it is to some degree a core number of players are All-Stars year in, and out. Showing to me that being good outweighs the importance of being lucky.

[Danny]

What's a very high level?

[LloydLungs]

Originally Posted by Pacersfan46

While I understand what you're saying, you have to realize exactly what it means. Taking it one step further, then you're saying numbers have no bearing on how good a player is either? I mean like you said ... Ichiro could have gotten lucky on 30 or 40 of his hits last year. Does that suddenly make him less of a player? How exactly can you judge that? Implementing a "lucky hit" stat? What you're implying just basically means that MLB hitters are lucky as often as they are good.

Nah -- generally over a 600-at-bat season, luck evens out, and stats give you a pretty good reflection of a player. I think the problem with "clutch" numbers is that they're based on much more limited sample sizes. For a big postseason at-bat, you still take 90s-era Bonds at the plate over Lemke unless you're completely insane.

Conversely, for basketball, I'd much rather have Horry taking a game winning shot than say, Chris Webber, even though Webber is a much better overall player. Webber routinely and quite obviously wets himself down the stretch of big games. It's no coincidence.

[ice4277]

Well, tough loss for the Pistons, but it was good to finally see a competitive game. If I could pick one team for Detroit to lose to in a Finals, it would be the Spurs. I think I will get my "wish" now, even as good as the Pistons play with their backs to the wall, I have a hard time picturing them winning 2 games in a row in San Antonio.

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by RendeR

You want to compare with NASCAR? Please. there isn't an NBA player than would last 48 minutes in a stock car before passing out from the heat and mental stress.

I don't know if there's a NBA player who could fit in a stock car. Stock car drivers are midgets.

Oh, btw, you know they have cooling systems in these cars now?

As for NASCAR being a "sport", well, it is - but just barely and the drivers are just above being a jockey on a racehorse. It very much is a mechanic and money contest, where the best funded teams have an extreme advantage over others. The drivers are very much the QB of a larger (often invisible) team of pit crews, mechanics, sponsors, etc. that directly impact the outcome. In fact, the more NASCAR goes big-time with big tracks, the less the drivers are a factor in the outcome.

But don't take my word for it. Go to NASCAR's own site and read this article.

hxxp://www.nascar.com/2003/news/cnnsi/02/15/driver_machine/

You'll find quotes like:

Terry Labonte says the current mix is 60 percent car, 40 percent driver. At Daytona and Talladega, almost everyone agrees it's 90 percent car and 10 percent driver.

and

"I think if you don't have the car capable of driving, it doesn't matter who's driving it," Joe Nemechek said. "They're not going to be able to go. If you have a car that's close, then the driver can make some differences. But both have to be right on top of each other."

and

"It depends," Ricky Rudd said. "I think as time goes on, it's more machine and less driver."

and

"People don't realize how important equipment is," Terry Labonte said. "But it's pretty important."

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by LloydLungs

I think it depends on the sport. In baseball I think it's mostly myth, but I definitely believe in clutch performance in basketball. You can absolutely let pressure affect your release point and your form on shots, and you can miss shots largely from letting pressure get to you.

But Horry is a robot.

yeah, perhaps I should clarify - I don't believe in clutch performers per se, but I do believe that pressure can affect you. And baseball we can study it more clearly and see just that.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Pacersfan46

I'm a pitcher, played at a very high level. Let me just say that NO pitch is unhittable. I've seen a pitch that bounced get hit over the fence. If a hitter follows through with the fundamentals even a low and outside pitch off the plate can be hit hard the opposite way.

While I understand what you're saying, you have to realize exactly what it means. Taking it one step further, then you're saying numbers have no bearing on how good a player is either? I mean like you said ... Ichiro could have gotten lucky on 30 or 40 of his hits last year. Does that suddenly make him less of a player? How exactly can you judge that? Implementing a "lucky hit" stat? What you're implying just basically means that MLB hitters are lucky as often as they are good.

Which I can't say the numbers coincide with. Otherwise it would be a crapshoot on what players would be the best from year to year, and while it is to some degree a core number of players are All-Stars year in, and out. Showing to me that being good outweighs the importance of being lucky.

Study after study has proven that while clutch peformance may exist, the clutchness of players is fairly random as it were- it is widely overstated. If the effect exists , it is small enough not to meet any of the confidence levels when testing.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by IMetTrentGreen

to everyone who thinks they are too cool to watch the nba, nobody here is too cool to do anything

I'm not too cool for the NBA, but the NBA is definitely not cool enough for me.

[RendeR]

Blackie:

Those comments are spot on, from a current DRIVERS perspective. What my point remains is that without a driver with serious skills it doesn't matter if the car is spot on perfect for a given day at a given track, he's not going to finish the race because he's going to lose it somewhere along the 4 hour marathon. The drivers are talking about having a driver WITH those skills and in those cases WINNING races comes down to exactly what they're saying, don't take the quotes out of context, these guys are discussing SUCCESS in the series, not just showing up and running.

As for the cooling units, yes, there are mini AC units blowing air into the FACE of the drivers in most cars, that doesn't change the fact that the rest of their body is being steam cleaned in those fire suits. Temperatures in the cockpit of stock cars can reach levels of 160 degrees with an average ranging between 120-130 each week.

You're still ignoring the most important trait that makes these drivers so great, the mental toughness. I suggest anyone who doubts a NASCAR driver's abilities go to the driving experiences,. They only get up to about 140 mph, but it will at elast give you a taste of what the drivers must be doing for 3-5 HOURS at a time with only 13 second breaks in the action =)

Michael Waltrip, while I admit he is a abberation, is 6 foot 6. So it might be a squeeze but you can get most NBA players into one, they'll start crying soon afterward, but it could be done

I'm not talking out my ass here folks, I've driven stock cars competitively on the touring level, I've done what they do every week and I freely admit I may not have the skills needed to succeed there, but I'll talk circles around anyone here when it comes to the ignorant comments I keep seeing about NASCAR and its athletes.

[Karlifornia]

I compete in a version of NASCAR everyday=The California Freeways.

[Wolfpack]

clutch (kluch)
v. To grasp and hold tightly
n. A tight grasp
n. A tense, critical situation
adj. (inf) Tending to be successful in tense or critical situations (see Horry, Robert, usages pertaining to NBA Finals)

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Study after study has proven that while clutch peformance may exist, the clutchness of players is fairly random as it were- it is widely overstated. If the effect exists , it is small enough not to meet any of the confidence levels when testing.

I am a believer in the "clutch" hitter/shooter/whatever phenomenon. It seems pretty obvious to me that some individuals are better able to tolerate pressure situations. If a player is capable of setting the moment aside, and concentrating fully on the matter at hand, then they have an advantage over the average player. These players are "clutch".

That said, in baseball, even when a player has everything going for them they are just not going to be successful more than 30 or 40 percent of the time.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

clutch (kluch)
v. To grasp and hold tightly
n. A tight grasp
n. A tense, critical situation
adj. (inf) Tending to be successful in tense or critical situations (see Horry, Robert, usages pertaining to NBA Finals)

[weinstein7]

Originally Posted by Comey

The guy is solely known for his clutch shooting (and that one dunk he had his rookie year, where he caught the oop pass from behind him, and he still made the dunk, despite the momentum change).

Actually, the explosive dunk he had last night was pretty impressive. Especially since he looked like he separated his shoulder on the play. I was shocked he stayed in the game after airballing the free-throw, but I guess you just don't take Robert Horry out at that point in a close game.

[terpkristin]

Going back the main topic of this thread, interestingly enough Mark Cuban seems to think this is a GREAT series for a "baskteball junkie." After reading this, all I could ask myself is, "What series is he watching or what planet is he on?" From http://www.blogmaverick.com/entry/1234000203047318/

Thoughts on the NBA Finals heading into Game 5

First, what a great , great series to watch. There has been everything that a basketball junkie could want. Passion, intensity, athleticism, how did he do that shots, team play on both sides of the ball, lots of suprises and a coaching chess match between the two best coaches of this decade.

Which leads me to the pre game shows. I don’t want to hear what Mike, Tim, Bill, Steven or Greg think the teams or players should do. I want more information on what they are doing. Why is it that only football pre games or in game analysts talk about plays? Why can’t we get some basketball analysts who break down games and tell us what plays are being run, how the defenses are reacting to them and whats working or not working?

Give me something of substance beyond “Duncan has got to show up”. “Joe Dumars told Rasheed to take his shot when they were in the elevator together.”

We have gotten some in game analysis about where certain players like to shoot from… mostly Bruce Bowen and Tim Duncan, and that Chauncey Billups likes to shoot 3s in the 4th quarter, but beyond that it seems like the announcers assume the fans not only know nothing about the game, but they want to keep it that way.

One of the best features, I think in Sports Illustrated is the scouting reports on teams and players. Give us some knowledge from the people who get paid to scout the league. The more we can give insights from insiders rather than listen to what Ben Wallace’s wife told him for the 9th time (it was ok as a fun fact the first time), the more involved fans will be with the game.

—Which is not to say that ABC hasn’t stepped up. The halftime series have been phenomenal! I have seen the ones of Rip, Manu and Horace Jenkins and they have been great TV. The only missing piece is that they weren’t in HD.

—Anyone who thought the series was over after the Spurs went up 2-0 had already forgotten what happened to them in the Seattle series. They just havent been great away from home this year. Not great, but capable of winning when pushed hard. Which makes tonights game 5 all the more exciting.

—I understand why the NBA wants to bring in the legends of the game. That’s what the focus groups said. That older potential viewers missed the legends of the NBA. Well, beyond the fact that 18-34 is the coveted demographic for our TV partners, to paraphrase Rick Pitino “Larry Bird, Dr J, Magic Johnson and Michael Jordon aren’t playing in an NBA game anytime soon”. Putting the legends in our commercials isn’t going to convince older viewers that they might, or that our current players are their peers.

The NBA product is amazing right now. The games are fun to watch. Every playoff matchup has had drama and excitement. The product is good and not only that, it is working for our advertisers. So why in the world are we selling what we don’t have?

The last time a mashup of old and new worked was when Aerosmith and Run DMC re worked Walk This Way. The NBA attempt at a mashup of old and new just isn’t working.

The first thing any salesperson learns is “Sell what you have”.

Can we please market and sell what we have… Drama, intense action, passion, fun, excitement, rabid fans, athleticism, and great guys playing a great game in a way that can appeal to all demographics. If we market the fun and benefits of the product we have, more people would get into the games. Trying to show off the Legends of the game might be great for ESPN Classic Sports, but it’s not going to get prospective fans, and those on the cusp to make an appointment with their TV to turn on ABC tonight at 9pm EST.

Our biggest challenge is in those cities who don’t have NBA teams. So how about this for an idea this upcoming season. In addition to sending teams to Europe and around the world to build interest, why not start camp a little early and send teams to cities like Cincinatti, Pittsburgh, St Louis, Kansas City, Columbus and others of similar sizes to build awareness and excitement for our game and players? Start off the week with an open tryout in that city, pick one or two players to work out with the team for that week and build some local excitement. It would build and extend our fanbase in those cities. It would expose the local media and fans to our players, where they can see what we are really like. It would be selling the product we have to the fans and customer we need the most… What a concept!

Finally, the ratings. It seems like thats a big a topic as the games themselves. I personally have been pleasantly suprised at how good they were. I didn’t expect them to match last year. As I have said before, people love trainwreck TV and that’s exactly what last years finals were, the trainwreck of the Lakers, which I enjoyed as much as the next person.

This year is about the games, the players who play them and what fans look for in a World Championship Series.. It’s all there.

Now if we had combined great marketing with all the great things we have seen on TV, who knows how good they could have been the first 4 games. From here on out however, I think the games will more than compensate for other mistakes. It’s a best of 3 series between two great teams, and that will make for great TV and ratings.

/tk

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by RendeR

Blackie:

Those comments are spot on, from a current DRIVERS perspective. What my point remains is that without a driver with serious skills it doesn't matter if the car is spot on perfect for a given day at a given track, he's not going to finish the race because he's going to lose it somewhere along the 4 hour marathon. The drivers are talking about having a driver WITH those skills and in those cases WINNING races comes down to exactly what they're saying, don't take the quotes out of context, these guys are discussing SUCCESS in the series, not just showing up and running.

As for the cooling units, yes, there are mini AC units blowing air into the FACE of the drivers in most cars, that doesn't change the fact that the rest of their body is being steam cleaned in those fire suits. Temperatures in the cockpit of stock cars can reach levels of 160 degrees with an average ranging between 120-130 each week.

You're still ignoring the most important trait that makes these drivers so great, the mental toughness. I suggest anyone who doubts a NASCAR driver's abilities go to the driving experiences,. They only get up to about 140 mph, but it will at elast give you a taste of what the drivers must be doing for 3-5 HOURS at a time with only 13 second breaks in the action =)

Michael Waltrip, while I admit he is a abberation, is 6 foot 6. So it might be a squeeze but you can get most NBA players into one, they'll start crying soon afterward, but it could be done

I'm not talking out my ass here folks, I've driven stock cars competitively on the touring level, I've done what they do every week and I freely admit I may not have the skills needed to succeed there, but I'll talk circles around anyone here when it comes to the ignorant comments I keep seeing about NASCAR and its athletes.

I don't want to turn the NBA thread into a pro/con NASCAR thread, so I'll be brief.

I've raced. Small circuits from VA, WVA, PA, etc., I've driven dirt and asphalt ovals and even a couple of road courses. No, it's not easy and I don't think anyone would suggest that the drivers aren't very talented. It can be very nerve-wracking, especially on a tight course with lots of traffic.

I don't dispute the concentration level it takes to be a successful driver. I actually enjoyed the driving aspect. It just takes the ability to absorb a lot of information quickly and make decisions based off of that information. I find driving to be much like looking at moving patterns. Since I tend to excel in that, it's not that difficult for me. The g-forces and heat can wear you down, but it's all what you get used to. Put you or I in a car right now and we'll pass out. Give us a few months to build up to it and we won't.

There's different types of mental toughness. To say one is harder than another...I think that's a personal decision. I don't find NASCAR's athletes to be superior in any way in that aspect.

[RendeR]

Well stated. I send you a polish victory lap for those comments.


Also I apologize for the intrusive threadjack, My original intent was simply to display my compelte disgust with professional basketball, so with that I'll send this thread on its way.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I am a believer in the "clutch" hitter/shooter/whatever phenomenon. It seems pretty obvious to me that some individuals are better able to tolerate pressure situations. If a player is capable of setting the moment aside, and concentrating fully on the matter at hand, then they have an advantage over the average player. These players are "clutch".

That said, in baseball, even when a player has everything going for them they are just not going to be successful more than 30 or 40 percent of the time.

Personally, I think it should be a pressure rating. I don't think it's so much that the good hitters or pitchers are any better than usual. It's that some of the players just crumble in the face of pressure so the ones who don't look better comparatively. For instance, Mariano Rivera doesn't pitch better than he does normally in the postseason- he pitches the same, but if you put a significant number of hitters in the 9th inning, down by a run or two, quite a few will crumble under pressure and make him look better.

Similar to how I think a manager affects things in baseball. They have a much greater capacity to be an impediment than a boost. Even the best will only will win you a couple of games across a season. But if they suck, they can lose you a lot of games with bad decisions. But, wow, now I'm really off topic.

SI

[ThunderingHERD]

I don't see how a crowd that plays simulations and witnesses an identical illusion of "clutch" and "streakiness" can still believe in those factors.

A great article on Horry from Slate (written before game 5, obviously):

Sideshow Bob

Is Robert Horry the NBA's best clutch shooter or its best con man?
By Felix Gillette

Posted Thursday, June 16, 2005, at 2:13 PM PT

In Tuesday's Game 3 of the NBA Finals, San Antonio and Detroit are tied with about a minute left in the third quarter. The Spurs' Robert Horry launches a high-arching three-pointer from the top of the key. Nothing but glass. Forty-five seconds later, Horry drives in for a layup—rejected. When the Pistons run out on a fast break, Horry tries to block Richard Hamilton's shot from behind—goaltending.

In less than a minute, Horry's burst of bad play has helped the Pistons lock up a victory. But don't tell that to the announcers. "That's a guy," says ABC's Hubie Brown, "who is not giving up on anything."

This year's playoffs have followed an all-too-familiar script. Robert Horry throws up a bunch of bricks. Robert Horry gets celebrated as "Big Shot Bob," legendary sharpshooter and five-time NBA champion. In both 2003 and 2004, Horry's missed three-pointers helped eliminate his teams from the playoffs. Yet during this year's finals, there's a commercial showing then-Laker Robert Horry hitting a three from the corner against the 76ers back in 2001. "The Finals," says a voice-over, "where legends are born." In Horry's case, it's more like, "The Finals, where legends are nurtured, coddled, and defended against reality."

Robert Horry's career has been built on a great, underappreciated basketball truth: Big shots are only big shots if you make them. Unlike a missed field goal or a botched ground ball, a missed three-pointer is imminently forgettable. Even the best long-range shooters miss most of the time. Every NBA game has dozens and dozens of misfires, all of which look more or less the same. One more miss, no matter how important the context, tends to get lost in the clutter. If you're a role player, that goes double—nobody expected you to make the shot anyway.

Horry's true genius isn't his clutch shooting. It's his understanding of roundball amnesia. After sinking a buzzer-beater against Sacramento in the 2002 playoffs, Horry explained his philosophy. "If I hit it we win, if I miss y'all are going to blame the stars for losing the game anyway," he told the Washington Post's Michael Wilbon. "There's no pressure on me." Horry has none of the guts and gets all of the glory. In the 2003 playoffs, Horry went 2-for-38 from behind the arc—and everybody blamed Shaq and Kobe for the Lakers' downfall. After this year's Game 3 drubbing, Horry got off again—it was Manu Ginobili's and Tim Duncan's fault.

The Big Shot Bob persona is so overwhelming that it blocks out more than missed shots. Remember when Horry took a swing at Utah's Jeff Hornacek in 1997? What a clutch punch! Or when he threw a towel in the face of his coach, Danny Ainge, that same year? Dagger! How about when he got fined for shoving a cameraman in 2003? Now that's killer instinct!

After Game 2 of this year's finals, in which Horry scored 12 points on 4-for-10 shooting, ESPN.com's Bill Simmons declared Horry "one of the more important team players of the last 35 years," and possibly even deserving of a spot in the Hall of Fame. Horry's reputation as a great team player is a bit of a mix-up. It's more accurate to say he's been the teammate of great players: Hakeem Olajuwon in Houston, Shaquille O'Neal in Los Angeles, and Tim Duncan in San Antonio. Horry has made his career coasting on other player's coattails. He's 6-feet-10, yet he lets his teammates scrap in the paint for offensive rebounds while he hovers vulturelike at the three-point line. On offense, he's incapable of creating an open shot for himself. Instead, he stands around waiting for the defense to double-team his superstar teammate, hoping for an open look.

Horry isn't even the best forward from the University of Alabama in this year's finals. Antonio McDyess' career averages (15.7 points, .494 shooting percentage, 8.5 rebounds) dwarf Horry's feeble stat line (7.5 points per game, .431 shooting percentage, 5.0 rebounds). Yet all the glory goes to Horry.

During the first half of Game 3, Horry became the all-time leader in three-pointers made during the NBA Finals, passing Michael Jordan. Only Reggie Miller has made more playoff three-pointers than Horry. What a clutch shooter! Better than Jordan! Never mind that Horry has made only 227 of 634 of his playoff threes—a mediocre .358 shooting percentage. After all, who's going to remember any of those 407 misses?

Felix Gillette is a writer in Austin, Texas.
Photograph of Robert Horry by Brian Bahr/Getty.

[Neon_Chaos]

Who won the game? Oh, what? Horry? With what? a 3-pointer? Ah. Good.

[ThunderingHERD]

Originally Posted by Neon_Chaos

Who won the game? Oh, what? Horry? With what? a 3-pointer? Ah. Good.

Who shot 2-38 in the 2003 playoffs? Oh, what? Horry? With what? 3-pointers? Ah. Good.

[Neon_Chaos]

See, I don't get why it has to matter if Horry shot 2/38 from the line in 2003. That was two years ago. He just single handedly brought the San Antonio Spurs back from the dead, and probably saved Tim Duncan's career, preventing any 'Webber-esqe' label from being tagged onto his back (at the same time probably tagging that label on 'Sheed).

I have no problem with the fact that if he didn't make the shot, the blame wouldn't be on him, it would be on Timmy's lousy showing in the final strecth. Heck, I envy Horry's position more than ever... he'll never take the blame, because all his outstanding performances came at times when they least expected it to come from him. But when he did show up, he shone brighter than anyone else.

Robert Horry just had one of the biggest 2nd halves in the history of the NBA Finals, it's 2005 and the Spurs are on the brink of an NBA Championship because of that.

Show some love.

Big Shot Rob Bags Another One

By Bill Simmons
Page 2

Somebody needs to go through Robert Horry's playoff games, pluck out all the big plays and shots, then run them in sequence for like 10 straight minutes with one of those cool sports video songs playing (like Aerosmith's "Dream On," or Led Zeppelin's "The Rain Song"). Who wouldn't enjoy that? I bet Horry has made at least 20 to 25 humongous shots over the years. Seriously.

Now …

You might be asking yourself, "Wait, that opening paragraph sounded a little familiar." Well, it should. I wrote it two summers ago.

Here's the point: Even if Horry had retired in 2003, we would have remembered Big Shot Bob for life. But he saved his defining moment for Sunday night, throwing a rattled Spurs team on his back in Detroit and making … I mean … it would almost demean what happened to write something like "some huge 3-pointers" or "a number of game-saving plays." Considering the situation (a budding Spurs collapse that seemed eerily reminiscent of the 2004 Lakers series), the circumstances (nobody else on his team was stepping up) and the opponent (one of the best defensive teams ever, playing at home), Horry's Game 5 ranks alongside MJ's Game 6 in 1998, Worthy's Game 7 in 1988, Frazier's Game 7 in 1970 and every other clutch Finals performance over the years. If Horry hadn't scored 21 of his team's last 35 points, the Spurs would have been "Dead Man Walking" heading back to San Antonio. Instead, they're probably going to win the title Tuesday night.

Big Shot Bob driving to the hoop is NOT what the Pistons want to see at crunch time.
(And forget about saving the season; Horry probably altered the course of Tim Duncan's career. If the Spurs had lost that game, they would have eventually blown the series and everyone would have blamed Duncan all summer, mainly because of his epic stink bomb down the stretch that brought back memories of Karl Malone and Elvin Hayes. Now he's just another great player who had an atrocious game at the wrong time. That's the power of Big Shot Bob. And if you think a rejuvenated/relieved/thankful Duncan isn't throwing up a 35-15 Tuesday night, you're crazy.)

My favorite thing about Sunday night's game: When Horry drained that go-ahead three at the end of the third quarter, it was like sitting at a poker table with a good player who plays possum for an hour, then suddenly pushes a stack of chips into the middle. Uh-oh. He's making his move. You could just see it coming. The rest of the game played out like that – the Spurs always one mistake from blowing the game, Horry bailing them out again and again. By the time he jammed home that astounding lefty dunk in overtime, everyone knew the game would somehow end up in Horry's hands.

Well, everyone but Rasheed Wallace.

(That reminds me. We're always too quick to demolish athletes who make dumb plays or screw up at the worst possible times, from Byner's fumble to C-Webb's timeout to poor Bill Buckner … but at the same time, I feel like 'Sheed's brainfart will somehow get swept under the rug in the afterglow of such an electric game. Let the record show that Wallace's decision to leave a scorching-hot Horry to double-team Ginobili was the single dumbest play in the history of the NBA Finals. For sweeping significance and staggering inexplicability, it cannot be topped. I'm telling you.)

Horry's career has always been a nice litmus test for the question, "Do you understand the game of basketball or not?" Nearly all of his strengths aren't things that casual fans would notice. He's the kind of guy who would be useless on the "And 1" tour. For instance, he's a terrific help defender who constantly covers for his teammates. He's big enough to handle power forwards and quick enough to handle small forwards. He picks his spots and only asserts himself in big situations when his team truly needs him. He doesn't care about stats or touches – at all – which gives him something in common with maybe 2 percent of the league. And he gets better when it matters. What more would you want from a supporting player?

Horry just might be screaming his way into the Hall of Fame.
Lord knows I've written about him enough times. I once compared him to a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, explaining that "Nobody ever talks about him, but he's always there when you need him, just like the Peebee and Jay." I compared him to Nate Dogg, John Cazale and every other famous person who flew under the radar screen but always ended up in good situations. When someone asked me in a recent mailbag whether I would have Horry's career (multiple rings and rich) or Barkley/Malone's careers (no rings and obscenely rich), I opted for Horry's career (and didn't even think twice). Imagine playing on five (soon to be six) championship teams, ending up with a cool nickname, making $50 million, earning the everlasting respect of everyone who ever played with or against you … and you didn't have to deal with any of the superstar BS? Have a great game, everyone notices you. Have a terrible game, nobody notices you. And that's your life. Doesn't that sound like the ultimate gig?

In a league loaded with guys who believe they're better than they actually are, Horry understands his own strengths and limitations better than anyone. That's what makes him so great. And that's why I like the poker analogy for him. He's the guy sitting at the table with a towering stack of chips, the guy who never chases a bad hand, the guy who makes your heart pound when he's staring you down. You never remember the hands he lost, but you always remember the ones he won. And when he finally cashes out and gets up from the table, you hope you never have to see him again.

Does that make him a Hall of Famer some day? Before this spring, I would have said no … and then Steve Nash won the MVP. Now I'm prepared for anything. But you know where I stand. Instead of making Horry's case in full, I'm telling you a story that hasn't even happened yet. Maybe it will be this summer, maybe next summer, maybe 15 years from now. But when ESPN Classic shows Game 5 of the 2005 Finals some day and I'm calling my buddy House just to tell him, "Turn on Classic, they're showing the Robert Horry Game," I can pretty much guarantee his response:

"Which one?"