Robert Horry = Hall of Famer?

[Diesel]

I was listening to the radio and this discussion came up. At first, I laughed. I don't think of Horry as being a Hall of famer. However, the radio reminded me that Horry has 7 NBA Championship Rings. 7 Rings can't be coincidence. Not with the same team either. It's not like Pipp who got 6 rings all with the Bulls. Horry got Rings with Houston, Rings with LAL, and Rings with San Anton...7 Rings. Plus, you can remember Horry as the guy always nailing the big Shots.

So I guess, the conversation is:

Should Horry be considered for the NBA Hall of fame?

[Cwell]

did he even start on a lot of those teams?He hit some shots but was never great.He was just always on the right team at the right time.

[AnakinJoe]

I'm pretty sure that he started for those Houston teams with Hakeem.

I don't think he is HOFer. While 7 rings is incredible, I don't think that he ever lived up to his talent level, as a 6'10" athletic, jump-shooting SF. Was he ever an All-Star?

[jhay610]

"Big Shot Bob" lived up to his talent. He was always there when you needed a big shot. He stepped up when it mattered most. Every time. That's got to count for something.

IMO, he is not a hall of famer. But he is a winner and he has had an incredible career.

The old debate is would you rather have a career like Charles Barkley (i.e. be a top player of your era but never get a ring) or Robert Horry (a middle of the road player that has ice water for veins and a reputation among your peers as clutch and a winner).

I think I would rather be Bobby Horry.

[Packfill]

No.

[Plainview1981]

Not even close. Horry on his best day is a decent player.

[FrankWhite]

Nah, he's not a HOFer. He's a clutch, smart role player who made his name in Houston and good teams with dominating big men wisely sought out his services.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Not even close. Horry on his best day is a decent player.

The problem is that the basketball hall of fame got some jokers on there who hasn't done as much as Horry:

Clyde E. Lovellette

Dino Meneghin

Meneghin holds the distinction of winning four championships - national playoffs, Italy Cup, European and Intercontinental Cup - all in the same year, in 1970, 1973, 1987. Meneghin Italian teams finished fourth in the World Championships in 1970 and 1978.

There are others who are in the hall simply because they were on championship teams. If that is the qualification... What about Horry. 7 NBA titles on 3 NBA teams means something. It's not just luck.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Not even close. Horry on his best day is a decent player.

The problem is that the basketball hall of fame got some jokers on there who hasn't done as much as Horry:

Clyde E. Lovellette

Dino Meneghin

Meneghin holds the distinction of winning four championships - national playoffs, Italy Cup, European and Intercontinental Cup - all in the same year, in 1970, 1973, 1987. Meneghin Italian teams finished fourth in the World Championships in 1970 and 1978.

There are others who are in the hall simply because they were on championship teams. If that is the qualification... What about Horry. 7 NBA titles on 3 NBA teams means something. It's not just luck.

The HOF has different standards for foreign players, women, etc. They are ridiculously low compared to what is required for NBA players. That doesn't mean I would lower the bar to let Horry in. He has his championship rings...he earned them and they are his legacy. He was always an asset for a winning team but never good enough to be HOF worthy, IMO.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

He was always an asset for a winning team but never good enough to be HOF worthy, IMO.

I think the question that needs to be asked is without Horry would those teams have won??

Kobe hasn't won since Horry left.

Houston stopped winning after Horry Left.

Had Duncan won a championship without Horry?

Moreover, the standards that they allow other people in is ridiculously low. When the NBA is the cream of the crop in basketball and you've let guys in because they were members of a team that won the championship... then Horry having 7 championship rings (second only to Russell) and being a part of three dynasties have to have some many.

Maybe he is a role player, but does his role create championships is what you have to determine.

[AHF]

If you were never a top 30 player in the NBA at any point in your career, I don't see how you can claim to be a HOF.

Regarding the people who have been let into the HOF under the non-NBA labels, I would slam the door shut on those people if I was in charge of the basketball HOF - not let in people like Horry.

[DrReality]

Never. He's just been a very fortunate player to be in the right place at the right time. That doesn't make him a HOFer.

[dlpin]

Michael Cooper, Don Nelson (as a player on the celtics) and Dennis Rodman didnt make the hall of fame, and won several championships, having a much more important role on their teams than Horry had on the Lakers and Spurts.

Horry was a started in Houston, but only because it was the seasons the 3 point line was moved in, and houston had decided to play a 4-1, with 4 3 point shooter and Hakeem in the middle.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Michael Cooper, Don Nelson (as a player on the celtics) and Dennis Rodman didnt make the hall of fame, and won several championships, having a much more important role on their teams than Horry had on the Lakers and Spurts.

Horry was a started in Houston, but only because it was the seasons the 3 point line was moved in, and houston had decided to play a 4-1, with 4 3 point shooter and Hakeem in the middle.

Actually, I think if it wasn't for Rodman's antics, the focus on Magic with the Lakers, and Nellie's coaching career all of those guys would be in the Hall.

I can't see how you can look at a guy like Maurice Stokes, Buddy Jeannette, or Arnie Risen and say that they are more worthy than Horry.

[dlpin]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Michael Cooper, Don Nelson (as a player on the celtics) and Dennis Rodman didnt make the hall of fame, and won several championships, having a much more important role on their teams than Horry had on the Lakers and Spurts.

Horry was a started in Houston, but only because it was the seasons the 3 point line was moved in, and houston had decided to play a 4-1, with 4 3 point shooter and Hakeem in the middle.

Actually, I think if it wasn't for Rodman's antics, the focus on Magic with the Lakers, and Nellie's coaching career all of those guys would be in the Hall.

I can't see how you can look at a guy like Maurice Stokes, Buddy Jeannette, or Arnie Risen and say that they are more worthy than Horry.

Pointing at guys who shouldnt be there is hardly an argument for why someone should be there. In any case, even the guys you mention (who I had to look up because I had no idea who they were) were all stars or made an all nba team (or coached a team to victory).

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Pointing at guys who shouldnt be there is hardly an argument for why someone should be there.

I don't think I can agree with you dlpin. Up until this point, you've been logically sound. However, let me state the case.

Doesn't the constituency of the Hall determine who's eligible? There are a lot of guys who are in the hall that are not and were not the NBA elite. I think that many here has missed the eligibility:

Quote:

---

ELIGIBILITY

Candidates must meet the following requirements in order to be eligible for Enshrinement into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame (hereafter BHOF):

Player: A player must be fully retired for five years before being eligible for Enshrinement. He/she may then be considered for Enshrinement in the sixth year of retirement. Should a player come out of retirement for a short period of time, as defined by the BHOF, his/her case and eligibility for Enshrinement shall be reviewed on an individual basis.

Quote:

---

There are four Screening Committees: 1. North American; 2. Women; 3. Veterans (an individual whose career ended 35 years before his/her current consideration); and 4. International. These Committees will review and recommend individuals to be reviewed for Enshrinement by the Honors Committee. The North American Committee consists of nine members. The Women's, International, and Veteran's Screening Committees are each composed of seven members. To advance to the Honors Committee, an individual requires a minimum number of affirmative votes from the applicable Screening Committee (North American: at least 7 of 9; all others at least 5 of 7). If an individual does not receive a single affirmative vote for three consecutive years (0-27 or 0-21) that person's candidacy is suspended for five years after which time he/she may again start the process of being reviewed by a Screening Committee. There is no limitation on the number of years a person can be considered for Enshrinement by a Screening Committee unless that person does not receive a single vote for three consecutive years. Screening Committees may put forth a maximum number of finalists to the Honors Committee as follows: North American 10; all others 2.

Nowhere does it say that a Hall of Famer has to be elite. It says that they have to be recommended by the Honors committee. Their guideline is not really known, but I believe it's loose and free.

I think the NBA makes it's own distinction for elite players and that distinction was the 50 greatest.

So when you look at the basketball hall of fame you have to look at their process of determination:

Quote:

---

After the vote of the Screening Committees, those candidates who are recommended to be put forth to the Honors Committee will first be reviewed by the BHOF Board of Trustees. At this time, should it be determined by the Board of Trustees that an individual has damaged the integrity of the game of basketball, he or she shall be deemed not worthy of Enshrinement and removed from consideration.

I think that when you do, I think that the main thing is that the person has promoted basketball well.

If 7 NBA championships on 3 different teams doesn't promote the sport of Basketball well, I don't know what does?

[AHF]

Quote:

---

I think that when you do, I think that the main thing is that the person has promoted basketball well.

If 7 NBA championships on 3 different teams doesn't promote the sport of Basketball well, I don't know what does?

Then clear a space in the HOF for Steve Kerr and his 5 championships with 2 different teams.

IMO, you have to have some elite standard as part of the player criteria. Also, I reject the HOFs nominees outside of NBA players in many cases so I recognize that they lower the bar for foreign players, etc. but I don't consider those guys anything but affirmative action cases who in there to reflect the global spread of the sport.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I think that when you do, I think that the main thing is that the person has promoted basketball well.

If 7 NBA championships on 3 different teams doesn't promote the sport of Basketball well, I don't know what does?

Then clear a space in the HOF for Steve Kerr and his 5 championships with 2 different teams.

IMO, you have to have some elite standard as part of the player criteria. Also, I reject the HOFs nominees outside of NBA players in many cases so I recognize that they lower the bar for foreign players, etc. but I don't consider those guys anything but affirmative action cases who in there to reflect the global spread of the sport.

The problem AHF is that there are many of the members within the Hall of Fame that played in the NBA and had less than Stellar careers. You would think that you have to be a great player to be nominated but that's not what the rules say. What the rules say is that you apply, put your package in, have it screened by screeners, then they look at what you've done for the Sport.

In fact, when it says that a player who has disrespected the game cannot be considered then you rule out eligible on the basis of just elite player status. You're considering stuff like citizenship.

Moreover, the people who decide who makes it in are people who decide one whatever basis they feel is correct. For instance, I am sure that there are some players in the Hall for simply political reasons. Drazen Petrovich was added to the Hall. He was a good player, but did his team ever make it to the 2nd round of the playoffs? Did he ever show up in a playoff game? However, he did drive his car off the side of the road and maybe for no other reason but sympathy got into the hall. Many of the guys who played in the league with before it became the ABA/NBA NBA are in the hall. Most of those guys were the opposite of good basketball players. I mean guys who have a career FG% of 30% and who only rebound 6 boards per game. Yet they are in there. When you read the rules for enshriment, you see that enshriment really follows the sign of the times. You can be not consider for 5 years and apply again after another 5 years has passed. That is to say maybe another group of judges might view you differently.

Many of the Celtics made it. Some of them however, I would say was not totally worthy.

However, the same reason they are in the Hall, Horry deserves consideration.... and he was not a part of 1 dynasty but three. Not to mention... How many big shots did Horry hit? How many series ending shots did he hit??

[FrankWhite]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

He was always an asset for a winning team but never good enough to be HOF worthy, IMO.

I think the question that needs to be asked is without Horry would those teams have won??

Kobe hasn't won since Horry left.

That's a little disingenuous, no? I seem to remember another prominent member of those Lakers squads who was traded...

Quote:

---

Had Duncan won a championship without Horry?

Yeah, he had. Twice to be exact.

[AHF]

You can enjoy your hall of pretty good with rings.

I'll take my hall of elite players.

You are asking my opinion whether Horry should be in the HOF. The answer is clearly "no" when the guy wasn't even close to an All-Star at any point in his career.

Just because past committees have taken guys like Petrovich does not convince me in the slightest.

If the Hall had taken Tyrone Corbin would you be arguing that every player at his level or higher should be in the HOF? I hope not.