I just had to post this stat. I couldn't resist it.

11 of the last 12 NBA Champions have had either Steve Kerr or Robert Horry on the team. Fuck Kobe, fuck Shaq, fuck Duncan, fuck MJ. If you want a championship you need Kerr or Bob apparently.

11 of the last 12 NBA Champions have had either Steve Kerr or Robert Horry on the team. Fuck Kobe, fuck Shaq, fuck Duncan, fuck MJ. If you want a championship you need Kerr or Bob apparently.

LMAO! but without those players, do you think they would still win a championship? That's an interesting stat though, I guess those are the most key roll players you need if you plan on winning anything so Grizzlies, please try to sign Horry

Horry is the shit.

I hate when people drool over Robert Horry. :\ Obviously he needed his superstars, so saking fuck Kobe and Shaq is idiotic, and every one of his shots that he makes he is wide open. He's decent but nothing special.

lol cool stat.
04-05-- horry
03-04-- n/a
02-03-- kerr
01-02--horry
00-01--horry
99-00--horry
98-99--kerr
97-98--kerr
96-97--kerr
95-96--kerr
94-95--horry
93-94--horry

Pure 3 point shoter is a must and this proves it. Knicks came close with Houston in the 90s.

Both clutch players who finish games strong for their team hitting huge shots.

I remember Robert Horry against the Pistons this year and Steve Kerr against the Nets a couple of years ago.

It's mostly coincidence, but there is some truth that you you need solid roleplayers who are steel nerved in the clutch moments. In crucial situations, especially playoff time, all eyes are on the superstar and he'll get triple, quadruple teamed. You need roleplayers who can take a dish and finish in playoff environment with iced out nerves.

Usually players that thrive in that situation are the main guys for their team, so to find that level of composure in just role players is unusual.

I was joking around about the fuck Kobe thing. You clearly need a player on that level to win it all unless you have tremendous team work(Pistons). However if you just have a superstar you aren't gong to go anywhere, you need role players. Which is why a guy like Robert Horry or Steve Kerr is needed, they always step up in the playoffs.

I know this thread is meant as a joke, but it does raise an interesting point that seems to hold true in any sport. When it comes to winning, superstars can only put you in a position to do it. Ultimately, sucess or failure comes down to the supporting cast being up to the task.

At the end of the day, any team that makes it to the finals is likely to have a superstar or two. The question is, who has the right players to fit around them who can get the job done? I mean, obviously Jordan and Pippen were a great duo, but there's no way they would have 6 titles without the Bulls twice being able to assemble players who could fit into a system that let them shine.

As far as role players go, you've got to say Kerr and Horry are top notch. Kerr is statistically the best 3 point shooter ever to pick up a basketball. Horry is a guy who might even be first on the list of "If your life depended on it, who would you give the game winning shot attempt to in a finals game". Obviously neither has the talent of a Barkley, Malone or those sorts of guys who never won any rings, but in their own way, they deserve the rings they've won. After all, as the USA found out at the last olympics, the old cliche that a great team can beat a team full of great players is true.

Well, think about it this way? Can't this all be just a mere coincidence because Horry and Kerr have been part of great teams with great leading players?

I just don't think that you can say, 'Without them, their team wouldn't have won, they wouldn't have won 12 of the last 13 championships.'

Granted, they did a lot in terms of clutch performance for their teams in their championship wins but if someone else was in their shoes, would they have done the same?

Yes, it is an impressive stat, but it doesn't really say too much, one thing that is for certain is that they have been lucky to have been a par tof their teams. If it wasn't a Horry or a Kerr who did what they did and it was a reserve who's moved to many teams and didn't do anything but won a ring by sitting on the pine, this stat would be the same and it wouldn't be recognised...

... the interesting nature of statistics: they don't mean that much!

The stat would've been alot better if they played for a different team like every 2 years then it would be a little scary

Both clutch players who finish games strong for their team hitting huge shots.

I remember Robert Horry against the Pistons this year and Steve Kerr against the Nets a couple of years ago.

kerr in the finals?... how can u remember him in that series-only playing 20 minutes... u should have remembered him in game 6 of the conference finals where he went 4 for 4 from 3s in the crucial final minutes of the game to help them seal the win. amazing.

I know this thread is meant as a joke, but it does raise an interesting point that seems to hold true in any sport. When it comes to winning, superstars can only put you in a position to do it. Ultimately, sucess or failure comes down to the supporting cast being up to the task.

At the end of the day, any team that makes it to the finals is likely to have a superstar or two. The question is, who has the right players to fit around them who can get the job done? I mean, obviously Jordan and Pippen were a great duo, but there's no way they would have 6 titles without the Bulls twice being able to assemble players who could fit into a system that let them shine.

As far as role players go, you've got to say Kerr and Horry are top notch. Kerr is statistically the best 3 point shooter ever to pick up a basketball. Horry is a guy who might even be first on the list of "If your life depended on it, who would you give the game winning shot attempt to in a finals game". Obviously neither has the talent of a Barkley, Malone or those sorts of guys who never won any rings, but in their own way, they deserve the rings they've won. After all, as the USA found out at the last olympics, the old cliche that a great team can beat a team full of great players is true.

-id say this is most accurate

There's no question that a successful teams needs good role players. Players who don't need the most shots or put up the best numbers, the guys that go out there and do what's asked of them, contributing here and there.

Steve Kerr and Robert Horry have indeed been key guys on almost every championship team in the last decade, but they in turn look a lot better when they're supporting guys like Michael Jordan, Hakeem Olajuwon, Shaquille O'Neal and Tim Duncan. Part of the reason they can shine as role players is because they don't have to do everything. They also have teammates who command a lot of defensive attention, which allows for open looks.

But it says a lot for these guys, especially Robert Horry, to have the ability to be a key role player in so many championships and for more than one team. Through the years there have been quite a few role players who look good while their team is winning and are sometimes overrated, who don't look so good when they move on to another team.

Guy's like Horry and Kerr are just extras on the championship team, and they are what makes the teams extra-good

I hate when people drool over Robert Horry. :\ Obviously he needed his superstars, so saking fuck Kobe and Shaq is idiotic, and every one of his shots that he makes he is wide open. He's decent but nothing special.

of course horry needed them, but they also needed horry. so i agree with you, i hate when people say fuck this guy or fuck that guy cause to win the ring you all need each other

Interesting stat, those are two big time clutch players that obviously helped their teams tremendously, especially in crucial games. It'd be nice, if, instead of Kerr or Horry, it'd be Reggie Miller (although Indy probably wouldn't want to see him out of Indiana, even if it meant giving up 6 rings )

Oh, look at that the Pistons were the only team who didn't need Steven Douglas Kerr or Bob "i only play the last 45 secounds" Horry.

the international play has most definitely gotten stronger, no disrespect...

there seems to be some backlash against american/nba style play that's unwarranted.

sorry but i think if USA sent all of it's top players, not just some rag tag/media/marketing friendly team, they would have won and erase all these doubts.

also considering how in the past USA has completely dominated the competition despite these other international teams having all this time to prepare, that's pretty remarkable

btw- players like manu & arroyo carry/travel just as much as lebron james & vince carter

anyway, horry should have a reality tv show

On a similar note, Horry has rings with 3 different teams. Does anyone know who has the most rings with different teams?

the international play has most definitely gotten stronger, no disrespect...

there seems to be some backlash against american/nba style play that's unwarranted.

sorry but i think if USA sent all of it's top players, not just some rag tag/media/marketing friendly team, they would have won and erase all these doubts.

also considering how in the past USA has completely dominated the competition despite these other international teams having all this time to prepare, that's pretty remarkable

btw- players like manu & arroyo carry/travel just as much as lebron james & vince carter

-? correct me if im wrong-but this came outta nowhere

I know this thread is meant as a joke, but it does raise an interesting point that seems to hold true in any sport. When it comes to winning, superstars can only put you in a position to do it. Ultimately, sucess or failure comes down to the supporting cast being up to the task.

At the end of the day, any team that makes it to the finals is likely to have a superstar or two. The question is, who has the right players to fit around them who can get the job done? I mean, obviously Jordan and Pippen were a great duo, but there's no way they would have 6 titles without the Bulls twice being able to assemble players who could fit into a system that let them shine.

As far as role players go, you've got to say Kerr and Horry are top notch. Kerr is statistically the best 3 point shooter ever to pick up a basketball. Horry is a guy who might even be first on the list of "If your life depended on it, who would you give the game winning shot attempt to in a finals game". Obviously neither has the talent of a Barkley, Malone or those sorts of guys who never won any rings, but in their own way, they deserve the rings they've won. After all, as the USA found out at the last olympics, the old cliche that a great team can beat a team full of great players is true.

11 of the last 12 NBA Champions have had either Steve Kerr or Robert Horry on the team. Fuck Kobe, fuck Shaq, fuck Duncan, fuck MJ. If you want a championship you need Kerr or Bob apparently.

How dare you say fuck MJ, rot in Hell you satanic n00b!!!!!11!!!!1!

Hey man, show some respect to the greatest player of all time. Both Kerr and Horry are basically bench role players who hit clutch shots when his team needed the most. Kerr and Horry are both clutch 3 points shooter. They are also called veteran playoffs clutch shooter! But nevertheless, the best clutch shooters will always be MJ and Reggie Miller. "Game Winner Shot"

there seems to be some backlash against american/nba style play that's unwarranted.

How is it a backlash when I basically said the USA's team clearly had better players than anyone else there? All I meant was despite having man for man better talent, they didn't play well as a team. I realise that there are reasons for that (less time to prepare together, a poor mix of players selected, etc), but that really re-enforces my point: in a team sport the whole can be greater or less than the sum of its parts. You can't just whack a bunch of players together and expect it to work. It only works in cases like 92 because the players selected are so unbelievably good that all other considerations need not apply.

I mean come on, maybe 1 in 8 players in the NBA are international players? This is the best paid league on Earth that everyone wants to play in, and 7 out of 8 players are from the USA. Of course the US has the best players, anyone who tries to tell you otherwise is an idiot.

I'm not sure why some people are so defensive about all this. Getting upset because you think someone's suggesting America doesn't have the best basketballers because they lost the Olympics is like getting upset over this thread because you think it suggests Steve Kerr is better than John Stockton because of the number of championships he won. The fact is you went off on a complete tangent of a rant over something that wasn't even said.