Alex English or Robert Horry?

PSASAP

I had this discussion with two friends who are avid basketball fans: if you could choose to have the career of Alex English or Robert Horry, whose would you choose? To level the playing field, you can't pick Horry because of the the salary disparity (he made far more than English because or the era in which he played). Definitely pros and cons on both sides, but as with most debates I get into, I held the minority opinion, among the three of us. Interested to read what people have to say.

orioles93

Well for one, I had never heard of Alex English, I had to look him up and then found out he was a hall of famer. So that makes me feel dumb. But even with that, I would have to select Robert Horry because of his being on 7 NBA championship teams. He was a very good player as well.

larryallen73

Interesting comparison but hard to compare. Would be better to compare if Alex English played in today's game v. Robert Horry. That is individual scoring super star v. multi-time champion role player. Each would be equally well known by sports fans of today but for totally different reasons. A better comparison might be Robert Horry v. Mitch Richmond. Having said all that, as much as I hate Horry for beating the Kings, I would have to take Horry.

thunderdan

I'd take the Fresh Prince any day. 7 rings. Huge shots that were crucial to those rings.

PSASAP

I was comparing the careers of a Hall of Famer with no rings and a good, but not great, player who won multiple titles, so Mitch Richmond vs. Robert Horry doesn't quite work, because Mitch won with the 2002 Lakers. It is close enough, so for the sake of the argument, you can sub out English for Richmond.

gregmo32

Considering that Mitch Richmond played a total of four minutes, and took one only one shot, in the entire 2002 NBA Playoffs, I would say it is a pretty fair comparison.

On the other hand, when Alex English retired in 1992, he was the 7th All Time leading scorer in NBA history.

(He also might have been the first player in history to score 2000 points in eight consecutive seasons, but I will have to look that up to be certain of it.)

galaxy27

I'm going to go against the grain on this one. If I were a HoF calibre player who left the game without a single ring, no doubt I'd feel unfulfilled. That is, unless I was a prolific scorer who played for the Denver Nuggets during the 80s. Their blueprint was to outscore you, period. A we'll-give-up-a-deuce-for-a-three-ball-on-the-other-end type of strategy. Anyone remember the 186-184 game against the Pistons in the early 80s? If I were a player who had a flair for creating string music, that would be roundball utopia.

SanctionII

Alex English was poetry in motion. He was about 6'7" or 6'8" tall, weighed about 190 lbs, could run and could shoot the lights out from anywhere. Very graceful on the court.

He was one of my favorite pro players from the 1980's.

He also had some Hollywood in him, given that he acted in a couple of movies, including 1987's "Amazing Grace and Chuck".

"Big Shot Bob" or "Alex English".

If I was a player, I think I would rather have the career that Alex English had instead of the career that Big Shot Bob had. 7 rings are all good. However longevity as a starter, a repeat All Star and at the time of retirement the #7 all time scorer in the NBA would trump 7 rings won for various teams on which Big Shot Bob was not the main guy.

Skin2

Alex English every day of the week. He was a better player, plain and simple.

I'd rather walk down the street next to someone and know I am the better player, as opposed to just merely being a decent player who just happened to play on teams that won championships(primarily because of the best players on those teams).

I would also rather be known as a HOFer.

Plus like someone said, I like English's extra credit for being in the movie. I always liked that movie, and his character.

TheCARDKid

I would take English in a second.

-He was a monster scorer. 25,000 career points. 15th all time, and look who passed him on the scoring list after he retired (kobe, shaq, dirk, garnett).

No disrespect to Horry, but he kind of reminds me of some of the yankee players from the 50's or 60's who racked up a lot of world series rings playing behind mantle. Maybe Horry and Reggie Miller would be a better comparison.

PSASAP

I don't think Horry is given enough credit for his importance to the championship teams he played on. Here's a Wikipedia article on his career:

link

larryallen73

<< <i>No disrespect to Horry, but he kind of reminds me of some of the yankee players from the 50's or 60's who racked up a lot of world series rings playing behind mantle. Maybe Horry and Reggie Miller would be a better comparison. >>



Good comparison to the Yankees and good call on the Reggie Miller comparison. I would take Reggie over Horry but I am a bias UCLA fan. Seriously though Reggie single handily beating the Knicks that one night will always stand out as one of the most amazing games ever. What did he score, 7 points in the final minute!? Reggie had some nice supporting players those years but he really carried the team on his skinny little back as far as humanly possible. Great player! Of course, as has been said on here before, it sucks when you are in the HOF and your sister was a better player. Lol!

Skin2

All that article does is reinforce what we already know....he was a role player, often not a starter, hit a big shot here or there(so did John Paxson), and basically rode the coattails of guys like Hakeem, Shaq, Kobe, and Duncan.

Tim Duncan was main reason for his team's titles and they won 5. Kobe/shaq main reason for theirs and LA won 5. So those teams(or main players) won FIVE without Horry. Horry just happened to play with them.

His getting 7 titles may be a neat tidbit, but is more just simply an example of him being in the right place at the right time, as opposed to him being a big reason they won.

Heck, the beginning of the article already gives his 'accomplishment' a qualifier by saying that he won more titles than anyone 'not playing for the 1960's Celtics'.

Had he been the lone player with the most rings in NBA history, then even with his role player status, he would have a unique distinction making his career a little more noteworthy than it is...but he doesn't, and it isn't.

PSASAP

The question is almost a personality test, as in would you rather experience personal glory, but never achieve the ultimate goal, or would you rather be a part of a group effort that reached the top. Perhaps what it boils down to is what you value most. To me, the championship run is so much more intense to watch as a fan, and I imagine it's way more to be in the middle of it as a player. Watching that on tv must have sucked for English.