E-mail from a friend of mine: "Are you pleased? 'Bush is Toast' is now officially relegated to #2 in the Slate 'oops' file."
Thanks. I google'd most of those results though. Guess I could have saved myself the trouble by waiting a few hours until the game was over! Will, that's hilarious.
This wasn't the usual, "the Suns will sweep the Spurs in the WCF" piece. This wasn't a man making a sports prediction and missing, horribly. This was a mean-spirited tome that Felix purportedly spent a great deal of time on. He went after a man's reputation in his chosen field, and on national TV, was proven wrong over and over again. He's going to get a lot of nasty emails over the next few days -- and you know what? -- he deserves them. We make a choice when we decide to rip away, that isn't something you ease into, and you better pick a good fish in a barrel.
I'm so glad that slate's article looks like such foolery now...I mean, what the hell is slate doing writing about basketball in the first place? I really really hate San Antonio. I really can't explain why. Maybe it's the black uniforms, maybe it's Genobli, or it's Tim Duncuns whole "I'm squeaky clean act" One thing is for sure though, I love Robert Horry. I hate to say this, but as much as I want Detroit to win, for some reason I want Robert Horry to win....to win another title, and another, and then go somewhere else and hit a big shot and get another ring. It's great to see that the heart of clutch city still has a beat.
I guess that its touching to see that much hate and love in one post. (anything to keep my cerebellum from exploding)
This is my favorite aspect of the whole Robert Horry phenomenon- the continuum. Rockets win championships in 1994 and 1995. Then, nothing for awhile. Then, Elie helps San Antonio win a ring in 1999, Horry does the same for the Lakers in 2001, 2002, and 2003, Cassell almost helps the T-Wolves get into the Finals in 2004, and Horry does it again for the Spurs in 2005. It's like an almost perfect circle, from 1995 to 2005. "Throughout the series, Robert Horry has played with a cool that belies his 3 years in the NBA." Bob Costas, 1995
The thing about the Slate article (and Horry agrees with this) is that, statistically, it's correct. His number are mediocre. And they don't traditionally grow by leaps and bounds in the playoffs. Where the Slate misses the mark, though, is that they forget this game is about a helluva lot more than numbers. There's no stat for heart, and Horry has that to spare. If I may draw a cheesy metaphor, Robert Horry is a oil filter wrench. It's useless for most jobs. It can't hammer, can't saw, can't drive a screw, or measure anything. But when it's time to change your oil, you've just absolutely got to have one. Horry does one thing: he hits big shots. But he's awfully damn good at it. He deserves every ring he's got, and then some. We, of course, remember that he was almost traded from the Rockets for a HESITANCY to shoot. I was sorry to see him go, even if we did get Barkley (admittedly, a great player). I, for one, would love to see him retire in a Rockets uniform.
I really enjoy reading Slate (except chatterbox which I hate - what's with Timothy Noah's racial pun obsessions?). Especially Will's articles (not kissing up, I really do enjoy them)... although I don't see as many of them lately, with the exception of the technology/science series that are updated regularly. Are you working on a side project? Maybe something related to the science column? Anyway, back to the topic. Slate seems to be publishing stronger, and sometimes more unconventional opinions. This article seems like a good example, but I would cite a trend in their headlines towards increased shock value and general strangeness as better evidence. From articles this week: "Goss Point Blank" "Booger Eating Morons" "Jacko: Off" "Steve McQueen is an Extremely Macho Elf"
Which begs the question: Could any of the championship teams he's been on have won the title without him? I don't think there's anyway we win in 94 or 95 without Bob. Especially 95. I think Lakers probably would have pulled it off in 2000 without him, but not 2001 or 2002. I think the Spurs might have been able to win 2 on their homecourt even if they had lost last night, but Robert certainly made things a lot easier for them. But see, in my mind, this is what seperates Horry from guys like Steve Kerr. The Spurs and Bulls could have won with other guys that played like Kerr, just pure, spot-up shooters. For everything he doesn't do, there aren't a lot of guys with skills as varied as Robert's. Horry can feed the post better than anyone in the league now that Rick Fox retired, he can spot up and hit threes, he's still a very good post defender and can even pick up a weakside shotblock once in a while. He throws great inbound and outlet passes, he gets steals whenever the opportunity presents itself, he's still a decent rebounder, and he sets good picks. And to top it all off, he can still take it to the rack when the spirit moves him. How many guys can do all that, and at 6'10 no less? Very few players, and probably no role-players, do all the little things quite as well as Robert Horry.
