Your rational take is welcomed.
Neither Horne nor Ingram is a star. Even with perfect health, it's true that this new Georgia team was going to struggle to win many games, particularly within the cutthroat SEC. Those are fairly undeniable objective assessments.
However, I don't think most fans and social media pundits understand how difficult it is for ANY team to lose a starter and their direct backup. In this case, Horne and Ingram were probably closer to a 1A and 1B. Either could start. Georgia lost significant strength and bulk, which has not coincidentally shown up most in interior defense and rebounding.
I talk about how margins are so small at this level of college basketball. Many people don't understand. The final scores of the UK and Miss St games ended up being fairly lopsided, which led most to think "Well, Georgia got blown out. They're not even close."
In both cases, Georgia was highly competitive for a half or more, but its lack of interior size/strength eventually did them in. You could visibly see it happening in both games. Do Horne and Ingram combine to allow Georgia to beat UK and/or Miss St.? I have no idea. In the case of UK, probably not. But you have to believe that their presence would negate a few offensive rebounds and a few baskets. On the other end of the floor, their presence would give Georgia options that it doesn't currently have. So the net effect is potentially significant.
What I've learned is that most people either don't care about these things or they believe that a good coach can overcome most injuries. Duke or Gonzaga or Kentucky or Kansas, etc. are surely in better position to overcome injuries, but I guarantee you that those teams would have problems overcoming the loss of a starter and a nearly equivalent backup. Georgia is probably not going to be in such a position.