lebron crying about mvp

[LAD]

I was willing to give Bron the benefit of the doubt on the MVP answer.

But, after the backlash about the statement, he turns right around and insinuates that Kerr didn't deserve COach of the Year.

He's either being passive aggressive or he's trying to send a message, maybe both.

Or maybe he's just a hater.

 

[LAD]

One of these days...

Twinny Twin Twin!!!

 

[gordontrue]

I never said he mentioned Kerr, I said he INSINUATED that he didn't deserve it.

If you honestly believe that Bron doesn't know that these types of statements are incendiary, you are being naive.

He knows EXACTLY how they are going to be construed.

After all the SportsHoopla over the MVP talk, he could have avoided another round of sensationalism. Yet, he chose not to.

He is being passive aggressive.

LeBron James goes from undermining Steph Curry to snubbing Steve Kerr

The blame for that sensationalism belongs on the media not on the players. Give me players answering questions honestly over players giving empty cliched answers.

And, wow, that article is 100X more passive aggressive than James' comments, but that's just my opinion. I mean, look at that opening paragraph (putting aside the bad grammar and spelling):

"After squaring off against — and losing to — the Warriors in last year’s NBA Finals, LeBron James and his Cavaliers appear to be on another collision course with Golden State. That could explain why the Cleveland star is continuing to troll his nemeses."

I challenge anyone to watch the actual interview (its like 8 minutes long) and see if your opinion on this doesn't change at least a little.

 

[gordontrue]

To recap this thread...

LeBron thinks that Stotts "COULD" have been COY given how much the Blazers exceeded expectations, that there is a difference between being the best player and being the most valuable, and that Curry was the obvious unquestionable choice for MVP.... and most people completely agree with him.

 

[Mecca of the “B” Team]

The blame for that sensationalism belongs on the media not on the players. Give me players answering questions honestly over players giving empty cliched answers.

And, wow, that article is 100X more passive aggressive than James comments, but that's just my opinion. Just look at that opening paragraph (looking past the bad grammar and spelling):

"After squaring off against — and losing to — the Warriors in last year’s NBA Finals, LeBron James and his Cavaliers appear to be on another collision course with Golden State. That could explain why the Cleveland star is continuing to troll his nemeses."

I challenge anyone to watch the actual interview (its like 8 minutes long) and see if your opinion on this doesn't change at least a little.

I totally agree with your take on the article, the state of journalism as a whole.

But, Lebron could have avoided it.

How is this any different from Draymond truthfully answering the " are they done " question about Portland ?

Lebron doesn't have to play along, he chooses to.

 

[Win TWINS!!!]

Twinny Twin Twin!!!

Whudup???


LYNX!

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

I challenge anyone to watch the actual interview (its like 8 minutes long) and see if your opinion on this doesn't change at least a little.

No!

Life is too short!

 

[LAD]

..undergrad is a JOKE compared to law school.....

See, this right here is the problem I think most people have with you. Instead of just staying positive you have to somehow downgrade a distinctive group in the process. As a lawyer it might do you some good to learn how to debate without beating down the brow of others.

 

[LAD]

No, but I'm starting to think you may have a room temperature i.q.

 

[gordontrue]

I totally agree with your take on the article, the state of journalism as a whole.

But, Lebron could have avoided it.

How is this any different from Draymond truthfully answering the " are they done " question about Portland ?

Lebron doesn't have to play along, he chooses to.

I won't argue with that. He could've gone Popovich and said "Blazers were good. Next question".

I hate that. I don't want that.

While I think there is an important distinction between saying that you think your opponent is done before the series is over and talking about a runner-up's case for winning an award... I accept both as better alternatives to non-answers.

 

[Mecca of the “B” Team]

I won't argue with that. He could've gone Popovich and said "Blazers were good. Next question".

I hate that. I don't want that.

While I think there is an important distinction between saying that you think your opponent is done before the series is over and talking about a runner-up's case for winning an award... I accept both as better alternatives to non-answers.

Yes, that was my point.

I never accused him of trolling, being a hater, nor that I felt his conclusion was incorrect.

My only point was, he knew it would be incendiary.

So, if he didn't want the backlash, he could have easily avoided it.

 

[LAD]

I won't argue with that. He could've gone Popovich and said "Blazers were good. Next question".

I hate that. I don't want that.

While I think there is an important distinction between saying that you think your opponent is done before the series is over and talking about a runner-up's case for winning an award... I accept both as better alternatives to non-answers.

Honestly there's a difference between both comments.

Dray's comment was a direct reference to his team so IMO he's allowed to give the answer that he gave. He's talking about something that directly involves himself & his team. Of course he's supposed to put himself and team above another in terms of comparison.

LBJ's comment had no direct affiliation to either himself or his team. In this situation it is always better to not take the bait because it just came across as him being a hater-especially because he was 3rd in the voting.

 

[gordontrue]

Yes, that was my point.

I never accused him of trolling, being a hater, nor that I felt his conclusion was incorrect.

My only point was, he knew it would be incendiary.

So, if he didn't want the backlash, he could have easily avoided it.

Gotcha. I agree with that. I think at this point LeBron realizes that anything other than a non-answer is usually going to draw some amount of criticism, which probably makes it easier for him not to care.

 

[ChrisGar15]

I won't argue with that. He could've gone Popovich and said "Blazers were good. Next question".
I hate that. I don't want that.
While I think there is an important distinction between saying that you think your opponent is done before the series is over and talking about a runner-up's case for winning an award... I accept both as better alternatives to non-answers.

Whenever I watch a press conference with Pop -- I think "I'm really glad I never became a sportwriter who would have to ask Pop a question in a press conference."

 

[Win TWINS!!!]

See, this right here is the problem I think most people have with you. Instead of just staying positive you have to somehow downgrade a distinctive group in the process. As a lawyer it might do you some good to learn how to debate without beating down the brow of others.

Is he still clinging to that story from FN?

 

[gordontrue]

LBJ's comment had no direct affiliation to either himself or his team. In this situation it is always better to not take the bait because it just came across as him being a hater-especially because he was 3rd in the voting.

I don't see the problem with complimenting the Blazers when directly asked what he thought of their season.

If he was asked what he thought of Steve Kerr's COY award... he would've been equally complimentary to Kerr and their 73 win season. He went out of his way to bring the discussion about "what does MVP really mean" (which the reporter brought up) back to Curry and said that Curry was the obvious choice and deserved it.

The difference to me is that Draymond was directly slighting the Blazers. They were talking about the Blazers.

LeBron and the reporters weren't talking about the Warriors at all. They were talking about the Blazers and LeBron was being complimentary of Stotts saying he "could have" won COY.

Draymond made a direct slight. LeBron made a direct compliment.

Warriors fans / the media are deliberately walking around a few corners to get to that "slight".

 

[gordontrue]

Literally anyone in the world not named LeBron (or Terry Stotts): "Terry Stotts could have won COY. Look at what they accomplished after losing 4 starters".

Response:

LeBron: "Terry Stotts could have won COY. Look at what they accomplished after losing 4 starters".

Response:

 

[Mecca of the “B” Team]

Whenever I watch a press conference with Pop -- I think "I'm really glad I never became a sportwriter who would have to ask Pop a question in a press conference."

His picture should be listed in the dictionary right next to the word: Cantankerous

 

[LAD]

I don't see the problem with complimenting the Blazers when directly asked what he thought of their season.

If he was asked what he thought of Steve Kerr's COY award... he would've been equally complimentary to Kerr and their 73 win season. He went out of his way to bring the discussion about "what does MVP really mean" (which the reporter brought up) back to Curry and said that Curry was the obvious choice and deserved it.

The difference to me is that Draymond was directly slighting the Blazers. They were talking about the Blazers.

LeBron and the reporters weren't talking about the Warriors at all. They were talking about the Blazers and LeBron was being complimentary of Stotts saying he "could have" won COY.

Draymond made a direct slight. LeBron made a direct compliment.

Warriors fans are going around a few corners to get to that "slight".

That's one perspective.

But in contrast- Dray saying they were done was also referring to his team taking care of business & displaying that confidence in his team. Had he not said yes then couldn't that have been a slight on his own team-displaying a lack of confidence? So again, my point is you always have to side with your guys, squad, whatever you want to call them.

The other thing that is troublesome is that most people want to always say enough credit isn't given when a player makes comments about their OWN team/efforts rather than talking about the competition. If they're speaking directly about themselves or teams then others shouldn't be reading "between the lines". Now if Dray came out an said "the blazers suck" then yes that is definitely cause for concern.

In the case of LBJ I just don't think he should be making any inferences to accolades that have already been awarded. If he wanted to say Stotts did a nice job with that team then he could've done so without going as far as mentioning the COY award. That's just my opinion.

 

[WiggyRuss]

i dont usually put too much stock into what Stephen A. Smith says--- but he made an interesting point today- that i agree with.

If LeBron loses to Curry this year- LeBron has DEFINITELY lost the title of best player.

Whether some people like it or not- there is still a very viable argument for LeBron- as there is for Curry. If Curry shows up healthy with his team and LeBron shows up healthy with his team- we are probably gonna get our answer.

I think thats awesome.

I cant wait to see LeBron fight and do what he needs to do to retain his crown and his title of KING JAMES. I do not think he will give it up lightly.