Boston Globe: Kyrie quit on the Celtics in games 4 and 5

[mmmmm]

I think the reporters got the okay to go forward with the information from the team with the info they had been withholding. And so, to me, that says smear campaign. If the reporters were withholding info, they most likely were told that they would be told when to go public with the information. Once told, it's a smear campaign.

Or call it damage control to give the ticket buying fans a scapegoat other than blaming those that will still be around(Ainge, Stevens, the other coaches, the remaining players) next season. Either or, it's still the same thing.

I guess you can call it what you want.


Bottom line for me is I have no reason to think any of the info that's coming out is inaccurate. 


What responsibility or obligation does the team have to withhold negative information about a player once that player is gone?


They're not "smearing" Horford right now.  Horford was a model teammate and a leader on the team.  He was a great Celtic in his short time here.  If the team was releasing a bunch of negative info about Horford, that would be a different situation.


Why should the Celtics do Kyrie any favors?  Kyrie really put the Celts in a bad spot with his behavior over the last year.

I concur with your take on this Phosita.

The fact is, if reporters were _sitting_ on information that painted a negative picture of Kyrie all along, then if anything they (& the team) were guilty of doing Kyrie a favor all along.   Because they were essentially helping to prop up his public image.

Call it a "smear" if you want, but if the information is true (and so far pretty much all of it seems true) then releasing it now isn't the 'crime'. 

The "crime" was the earlier deception.

[rondofan1255]

This is like the Cavs eventually leaking that Kyrie gave his teammates the silent treatment for a portion of the 2017 playoffs. Or the Celtics and Rondo throwing a water bottle at the TV or whatever.

If true, this isn't surprising either. Quitting doesn't mean 0% or not playing, the mentions of it as going through the motions are spot on IMO. LeBron 2010 was accused of the same thing.

[gpap]

I think the reporters got the okay to go forward with the information from the team with the info they had been withholding. And so, to me, that says smear campaign. If the reporters were withholding info, they most likely were told that they would be told when to go public with the information. Once told, it's a smear campaign.

Or call it damage control to give the ticket buying fans a scapegoat other than blaming those that will still be around(Ainge, Stevens, the other coaches, the remaining players) next season. Either or, it's still the same thing.

Pretty soon were going to find out Kyrie was the 2nd shooter in the JFK assassination.

[nickagneta]

I think the reporters got the okay to go forward with the information from the team with the info they had been withholding. And so, to me, that says smear campaign. If the reporters were withholding info, they most likely were told that they would be told when to go public with the information. Once told, it's a smear campaign.

Or call it damage control to give the ticket buying fans a scapegoat other than blaming those that will still be around(Ainge, Stevens, the other coaches, the remaining players) next season. Either or, it's still the same thing.

I guess you can call it what you want.


Bottom line for me is I have no reason to think any of the info that's coming out is inaccurate. 


What responsibility or obligation does the team have to withhold negative information about a player once that player is gone?


They're not "smearing" Horford right now.  Horford was a model teammate and a leader on the team.  He was a great Celtic in his short time here.  If the team was releasing a bunch of negative info about Horford, that would be a different situation.


Why should the Celtics do Kyrie any favors?  Kyrie really put the Celts in a bad spot with his behavior over the last year.

I concur with your take on this Phosita.

The fact is, if reporters were _sitting_ on information that painted a negative picture of Kyrie all along, then if anything they (& the team) were guilty of doing Kyrie a favor all along.   Because they were essentially helping to prop up his public image.

Call it a "smear" if you want, but if the information is true (and so far pretty much all of it seems true) then releasing it now isn't the 'crime'. 

The "crime" was the earlier deception.

The local press hold negative info on players all the time as a favor to the team and to still have inside access to other important info. It happens with every local media person in every city across every sport. It's even done with media who cover Division I college programs across the country.

Once a local guy leaks inside negative info that makes a team or player look bad, their access to interviews of the players, the coach, and Ainge will cease to exist and render them unable to be a proper reporter on the team. So they withhold the info until they get the okay for it to be released.

This is pretty much "How to be a Beat Reporter 101" if there was a class on how to be a beat Reporter. You don't bite the hand that is feeding you the inside scoop.

[footey]

I think the reporters got the okay to go forward with the information from the team with the info they had been withholding. And so, to me, that says smear campaign. If the reporters were withholding info, they most likely were told that they would be told when to go public with the information. Once told, it's a smear campaign.

Or call it damage control to give the ticket buying fans a scapegoat other than blaming those that will still be around(Ainge, Stevens, the other coaches, the remaining players) next season. Either or, it's still the same thing.

Pretty soon were going to find out Kyrie was the 2nd shooter in the JFK assassination.

If during the Bucks' series, he would have missed.

[PhoSita]

The local press hold negative info on players all the time as a favor to the team and to still have inside access to other important info. It happens with every local media person in every city across every sport. It's even done with media who cover Division I college programs across the country.

Once a local guy leaks inside negative info that makes a team or player look bad, their access to interviews of the players, the coach, and Ainge will cease to exist and render them unable to be a proper reporter on the team. So they withhold the info until they get the okay for it to be released.

This is pretty much "How to be a Beat Reporter 101" if there was a class on how to be a beat Reporter. You don't bite the hand that is feeding you the inside scoop.

Totally correct.


So why is it a "smear campaign" if the team lets the beat reporters (and other insider folks) know that it's OK to run whatever stories they have about a player who has burned a bridge with the team?

[nickagneta]

The local press hold negative info on players all the time as a favor to the team and to still have inside access to other important info. It happens with every local media person in every city across every sport. It's even done with media who cover Division I college programs across the country.

Once a local guy leaks inside negative info that makes a team or player look bad, their access to interviews of the players, the coach, and Ainge will cease to exist and render them unable to be a proper reporter on the team. So they withhold the info until they get the okay for it to be released.

This is pretty much "How to be a Beat Reporter 101" if there was a class on how to be a beat Reporter. You don't bite the hand that is feeding you the inside scoop.

Totally correct.


So why is it a "smear campaign" if the team lets the beat reporters (and other insider folks) know that it's OK to run whatever stories they have about a player who has burned a bridge with the team?

As I said, call it whatever you want smear campaign, scapegoating, damage control...it's all semantics. It's the spreading of info to make Kyrie look bad and to make people sympathetic to the people that remain within the organization. I think it's definitely a concerted effort on the team's part to make people see Kyrie differently. It really doesn't matter to me that the info is true, it's still the team putting out negative info on Kyrie. And I don't see anything wrong with the reporters knowing and withholding the info. That's part of being in the profession they are in.

[wreckoner]

I think the reporters got the okay to go forward with the information from the team with the info they had been withholding. And so, to me, that says smear campaign. If the reporters were withholding info, they most likely were told that they would be told when to go public with the information. Once told, it's a smear campaign.

Or call it damage control to give the ticket buying fans a scapegoat other than blaming those that will still be around(Ainge, Stevens, the other coaches, the remaining players) next season. Either or, it's still the same thing.

Pretty soon were going to find out Kyrie was the 2nd shooter in the JFK assassination.

If during the Bucks' series, he would have missed.

TP!

[RJ87]

The local press hold negative info on players all the time as a favor to the team and to still have inside access to other important info. It happens with every local media person in every city across every sport. It's even done with media who cover Division I college programs across the country.

Once a local guy leaks inside negative info that makes a team or player look bad, their access to interviews of the players, the coach, and Ainge will cease to exist and render them unable to be a proper reporter on the team. So they withhold the info until they get the okay for it to be released.

This is pretty much "How to be a Beat Reporter 101" if there was a class on how to be a beat Reporter. You don't bite the hand that is feeding you the inside scoop.

Totally correct.


So why is it a "smear campaign" if the team lets the beat reporters (and other insider folks) know that it's OK to run whatever stories they have about a player who has burned a bridge with the team?

As I said, call it whatever you want smear campaign, scapegoating, damage control...it's all semantics. It's the spreading of info to make Kyrie look bad and to make people sympathetic to the people that remain within the organization. I think it's definitely a concerted effort on the team's part to make people see Kyrie differently. It really doesn't matter to me that the info is true, it's still the team putting out negative info on Kyrie. And I don't see anything wrong with the reporters knowing and withholding the info. That's part of being in the profession they are in.

It's legit PR 101. The Celtics are about to lose an All-Star/All-NBA talent despite being able to offer him more money and more years than the rest of the market. This is all on the heels of AD wanting nothing to do with us. So of course management is going to give the go ahead to run any stories that reporters may have been sitting on. It's a "See, it's them. It's not us. We're good" strategy.

[PhoSita]

As I said, call it whatever you want smear campaign, scapegoating, damage control...it's all semantics. It's the spreading of info to make Kyrie look bad and to make people sympathetic to the people that remain within the organization . I think it's definitely a concerted effort on the team's part to make people see Kyrie differently. It really doesn't matter to me that the info is true, it's still the team putting out negative info on Kyrie. And I don't see anything wrong with the reporters knowing and withholding the info. That's part of being in the profession they are in.

I agree, I don't see anything wrong with the beat reporters holding that info back.  It's part of the business, like you said.


By the same token, though, part of the business is that when a player leaves and the team has no reason to protect any info about them, the team gives the beat reporters permission to run whatever they have.  The team has to manage those relationships with the reporters just like they have to manage relationships with their players.


Which relationship should the Celts be more concerned with maintaining, the one they have with Kyrie (to the extent one even exists at this point), or the ones they have with various reporters that spend significant time around the team year in and year out?


I just don't see how you can agree to the facts of how this works and then conclude that the team is "spreading info to make Kyrie look bad and to make people sympathetic to the people that remain within the organization."


Seems to me that the info itself does that.  Maybe the reporters are presenting the facts in a certain light that is favorable to the team and less favorable to the player.  That again is part of the business, although in Boston there are plenty of media types who don't hesitate to criticize the teams.  I just don't see any reason to paint it as a "smear campaign," which implies on some level that it's unfair and that it's all either sour grapes or just a calculated attempt to manipulate the fans.

In other words, you're giving Kyrie a pass while excoriating the team.  That's a head scratcher to me.

[moiso]

I'm not sure why this would be considered a smear campaign, scapegoating, or damage control.  I'm sure the reporters wanted to get some things off their chest and now there is no reason to keep them secret.  I've been waiting for the truth to come out.  I knew it would happen eventually, and I'm glad that I'm getting the info that I've been wanting.  Thank you, reporters. 

Whether it was right or wrong at the time, it was kind of nice to hear Rozier not sounding like a robot regurgitating what he was programmed to say also.

[Donoghus]

As I said, call it whatever you want smear campaign, scapegoating, damage control...it's all semantics. It's the spreading of info to make Kyrie look bad and to make people sympathetic to the people that remain within the organization . I think it's definitely a concerted effort on the team's part to make people see Kyrie differently. It really doesn't matter to me that the info is true, it's still the team putting out negative info on Kyrie. And I don't see anything wrong with the reporters knowing and withholding the info. That's part of being in the profession they are in.

I agree, I don't see anything wrong with the beat reporters holding that info back.  It's part of the business, like you said.


By the same token, though, part of the business is that when a player leaves and the team has no reason to protect any info about them, the team gives the beat reporters permission to run whatever they have.  The team has to manage those relationships with the reporters just like they have to manage relationships with their players.


Which relationship should the Celts be more concerned with maintaining, the one they have with Kyrie (to the extent one even exists at this point), or the ones they have with various reporters that spend significant time around the team year in and year out?


I just don't see how you can agree to the facts of how this works and then conclude that the team is "spreading info to make Kyrie look bad and to make people sympathetic to the people that remain within the organization."


Seems to me that the info itself does that.  Maybe the reporters are presenting the facts in a certain light that is favorable to the team and less favorable to the player.  That again is part of the business, although in Boston there are plenty of media types who don't hesitate to criticize the teams.  I just don't see any reason to paint it as a "smear campaign," which implies on some level that it's unfair and that it's all either sour grapes or just a calculated attempt to manipulate the fans.

In other words, you're giving Kyrie a pass while excoriating the team.  That's a head scratcher to me.

I'm certainly not giving Kyrie a pass. He had plenty of warts and the ending left an ugly taste in many peoples' mouths.  Of course, the blame pie should be shared among several players on the team but the target has clearly been Kyrie.  Simply calling it as I see it with the Boston media and Boston teams.   This stuff has become rather predictable and apparent when it starts.  It happened with Nomar, Tito, Mo Vaughn, even Pedro  For whatever reason, teams try to minimize any potential PR damage blowback to the organization by using the local media to put "X" in a negative spotlight on the way out.

Sadly, this has been going on in this town for decades.   I'm sure in the coming days/weeks, you'll see & hear reports from "team sources" about the behind the scenes stuff this past season centered around Kyrie.   

Plenty of it might be based on fact but that doesn't remove the fact that he's gonna get crushed on the way out the door.    This past Celtics season went to crap.    The organization took a competitive step backwards after high expectations.  Fans are peeved.   Someone is going to be made the scapegoat.  Easiest person to do that to is the high priced FA on his way out of town, not the front office, coaching staff, or ownership.  From a PR standpoint, this is what happens.

[nickagneta]

In other words, you're giving Kyrie a pass while excoriating the team.  That's a head scratcher to me.

No, I'm really not. I am just stating what I think is true, that the team is now allowing this info to come out because it's beneficial to the team. I fully expected this as the team needs to have the fans look at the team, coaches and remaining players favorably and getting the Kyrie info out there does that.

Anything that's good for the team is okay by me. I believe everything being said. It's all very close to info Cleveland leaked after they traded Kyrie. It seems pretty clear that after two stops and both teams putting out stuff that Kyrie is a problem, that Kyrie was a huge handful and is a massive problem behind the scenes.

I think it's possible to see the negative info coming out for what it is, a concerted public relations move and still think Kyrie is a problem and the team is in the right for doing what they are doing. I don't think it's as black and white as you are painting it, in that, because I am saying the team is behind all the Kyrie negative press that I must be giving Kyrie a pass or excoriating the team. It can't be that because that isn't how I feel or what I am doing. I'm just calling it out for what it is.

[PhoSita]

I think we're gonna keep going round in circles on this.


To me it would be different if we were talking about Al Horford or Isaiah Thomas getting slammed on his way out the door.  Those guys were everything a fan or a teammate or a coach or a media member could want from a star player while they were in a Celtics uniform.


Kyrie's behavior over the last year lost him any sort of benefit of the doubt in my eyes.  I've been anticipating these negative reports and "tell all" stories for months.

In my mind, these stories are the inevitable outcome of how Kyrie handled himself and his business. 

It would be very strange if we weren't hearing any of this stuff.  Especially when you consider how Kyrie has basically told the whole NBA world that he plans to leave and didn't even give the Celts the courtesy of a basic "let's discuss our plans" sort of meeting before his free agency intentions became public knowledge.

Honestly I can't wait for when he officially signs in Brooklyn or wherever and then Jackie Mac or Bulpett or whoever gets to write the in depth story about how things went sideways this season.


You reap what you sow and Kyrie sowed a lot of oats this year.

[KGs Knee]

As I said, call it whatever you want smear campaign, scapegoating, damage control...it's all semantics. It's the spreading of info to make Kyrie look bad and to make people sympathetic to the people that remain within the organization . I think it's definitely a concerted effort on the team's part to make people see Kyrie differently. It really doesn't matter to me that the info is true, it's still the team putting out negative info on Kyrie. And I don't see anything wrong with the reporters knowing and withholding the info. That's part of being in the profession they are in.

I agree, I don't see anything wrong with the beat reporters holding that info back.  It's part of the business, like you said.


By the same token, though, part of the business is that when a player leaves and the team has no reason to protect any info about them, the team gives the beat reporters permission to run whatever they have.  The team has to manage those relationships with the reporters just like they have to manage relationships with their players.


Which relationship should the Celts be more concerned with maintaining, the one they have with Kyrie (to the extent one even exists at this point), or the ones they have with various reporters that spend significant time around the team year in and year out?


I just don't see how you can agree to the facts of how this works and then conclude that the team is "spreading info to make Kyrie look bad and to make people sympathetic to the people that remain within the organization."


Seems to me that the info itself does that.  Maybe the reporters are presenting the facts in a certain light that is favorable to the team and less favorable to the player.  That again is part of the business, although in Boston there are plenty of media types who don't hesitate to criticize the teams.  I just don't see any reason to paint it as a "smear campaign," which implies on some level that it's unfair and that it's all either sour grapes or just a calculated attempt to manipulate the fans.

In other words, you're giving Kyrie a pass while excoriating the team.  That's a head scratcher to me.

I'm certainly not giving Kyrie a pass. He had plenty of warts and the ending left an ugly taste in many peoples' mouths.  Of course, the blame pie should be shared among several players on the team but the target has clearly been Kyrie.  Simply calling it as I see it with the Boston media and Boston teams.   This stuff has become rather predictable and apparent when it starts.  It happened with Nomar, Tito, Mo Vaughn, even Pedro  For whatever reason, teams try to minimize any potential PR damage blowback to the organization by using the local media to put "X" in a negative spotlight on the way out.

Sadly, this has been going on in this town for decades.   I'm sure in the coming days/weeks, you'll see & hear reports from "team sources" about the behind the scenes stuff this past season centered around Kyrie.   

Plenty of it might be based on fact but that doesn't remove the fact that he's gonna get crushed on the way out the door.    This past Celtics season went to crap.    The organization took a competitive step backwards after high expectations.  Fans are peeved.   Someone is going to be made the scapegoat.  Easiest person to do that to is the high priced FA on his way out of town, not the front office, coaching staff, or ownership.  From a PR standpoint, this is what happens.

It's true, and it's disgusting.  A lot of the fans have a part in this too and should be ashamed of themselves.

Players have short memories it seems because if they were paying attention they'd want nothing to do with this town.  This might actually be the case with the Celtics right now.

I love you! Oh...you might leave me because I'm taking you for granted and disrespecting you?  Yeah, you weren't [poop] anyways.  And you're a terrible person!

LOL.....