I dislike Kyrie(merged threads)

[celticsclay]

I'm confused as to how a basically Boston beat reporter has any real idea of how the Nets are run.  And I get that she talked with people and has quotes, but I don't think she really has any idea what the Nets are like on a day to day basis. 

And the Nets have all basically come out and said the article was nonsense.  That Irving isn't a problem at all, everyone likes him, there are no issues, etc.

Wow, you mean a team is denying there being problems on the team? Shocking.

Sure, but this wasn't a Nets beat reporter that is well connected with the team writing the article.  That was the main point I was making.  How does Jackie have any real idea what is going on in Brooklyn?  She isn't there everyday.  She doesn't cover them.  Etc. 

It came off like a hit piece from a disgruntled former lover.

Again, its Jackie Mac. She doesn't have some agenda man, she knows because she's very well connected. Its like asking how WOJ knows who every team is gonna draft/sign every year. He isnt a beat writer! How does he know? Its their job to know. Do you think she's making this up? I mean it pretty much tracks with everything everybody else has said about Kyrie at every stop he's been at. This behavior isnt a secret.

Woj is well connected to agents and does have contacts across the league.  But Woj isn't writing stories about team cultures.  He is reporting breaking news.  That is a vastly different type of reporting.  And of course Jackie could have an agenda.  Every single piece of opinion based journalism is written or spoken with an agenda or bias.  That is what makes it opinion based.  To act like Jackie doesn't have an agenda is just strange.  Jackie isn't in Brooklyn every day covering the team.  I absolutely maintain the article came off like a hit job.

She didn't just conjure something out of thin air, though.  She might write more along the lines of opinion pieces these days but the fact of the matter is that she's been covering the league for more than 3 decades now in one capacity or another.  You don't spend that much time in the league without developing contacts & sources.   Someone told her this.  Maybe there's an agenda and maybe there isn't but she got this from somewhere. And, of course, the Nets are going to deny this.  He's their shiny new toy and investment.  With KD due back next season, this organization has extremely high hopes.  They're not going to come out and confirm this.  That would be a needless self-inflicted wound.

What's odd is seemingly questioning the credibility of someone like Jackie Mac while running to the defense of a guy that has created well-documented organizational problems in the past.

This is what I find a bit perplexing too. I kind of thought that Jackie Mac was considered by most to be a great old school journalist (I'll admit I thought she has gotten a bit more hot takey when she is on a show like around the horn), however it seems to be a very different thing to suggest she did a hit piece. I am also further confused why she would do this? Irving, despite being weird, seems to have friends around the NBA including Lebron and Durant. I don't think she would her entire career and reputation to just make up stuff about irving. Why would she do that?

Let's not forgot about all the hit pieces Woj has done on LeBron.  Didn't ruin his career.

I don't speak for Moranis, but to me it felt like she was just regurgitating the same stuff she wrote about Kyrie in Boston.  I imagine she has a strong opinion of him already, writing several ESPN articles on Kyrie and speaking about him on podcasts over the years.  Took her Kyrie/Boston article and just updated the team and called it new.

Doesn't mean it's not credible, but also the same thing she's been saying about Kyrie for years.  To me it would have hold more weight if it came from a different, credible source.  Again not that Jackie Mac isn't credible, but she's already a source on him being difficult, this doesn't seem like new info to me.

This is kind of where I'm going.  All of the really "harmful" stuff about Kyrie in the article isn't quoted and sounds like articles she was writing last year when Irving was in Boston.  I read the article more like Jackie had a way she wanted to go and then just fit quotes in in a manner to fit the narrative she wanted to present.  if this article was from a Nets beat writer I'd hold it in much higher regard than I do one coming from a Boston beat writer that has printed very similar articles for years.  It just came off like a hit job from someone that has very little day to day interaction of the team being written about.

Curious why you think Zack Lowe and the Ringer NBA guys would go along with a hit piece? Why would (at least 3) highly respected NBA all randomly go in on this hit piece? Really curious what possible reason there could be for that.

The Ringer story you shared is about Kyrie being odd.  Everyone knows Kyrie is odd.  That wasn't the slant or nature of Jackie's piece.  No where near the same thing.

One of the main parts of the Jac article was that irvings moods were making his teammates uncomfortable. Isn’t him going up to all the photographers and asking them not to take pictures of him an example of him being in a bad mood (and probably something that wasn’t super comfortable for his teammates to be around?). Not to mention, why did Lowe day the whole report was true? Weird hill here

And yet she was all over the radio this week singing Irving's praises specifically mentioning how engaged he was, how he was helping the young guys, and that they all liked him.  Which is it, is he a problem or not?

She also said she spent 4 days with the Nets.  Yet somehow that makes her an expert on the culture of the team.  I just think it was hacky reporting from someone with a known bias against Irving.  She took what she felt she already knew, found some evidence to "confirm" that belief, and then wrote a piece making the whole thing seem much worse than it actually is.  That is a hit job.

If this piece came from a beat writer of the Nets that had spent years covering the team it would far more believable.

Did you read the part about Zach lower confirming the facts. Or are you just gonna ignore that? Again the facts are not disputable.

who said I objected to the facts.  go back and read what I've said in this thread.  The truly "harmful" parts of the article aren't quotes.  I believe they are supposition based on the authors preconceived notions.  An author that was with the team for a whopping total of 4 days, yet supposedly knows the Nets culture, got an accurate read on things, etc.  This was a carpet bagger coming in to write a hit piece. 

The fact that Kyrie is a strange dude that does weird things at times isn't news.  Everyone knows this to be true.  I absolutely believe Kyrie wouldn't take his hat off for a photo shoot and was reticent to try new things.  That is just Kyrie being Kyrie, but to claim that it is causing a rift, their are concerns, etc. that is the part I think is nonsense.  And I think it is nonsense for all of the reasons I've stated several times in this thread, including Jackie's own interviews since the hit job was published.

Calling Jackie Mac a carpet bagger is completely out of line. There is no reason to talk about a respected Boston journalist like that.

[GreenFaith1819]

Love him or hate him he had a solid win vs HOU last night...had 10 assists, too.

I wish him well - he doesn't deserve most of the blame around this blog.

[Moranis]

I'm confused as to how a basically Boston beat reporter has any real idea of how the Nets are run.  And I get that she talked with people and has quotes, but I don't think she really has any idea what the Nets are like on a day to day basis. 

And the Nets have all basically come out and said the article was nonsense.  That Irving isn't a problem at all, everyone likes him, there are no issues, etc.

Wow, you mean a team is denying there being problems on the team? Shocking.

Sure, but this wasn't a Nets beat reporter that is well connected with the team writing the article.  That was the main point I was making.  How does Jackie have any real idea what is going on in Brooklyn?  She isn't there everyday.  She doesn't cover them.  Etc. 

It came off like a hit piece from a disgruntled former lover.

Again, its Jackie Mac. She doesn't have some agenda man, she knows because she's very well connected. Its like asking how WOJ knows who every team is gonna draft/sign every year. He isnt a beat writer! How does he know? Its their job to know. Do you think she's making this up? I mean it pretty much tracks with everything everybody else has said about Kyrie at every stop he's been at. This behavior isnt a secret.

Woj is well connected to agents and does have contacts across the league.  But Woj isn't writing stories about team cultures.  He is reporting breaking news.  That is a vastly different type of reporting.  And of course Jackie could have an agenda.  Every single piece of opinion based journalism is written or spoken with an agenda or bias.  That is what makes it opinion based.  To act like Jackie doesn't have an agenda is just strange.  Jackie isn't in Brooklyn every day covering the team.  I absolutely maintain the article came off like a hit job.

She didn't just conjure something out of thin air, though.  She might write more along the lines of opinion pieces these days but the fact of the matter is that she's been covering the league for more than 3 decades now in one capacity or another.  You don't spend that much time in the league without developing contacts & sources.   Someone told her this.  Maybe there's an agenda and maybe there isn't but she got this from somewhere. And, of course, the Nets are going to deny this.  He's their shiny new toy and investment.  With KD due back next season, this organization has extremely high hopes.  They're not going to come out and confirm this.  That would be a needless self-inflicted wound.

What's odd is seemingly questioning the credibility of someone like Jackie Mac while running to the defense of a guy that has created well-documented organizational problems in the past.

This is what I find a bit perplexing too. I kind of thought that Jackie Mac was considered by most to be a great old school journalist (I'll admit I thought she has gotten a bit more hot takey when she is on a show like around the horn), however it seems to be a very different thing to suggest she did a hit piece. I am also further confused why she would do this? Irving, despite being weird, seems to have friends around the NBA including Lebron and Durant. I don't think she would her entire career and reputation to just make up stuff about irving. Why would she do that?

Let's not forgot about all the hit pieces Woj has done on LeBron.  Didn't ruin his career.

I don't speak for Moranis, but to me it felt like she was just regurgitating the same stuff she wrote about Kyrie in Boston.  I imagine she has a strong opinion of him already, writing several ESPN articles on Kyrie and speaking about him on podcasts over the years.  Took her Kyrie/Boston article and just updated the team and called it new.

Doesn't mean it's not credible, but also the same thing she's been saying about Kyrie for years.  To me it would have hold more weight if it came from a different, credible source.  Again not that Jackie Mac isn't credible, but she's already a source on him being difficult, this doesn't seem like new info to me.

This is kind of where I'm going.  All of the really "harmful" stuff about Kyrie in the article isn't quoted and sounds like articles she was writing last year when Irving was in Boston.  I read the article more like Jackie had a way she wanted to go and then just fit quotes in in a manner to fit the narrative she wanted to present.  if this article was from a Nets beat writer I'd hold it in much higher regard than I do one coming from a Boston beat writer that has printed very similar articles for years.  It just came off like a hit job from someone that has very little day to day interaction of the team being written about.

Curious why you think Zack Lowe and the Ringer NBA guys would go along with a hit piece? Why would (at least 3) highly respected NBA all randomly go in on this hit piece? Really curious what possible reason there could be for that.

The Ringer story you shared is about Kyrie being odd.  Everyone knows Kyrie is odd.  That wasn't the slant or nature of Jackie's piece.  No where near the same thing.

One of the main parts of the Jac article was that irvings moods were making his teammates uncomfortable. Isn’t him going up to all the photographers and asking them not to take pictures of him an example of him being in a bad mood (and probably something that wasn’t super comfortable for his teammates to be around?). Not to mention, why did Lowe day the whole report was true? Weird hill here

And yet she was all over the radio this week singing Irving's praises specifically mentioning how engaged he was, how he was helping the young guys, and that they all liked him.  Which is it, is he a problem or not?

She also said she spent 4 days with the Nets.  Yet somehow that makes her an expert on the culture of the team.  I just think it was hacky reporting from someone with a known bias against Irving.  She took what she felt she already knew, found some evidence to "confirm" that belief, and then wrote a piece making the whole thing seem much worse than it actually is.  That is a hit job.

If this piece came from a beat writer of the Nets that had spent years covering the team it would far more believable.

Did you read the part about Zach lower confirming the facts. Or are you just gonna ignore that? Again the facts are not disputable.

who said I objected to the facts.  go back and read what I've said in this thread.  The truly "harmful" parts of the article aren't quotes.  I believe they are supposition based on the authors preconceived notions.  An author that was with the team for a whopping total of 4 days, yet supposedly knows the Nets culture, got an accurate read on things, etc.  This was a carpet bagger coming in to write a hit piece. 

The fact that Kyrie is a strange dude that does weird things at times isn't news.  Everyone knows this to be true.  I absolutely believe Kyrie wouldn't take his hat off for a photo shoot and was reticent to try new things.  That is just Kyrie being Kyrie, but to claim that it is causing a rift, their are concerns, etc. that is the part I think is nonsense.  And I think it is nonsense for all of the reasons I've stated several times in this thread, including Jackie's own interviews since the hit job was published.

So if I got this right you're saying "sure Kyrie acts weird, but that doesn't mean its a problem." And asserting that the perception of there being a "problem" is Jackie Mac commentary. What we are trying to tell you is that it is a well established fact that Kyrie causes problems wherever he goes. We all saw it while he was here. Again man Zach Lowes comments were directly responding to Net's player denying that Kyrie was problem, saying that everybody has heard this stuff and thats nets players were protesting a little too loudly.

In other words man I get the argument you are trying to make. The problem is its obviously wrong. The overwhelming weight of the argument from the facts we have at hands, to the past actions of Kyries, to the fact that Jackie Mac is one of the NBA most respected writers all point one way.

Now personally I think Kyrie gets a little to much blame for last year, everybody clearly had their problems from Jaylen losing his grove, to Tatum going Kobe, to Haywards lack of confidence. And before last year I would have said "Kyrie is a clear all-nba guy, if you can get him you make it work cuz talent wins." Now? I'm glad he's gone, at least I can like this team again.

I don't think it is obviously wrong.  Kyrie got along great in Boston and Cleveland for a long time before his quirks eventually became problems.  Eventually they wore on his teammates and organizations, of course by now everyone understands that is who Kyrie is.  To act like 4 games into his tenure his previously known quirks are causing rifts, I find to be complete and utter nonsense.  It is a Boston reporter putting her preconceived ideas onto a completely different organization that she spent a whopping 4 days with. 

Imagine a former beat reporter of the Hornets writing a similar piece about Walker and some weird things Walker did in his past that he may have done in his first few weeks in Boston.  Why would someone in Charlotte that spent years covering the Hornets know anything about how Walker is fitting in and getting on with his teammates.  Obviously Walker hasn't ever shown to be the weird quirky dude Irving is, and I suspect at some point Irving will wear out his welcome in Brooklyn, I just find the reporting to be suspect given the source, the time frame, etc.  Especially when said reporter has walked all of that back after the fact and without confirmation from actual Nets beat reporters of the non-fact based stuff. 

[Moranis]

I'm confused as to how a basically Boston beat reporter has any real idea of how the Nets are run.  And I get that she talked with people and has quotes, but I don't think she really has any idea what the Nets are like on a day to day basis. 

And the Nets have all basically come out and said the article was nonsense.  That Irving isn't a problem at all, everyone likes him, there are no issues, etc.

Wow, you mean a team is denying there being problems on the team? Shocking.

Sure, but this wasn't a Nets beat reporter that is well connected with the team writing the article.  That was the main point I was making.  How does Jackie have any real idea what is going on in Brooklyn?  She isn't there everyday.  She doesn't cover them.  Etc. 

It came off like a hit piece from a disgruntled former lover.

Again, its Jackie Mac. She doesn't have some agenda man, she knows because she's very well connected. Its like asking how WOJ knows who every team is gonna draft/sign every year. He isnt a beat writer! How does he know? Its their job to know. Do you think she's making this up? I mean it pretty much tracks with everything everybody else has said about Kyrie at every stop he's been at. This behavior isnt a secret.

Woj is well connected to agents and does have contacts across the league.  But Woj isn't writing stories about team cultures.  He is reporting breaking news.  That is a vastly different type of reporting.  And of course Jackie could have an agenda.  Every single piece of opinion based journalism is written or spoken with an agenda or bias.  That is what makes it opinion based.  To act like Jackie doesn't have an agenda is just strange.  Jackie isn't in Brooklyn every day covering the team.  I absolutely maintain the article came off like a hit job.

She didn't just conjure something out of thin air, though.  She might write more along the lines of opinion pieces these days but the fact of the matter is that she's been covering the league for more than 3 decades now in one capacity or another.  You don't spend that much time in the league without developing contacts & sources.   Someone told her this.  Maybe there's an agenda and maybe there isn't but she got this from somewhere. And, of course, the Nets are going to deny this.  He's their shiny new toy and investment.  With KD due back next season, this organization has extremely high hopes.  They're not going to come out and confirm this.  That would be a needless self-inflicted wound.

What's odd is seemingly questioning the credibility of someone like Jackie Mac while running to the defense of a guy that has created well-documented organizational problems in the past.

This is what I find a bit perplexing too. I kind of thought that Jackie Mac was considered by most to be a great old school journalist (I'll admit I thought she has gotten a bit more hot takey when she is on a show like around the horn), however it seems to be a very different thing to suggest she did a hit piece. I am also further confused why she would do this? Irving, despite being weird, seems to have friends around the NBA including Lebron and Durant. I don't think she would her entire career and reputation to just make up stuff about irving. Why would she do that?

Let's not forgot about all the hit pieces Woj has done on LeBron.  Didn't ruin his career.

I don't speak for Moranis, but to me it felt like she was just regurgitating the same stuff she wrote about Kyrie in Boston.  I imagine she has a strong opinion of him already, writing several ESPN articles on Kyrie and speaking about him on podcasts over the years.  Took her Kyrie/Boston article and just updated the team and called it new.

Doesn't mean it's not credible, but also the same thing she's been saying about Kyrie for years.  To me it would have hold more weight if it came from a different, credible source.  Again not that Jackie Mac isn't credible, but she's already a source on him being difficult, this doesn't seem like new info to me.

This is kind of where I'm going.  All of the really "harmful" stuff about Kyrie in the article isn't quoted and sounds like articles she was writing last year when Irving was in Boston.  I read the article more like Jackie had a way she wanted to go and then just fit quotes in in a manner to fit the narrative she wanted to present.  if this article was from a Nets beat writer I'd hold it in much higher regard than I do one coming from a Boston beat writer that has printed very similar articles for years.  It just came off like a hit job from someone that has very little day to day interaction of the team being written about.

Curious why you think Zack Lowe and the Ringer NBA guys would go along with a hit piece? Why would (at least 3) highly respected NBA all randomly go in on this hit piece? Really curious what possible reason there could be for that.

The Ringer story you shared is about Kyrie being odd.  Everyone knows Kyrie is odd.  That wasn't the slant or nature of Jackie's piece.  No where near the same thing.

One of the main parts of the Jac article was that irvings moods were making his teammates uncomfortable. Isn’t him going up to all the photographers and asking them not to take pictures of him an example of him being in a bad mood (and probably something that wasn’t super comfortable for his teammates to be around?). Not to mention, why did Lowe day the whole report was true? Weird hill here

And yet she was all over the radio this week singing Irving's praises specifically mentioning how engaged he was, how he was helping the young guys, and that they all liked him.  Which is it, is he a problem or not?

She also said she spent 4 days with the Nets.  Yet somehow that makes her an expert on the culture of the team.  I just think it was hacky reporting from someone with a known bias against Irving.  She took what she felt she already knew, found some evidence to "confirm" that belief, and then wrote a piece making the whole thing seem much worse than it actually is.  That is a hit job.

If this piece came from a beat writer of the Nets that had spent years covering the team it would far more believable.

Did you read the part about Zach lower confirming the facts. Or are you just gonna ignore that? Again the facts are not disputable.

who said I objected to the facts.  go back and read what I've said in this thread.  The truly "harmful" parts of the article aren't quotes.  I believe they are supposition based on the authors preconceived notions.  An author that was with the team for a whopping total of 4 days, yet supposedly knows the Nets culture, got an accurate read on things, etc.  This was a carpet bagger coming in to write a hit piece. 

The fact that Kyrie is a strange dude that does weird things at times isn't news.  Everyone knows this to be true.  I absolutely believe Kyrie wouldn't take his hat off for a photo shoot and was reticent to try new things.  That is just Kyrie being Kyrie, but to claim that it is causing a rift, their are concerns, etc. that is the part I think is nonsense.  And I think it is nonsense for all of the reasons I've stated several times in this thread, including Jackie's own interviews since the hit job was published.

Calling Jackie Mac a carpet bagger is completely out of line. There is no reason to talk about a respected Boston journalist like that.

Um, writing an article about an organization you've spent almost no time with as if you have spent your career covering said organization, is pretty much the definition of a carpet bagger. 

[ChillyWilly]

I'm confused as to how a basically Boston beat reporter has any real idea of how the Nets are run.  And I get that she talked with people and has quotes, but I don't think she really has any idea what the Nets are like on a day to day basis. 

And the Nets have all basically come out and said the article was nonsense.  That Irving isn't a problem at all, everyone likes him, there are no issues, etc.

Wow, you mean a team is denying there being problems on the team? Shocking.

Sure, but this wasn't a Nets beat reporter that is well connected with the team writing the article.  That was the main point I was making.  How does Jackie have any real idea what is going on in Brooklyn?  She isn't there everyday.  She doesn't cover them.  Etc. 

It came off like a hit piece from a disgruntled former lover.

Again, its Jackie Mac. She doesn't have some agenda man, she knows because she's very well connected. Its like asking how WOJ knows who every team is gonna draft/sign every year. He isnt a beat writer! How does he know? Its their job to know. Do you think she's making this up? I mean it pretty much tracks with everything everybody else has said about Kyrie at every stop he's been at. This behavior isnt a secret.

Woj is well connected to agents and does have contacts across the league.  But Woj isn't writing stories about team cultures.  He is reporting breaking news.  That is a vastly different type of reporting.  And of course Jackie could have an agenda.  Every single piece of opinion based journalism is written or spoken with an agenda or bias.  That is what makes it opinion based.  To act like Jackie doesn't have an agenda is just strange.  Jackie isn't in Brooklyn every day covering the team.  I absolutely maintain the article came off like a hit job.

She didn't just conjure something out of thin air, though.  She might write more along the lines of opinion pieces these days but the fact of the matter is that she's been covering the league for more than 3 decades now in one capacity or another.  You don't spend that much time in the league without developing contacts & sources.   Someone told her this.  Maybe there's an agenda and maybe there isn't but she got this from somewhere. And, of course, the Nets are going to deny this.  He's their shiny new toy and investment.  With KD due back next season, this organization has extremely high hopes.  They're not going to come out and confirm this.  That would be a needless self-inflicted wound.

What's odd is seemingly questioning the credibility of someone like Jackie Mac while running to the defense of a guy that has created well-documented organizational problems in the past.

This is what I find a bit perplexing too. I kind of thought that Jackie Mac was considered by most to be a great old school journalist (I'll admit I thought she has gotten a bit more hot takey when she is on a show like around the horn), however it seems to be a very different thing to suggest she did a hit piece. I am also further confused why she would do this? Irving, despite being weird, seems to have friends around the NBA including Lebron and Durant. I don't think she would her entire career and reputation to just make up stuff about irving. Why would she do that?

Let's not forgot about all the hit pieces Woj has done on LeBron.  Didn't ruin his career.

I don't speak for Moranis, but to me it felt like she was just regurgitating the same stuff she wrote about Kyrie in Boston.  I imagine she has a strong opinion of him already, writing several ESPN articles on Kyrie and speaking about him on podcasts over the years.  Took her Kyrie/Boston article and just updated the team and called it new.

Doesn't mean it's not credible, but also the same thing she's been saying about Kyrie for years.  To me it would have hold more weight if it came from a different, credible source.  Again not that Jackie Mac isn't credible, but she's already a source on him being difficult, this doesn't seem like new info to me.

This is kind of where I'm going.  All of the really "harmful" stuff about Kyrie in the article isn't quoted and sounds like articles she was writing last year when Irving was in Boston.  I read the article more like Jackie had a way she wanted to go and then just fit quotes in in a manner to fit the narrative she wanted to present.  if this article was from a Nets beat writer I'd hold it in much higher regard than I do one coming from a Boston beat writer that has printed very similar articles for years.  It just came off like a hit job from someone that has very little day to day interaction of the team being written about.

Curious why you think Zack Lowe and the Ringer NBA guys would go along with a hit piece? Why would (at least 3) highly respected NBA all randomly go in on this hit piece? Really curious what possible reason there could be for that.

The Ringer story you shared is about Kyrie being odd.  Everyone knows Kyrie is odd.  That wasn't the slant or nature of Jackie's piece.  No where near the same thing.

One of the main parts of the Jac article was that irvings moods were making his teammates uncomfortable. Isn’t him going up to all the photographers and asking them not to take pictures of him an example of him being in a bad mood (and probably something that wasn’t super comfortable for his teammates to be around?). Not to mention, why did Lowe day the whole report was true? Weird hill here

And yet she was all over the radio this week singing Irving's praises specifically mentioning how engaged he was, how he was helping the young guys, and that they all liked him.  Which is it, is he a problem or not?

She also said she spent 4 days with the Nets.  Yet somehow that makes her an expert on the culture of the team.  I just think it was hacky reporting from someone with a known bias against Irving.  She took what she felt she already knew, found some evidence to "confirm" that belief, and then wrote a piece making the whole thing seem much worse than it actually is.  That is a hit job.

If this piece came from a beat writer of the Nets that had spent years covering the team it would far more believable.

Did you read the part about Zach lower confirming the facts. Or are you just gonna ignore that? Again the facts are not disputable.

who said I objected to the facts.  go back and read what I've said in this thread.  The truly "harmful" parts of the article aren't quotes.  I believe they are supposition based on the authors preconceived notions.  An author that was with the team for a whopping total of 4 days, yet supposedly knows the Nets culture, got an accurate read on things, etc.  This was a carpet bagger coming in to write a hit piece. 

The fact that Kyrie is a strange dude that does weird things at times isn't news.  Everyone knows this to be true.  I absolutely believe Kyrie wouldn't take his hat off for a photo shoot and was reticent to try new things.  That is just Kyrie being Kyrie, but to claim that it is causing a rift, their are concerns, etc. that is the part I think is nonsense.  And I think it is nonsense for all of the reasons I've stated several times in this thread, including Jackie's own interviews since the hit job was published.

Calling Jackie Mac a carpet bagger is completely out of line. There is no reason to talk about a respected Boston journalist like that.

Um, writing an article about an organization you've spent almost no time with as if you have spent your career covering said organization, is pretty much the definition of a carpet bagger.

You his cousin and a defense attorney by chance j/k

In all seriousness I can spend 4 days observing new work place with someone I spent 2 years covering to confidently write that same piece.

The group of us can debate 2018 till we're Green in the face don't think anyone is getting their minds changed on KI.

Personally I think deciding factor for me is how does this season play out for the Celtics.

[SHAQATTACK]

Nets have a good down to earth coach.   This might not work in the long run.  Smart coachs like TO COACH , not stand and watch like us fans.   He seems a nice patient guy for the most part , but not as relaxed at the CBS level.   He has already admitted there is no plan when Irving is in ,  you just watch him in awe.   What happens is the rest of the team goes to sleep watching him too.  So when Irving is out , they haven't practiced REAL team basketball and plays in real time.  Irving is ruined and basically wants to play street ball with others at his level .....Bron , Wade , KD .....screw the coach ....not needed.   

[KGs Knee]

I'm confused as to how a basically Boston beat reporter has any real idea of how the Nets are run.  And I get that she talked with people and has quotes, but I don't think she really has any idea what the Nets are like on a day to day basis. 

And the Nets have all basically come out and said the article was nonsense.  That Irving isn't a problem at all, everyone likes him, there are no issues, etc.

Wow, you mean a team is denying there being problems on the team? Shocking.

Sure, but this wasn't a Nets beat reporter that is well connected with the team writing the article.  That was the main point I was making.  How does Jackie have any real idea what is going on in Brooklyn?  She isn't there everyday.  She doesn't cover them.  Etc. 

It came off like a hit piece from a disgruntled former lover.

Again, its Jackie Mac. She doesn't have some agenda man, she knows because she's very well connected. Its like asking how WOJ knows who every team is gonna draft/sign every year. He isnt a beat writer! How does he know? Its their job to know. Do you think she's making this up? I mean it pretty much tracks with everything everybody else has said about Kyrie at every stop he's been at. This behavior isnt a secret.

Woj is well connected to agents and does have contacts across the league.  But Woj isn't writing stories about team cultures.  He is reporting breaking news.  That is a vastly different type of reporting.  And of course Jackie could have an agenda.  Every single piece of opinion based journalism is written or spoken with an agenda or bias.  That is what makes it opinion based.  To act like Jackie doesn't have an agenda is just strange.  Jackie isn't in Brooklyn every day covering the team.  I absolutely maintain the article came off like a hit job.

She didn't just conjure something out of thin air, though.  She might write more along the lines of opinion pieces these days but the fact of the matter is that she's been covering the league for more than 3 decades now in one capacity or another.  You don't spend that much time in the league without developing contacts & sources.   Someone told her this.  Maybe there's an agenda and maybe there isn't but she got this from somewhere. And, of course, the Nets are going to deny this.  He's their shiny new toy and investment.  With KD due back next season, this organization has extremely high hopes.  They're not going to come out and confirm this.  That would be a needless self-inflicted wound.

What's odd is seemingly questioning the credibility of someone like Jackie Mac while running to the defense of a guy that has created well-documented organizational problems in the past.

This is what I find a bit perplexing too. I kind of thought that Jackie Mac was considered by most to be a great old school journalist (I'll admit I thought she has gotten a bit more hot takey when she is on a show like around the horn), however it seems to be a very different thing to suggest she did a hit piece. I am also further confused why she would do this? Irving, despite being weird, seems to have friends around the NBA including Lebron and Durant. I don't think she would her entire career and reputation to just make up stuff about irving. Why would she do that?

Let's not forgot about all the hit pieces Woj has done on LeBron.  Didn't ruin his career.

I don't speak for Moranis, but to me it felt like she was just regurgitating the same stuff she wrote about Kyrie in Boston.  I imagine she has a strong opinion of him already, writing several ESPN articles on Kyrie and speaking about him on podcasts over the years.  Took her Kyrie/Boston article and just updated the team and called it new.

Doesn't mean it's not credible, but also the same thing she's been saying about Kyrie for years.  To me it would have hold more weight if it came from a different, credible source.  Again not that Jackie Mac isn't credible, but she's already a source on him being difficult, this doesn't seem like new info to me.

This is kind of where I'm going.  All of the really "harmful" stuff about Kyrie in the article isn't quoted and sounds like articles she was writing last year when Irving was in Boston.  I read the article more like Jackie had a way she wanted to go and then just fit quotes in in a manner to fit the narrative she wanted to present.  if this article was from a Nets beat writer I'd hold it in much higher regard than I do one coming from a Boston beat writer that has printed very similar articles for years.  It just came off like a hit job from someone that has very little day to day interaction of the team being written about.

Curious why you think Zack Lowe and the Ringer NBA guys would go along with a hit piece? Why would (at least 3) highly respected NBA all randomly go in on this hit piece? Really curious what possible reason there could be for that.

The Ringer story you shared is about Kyrie being odd.  Everyone knows Kyrie is odd.  That wasn't the slant or nature of Jackie's piece.  No where near the same thing.

One of the main parts of the Jac article was that irvings moods were making his teammates uncomfortable. Isn’t him going up to all the photographers and asking them not to take pictures of him an example of him being in a bad mood (and probably something that wasn’t super comfortable for his teammates to be around?). Not to mention, why did Lowe day the whole report was true? Weird hill here

And yet she was all over the radio this week singing Irving's praises specifically mentioning how engaged he was, how he was helping the young guys, and that they all liked him.  Which is it, is he a problem or not?

She also said she spent 4 days with the Nets.  Yet somehow that makes her an expert on the culture of the team.  I just think it was hacky reporting from someone with a known bias against Irving.  She took what she felt she already knew, found some evidence to "confirm" that belief, and then wrote a piece making the whole thing seem much worse than it actually is.  That is a hit job.

If this piece came from a beat writer of the Nets that had spent years covering the team it would far more believable.

Did you read the part about Zach lower confirming the facts. Or are you just gonna ignore that? Again the facts are not disputable.

who said I objected to the facts.  go back and read what I've said in this thread.  The truly "harmful" parts of the article aren't quotes.  I believe they are supposition based on the authors preconceived notions.  An author that was with the team for a whopping total of 4 days, yet supposedly knows the Nets culture, got an accurate read on things, etc.  This was a carpet bagger coming in to write a hit piece. 

The fact that Kyrie is a strange dude that does weird things at times isn't news.  Everyone knows this to be true.  I absolutely believe Kyrie wouldn't take his hat off for a photo shoot and was reticent to try new things.  That is just Kyrie being Kyrie, but to claim that it is causing a rift, their are concerns, etc. that is the part I think is nonsense.  And I think it is nonsense for all of the reasons I've stated several times in this thread, including Jackie's own interviews since the hit job was published.

Calling Jackie Mac a carpet bagger is completely out of line. There is no reason to talk about a respected Boston journalist like that.

Um, writing an article about an organization you've spent almost no time with as if you have spent your career covering said organization, is pretty much the definition of a carpet bagger. 

Quite frankly, I'm a bit tired of the idolizing of Jackie around here.  She became a sell-out and stopped doing real journalism when she went to work for ESPN, which was quite a while ago.  She's been a hack that loves to stir up drama for quite some time now, that's how you make money over at that network.  All she did here was expose her own biases, exact a little revenge on a person she clearly doesn't like, and tell Celtics fans who have been foaming at the mouth exactly what they wanted to hear.  She then had to publicly 'clarify' what she meant after there was push back, but she had already accomplished her goal of making Kyrie look bad and stirring up unnecessary, baseless drama.  Jackie should be ashamed of herself, but she knows she has the backing of a sports town that loves to tear people down.

It's all rather pathetic and brings nothing but shame on the city of Boston and the Celtics fan base.

[Moranis]

I'm confused as to how a basically Boston beat reporter has any real idea of how the Nets are run.  And I get that she talked with people and has quotes, but I don't think she really has any idea what the Nets are like on a day to day basis. 

And the Nets have all basically come out and said the article was nonsense.  That Irving isn't a problem at all, everyone likes him, there are no issues, etc.

Wow, you mean a team is denying there being problems on the team? Shocking.

Sure, but this wasn't a Nets beat reporter that is well connected with the team writing the article.  That was the main point I was making.  How does Jackie have any real idea what is going on in Brooklyn?  She isn't there everyday.  She doesn't cover them.  Etc. 

It came off like a hit piece from a disgruntled former lover.

Again, its Jackie Mac. She doesn't have some agenda man, she knows because she's very well connected. Its like asking how WOJ knows who every team is gonna draft/sign every year. He isnt a beat writer! How does he know? Its their job to know. Do you think she's making this up? I mean it pretty much tracks with everything everybody else has said about Kyrie at every stop he's been at. This behavior isnt a secret.

Woj is well connected to agents and does have contacts across the league.  But Woj isn't writing stories about team cultures.  He is reporting breaking news.  That is a vastly different type of reporting.  And of course Jackie could have an agenda.  Every single piece of opinion based journalism is written or spoken with an agenda or bias.  That is what makes it opinion based.  To act like Jackie doesn't have an agenda is just strange.  Jackie isn't in Brooklyn every day covering the team.  I absolutely maintain the article came off like a hit job.

She didn't just conjure something out of thin air, though.  She might write more along the lines of opinion pieces these days but the fact of the matter is that she's been covering the league for more than 3 decades now in one capacity or another.  You don't spend that much time in the league without developing contacts & sources.   Someone told her this.  Maybe there's an agenda and maybe there isn't but she got this from somewhere. And, of course, the Nets are going to deny this.  He's their shiny new toy and investment.  With KD due back next season, this organization has extremely high hopes.  They're not going to come out and confirm this.  That would be a needless self-inflicted wound.

What's odd is seemingly questioning the credibility of someone like Jackie Mac while running to the defense of a guy that has created well-documented organizational problems in the past.

This is what I find a bit perplexing too. I kind of thought that Jackie Mac was considered by most to be a great old school journalist (I'll admit I thought she has gotten a bit more hot takey when she is on a show like around the horn), however it seems to be a very different thing to suggest she did a hit piece. I am also further confused why she would do this? Irving, despite being weird, seems to have friends around the NBA including Lebron and Durant. I don't think she would her entire career and reputation to just make up stuff about irving. Why would she do that?

Let's not forgot about all the hit pieces Woj has done on LeBron.  Didn't ruin his career.

I don't speak for Moranis, but to me it felt like she was just regurgitating the same stuff she wrote about Kyrie in Boston.  I imagine she has a strong opinion of him already, writing several ESPN articles on Kyrie and speaking about him on podcasts over the years.  Took her Kyrie/Boston article and just updated the team and called it new.

Doesn't mean it's not credible, but also the same thing she's been saying about Kyrie for years.  To me it would have hold more weight if it came from a different, credible source.  Again not that Jackie Mac isn't credible, but she's already a source on him being difficult, this doesn't seem like new info to me.

This is kind of where I'm going.  All of the really "harmful" stuff about Kyrie in the article isn't quoted and sounds like articles she was writing last year when Irving was in Boston.  I read the article more like Jackie had a way she wanted to go and then just fit quotes in in a manner to fit the narrative she wanted to present.  if this article was from a Nets beat writer I'd hold it in much higher regard than I do one coming from a Boston beat writer that has printed very similar articles for years.  It just came off like a hit job from someone that has very little day to day interaction of the team being written about.

Curious why you think Zack Lowe and the Ringer NBA guys would go along with a hit piece? Why would (at least 3) highly respected NBA all randomly go in on this hit piece? Really curious what possible reason there could be for that.

The Ringer story you shared is about Kyrie being odd.  Everyone knows Kyrie is odd.  That wasn't the slant or nature of Jackie's piece.  No where near the same thing.

One of the main parts of the Jac article was that irvings moods were making his teammates uncomfortable. Isn’t him going up to all the photographers and asking them not to take pictures of him an example of him being in a bad mood (and probably something that wasn’t super comfortable for his teammates to be around?). Not to mention, why did Lowe day the whole report was true? Weird hill here

And yet she was all over the radio this week singing Irving's praises specifically mentioning how engaged he was, how he was helping the young guys, and that they all liked him.  Which is it, is he a problem or not?

She also said she spent 4 days with the Nets.  Yet somehow that makes her an expert on the culture of the team.  I just think it was hacky reporting from someone with a known bias against Irving.  She took what she felt she already knew, found some evidence to "confirm" that belief, and then wrote a piece making the whole thing seem much worse than it actually is.  That is a hit job.

If this piece came from a beat writer of the Nets that had spent years covering the team it would far more believable.

Did you read the part about Zach lower confirming the facts. Or are you just gonna ignore that? Again the facts are not disputable.

who said I objected to the facts.  go back and read what I've said in this thread.  The truly "harmful" parts of the article aren't quotes.  I believe they are supposition based on the authors preconceived notions.  An author that was with the team for a whopping total of 4 days, yet supposedly knows the Nets culture, got an accurate read on things, etc.  This was a carpet bagger coming in to write a hit piece. 

The fact that Kyrie is a strange dude that does weird things at times isn't news.  Everyone knows this to be true.  I absolutely believe Kyrie wouldn't take his hat off for a photo shoot and was reticent to try new things.  That is just Kyrie being Kyrie, but to claim that it is causing a rift, their are concerns, etc. that is the part I think is nonsense.  And I think it is nonsense for all of the reasons I've stated several times in this thread, including Jackie's own interviews since the hit job was published.

Calling Jackie Mac a carpet bagger is completely out of line. There is no reason to talk about a respected Boston journalist like that.

Um, writing an article about an organization you've spent almost no time with as if you have spent your career covering said organization, is pretty much the definition of a carpet bagger.

You his cousin and a defense attorney by chance j/k

In all seriousness I can spend 4 days observing new work place with someone I spent 2 years covering to confidently write that same piece.

The group of us can debate 2018 till we're Green in the face don't think anyone is getting their minds changed on KI.

Personally I think deciding factor for me is how does this season play out for the Celtics.

and it would be the same piece of nonsense.  There is no way you can truly get the feel of an organization by observing it for 4 days.  It isn't possible.  You bring your biases about the main component of the piece with you and insert it into your observations.

[moiso]

Who cares if she spent “only” 4 days with the Nets?  She could have talked to the same sources in 4 hours.

[cman88]

Kyrie Irving is still a great talent. No one is denying that. But he appears to be a locker-room cancer and is showing the same signs he did with the Nets that he did with the Cavs and then the Celtics. Look at how much better the Celtics are playing this year with Kemba and how much happier/more free guys are.

You cant win a title with that. People will point to the Cavs, but they also had the greatest player of our generation in Lebron and still only were able to hold it together with Kyrie for 3 years. Maybe Durant comes back and is the same player and they are a contender. But its only a matter of time before these two guys self destruct the team.

[Moranis]

Kyrie Irving is still a great talent. No one is denying that. But he appears to be a locker-room cancer and is showing the same signs he did with the Nets that he did with the Cavs and then the Celtics. Look at how much better the Celtics are playing this year with Kemba and how much happier/more free guys are.

You cant win a title with that. People will point to the Cavs, but they also had the greatest player of our generation in Lebron and still only were able to hold it together with Kyrie for 3 years. Maybe Durant comes back and is the same player and they are a contender. But its only a matter of time before these two guys self destruct the team.

“I was in Brooklyn for about four days and he’s happy as I’ve seen him, maybe ever,” “He is taking the time to be with the younger players. He’s engaging with them. He won the game for them the other night, almost won the game for them on opening night.”

So in those 4 days she apparently saw Irving the happiest he has been.  He has been engaging the young players.  Is spending time with them. 

yet he is apparently destroying the culture of the Nets.

Which is it?  Pick a story and stick to it Jackie.

[gpap]

Love him or hate him he had a solid win vs HOU last night...had 10 assists, too.

I wish him well - he doesn't deserve most of the blame around this blog.

Nope, I wish his name would stop being brought up, Jackie MacMullen included.

[Roy H.]

It's all rather pathetic and brings nothing but shame on the city of Boston and the Celtics fan base.

Comedy gold. 

[GreenFaith1819]

Love him or hate him he had a solid win vs HOU last night...had 10 assists, too.

I wish him well - he doesn't deserve most of the blame around this blog.

Nope, I wish his name would stop being brought up, Jackie MacMullen included.

Oh, I agree - about Irving. I have no issues with Jackie.

But as for Kyrie - this Blog always seemed to need a whipping boy. It was (and still is for some), 'Toine - Mr. Shimmy.

I think Rondo FINALLY graduated from being the whipping boy around here.

Now? Kyrie is a full-fledged Honor Student of the Celticsstrong Whipping Boy University. He will be like the Val Kilmer character from "Real Genius" around here for a LONG time, unfortunately...

Instead of developing Laser weapons, though - Kyrie will eventually prove to the world that the earth is INDEED flat............

I wish Kyrie Irving the student well as he continues to develop this thesis.

[Roy H.]

Scal made a key point last night.  Tatum's game winner was very similar to the buzzer beater he missed last season, which Kyrie whined and called his teammates out for.