Chris Broussard actually making sense, who knew he had it in him?

649
10
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
[h1]Time for Cavs owner to act his age[/h1][h3]If Dan Gilbert felt this way about LeBron, why exactly did he want him back?[/h3]

By Chris Broussard
ESPN The Magazine
Archive




nba_a_gilbert1x_576.jpg
Cavs owner Dan Gilbert did not take the high road in addressing the departure of LeBron
James.
I'm beginning to wonder if Dan Gilbert's real name is Benjamin Button. You know, the character from the hit movie, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," who looks old when he's young and young when he's old.How else to explain a 48-year-old man -- an intelligent, accomplished, incredibly wealthy 48-year-old man -- sounding off like an acne-riddled 13-year-old who'd just been jilted by his first love?LeBron James has been roundly criticized for the stunning way he handled his departure from the Cleveland Cavaliers on Thursday, and rightly so. James should have informed the team of his decision to leave in person and as soon as he could, thus giving it the chance to formulate a practical Plan B rather than having to react to such devastating news on the fly.He dumped them -- and northeast Ohio -- on national TV, making the ending unnecessarily dramatic and harsh.But Gilbert's nearly twice James' age. And when you're two winters away from 50, you should know better than to act off pure emotion. If you want to react spontaneously in your living room, ranting and raving like a heartbroken teenager, immaturely pointing out flaws in the one you'd gladly spend the rest of your life with, issuing ridiculous threats that are about as likely as purple rain, and -- get this -- casting spellsBut to do that publicly? Uhh, two words:Grow up.But the childishness didn't stop there. On Friday, Gilbert, the owner of Fathead, dropped the price of James fatheads from $99.99 to $17.41. Benedict Arnold was born in 1741.With the way this is going, I'm expecting Gilbert to tape "Kick Me" signs to the seats on the visitors bench when Miami visits The Q next season. That'll be a good one!Let's be honest: Gilbert, and most every other owner or league executive, makes a habit of being just as cold-blooded and callous as James was in making his decision. They do it with NBA players all the time, telling them to their faces they have no intention of trading them and then picking up their cell phone and offering them to a competitor as soon as the player leaves the room.Heck, the Cavs are doing that at this very moment. Everyone on that roster not named LeBron has been available in a trade since that May semifinals series loss to Boston. Think Gilbert's told them that?What Gilbert did was especially reckless and immature when you consider how volatile the situation in Cleveland was Thursday night. With fans burning James jerseys and throwing things at murals and paintings of James, he thought it best to exacerbate their anger rather than to call for calm.So now, I'm told, James' close friends -- and perhaps even the player himself -- have been threatened with violence, told that their homes in Cleveland and Akron may be burned down. They've got friends and relatives living in the area, and Gilbert thought it right to stir up the fury of the masses even more?In his incendiary e-mail, Gilbert wrote that James' decision to leave Cleveland was "the exact opposite lesson of what we would want our children to learn." Yet in his letter, he seemed to threaten to expose potentially embarrassing information about James, writing that he plans to communicate "events of the recent past" to the public over "the next several days and weeks." Is that how Gilbert wants children to act when they don't get their way?Gilbert's diatribes -- he further attacked James' character in a subsequent interview with The Associated Press -- were hypocritical in so many ways.He called James a quitter, saying he quit in five playoff games over the past two years, yet he was willing to pay him $125 million to stay on his team. He called James a "self-declared King," yet failed to mention that it was he himself who promoted the "King James" brand throughout his arena. He said James has "gotten a free pass" and that "people have covered up for him for way too long," yet it was Gilbert who overruled the objections of former GM Danny Ferry and gave James and his friends carte blanche throughout the organization. If James was enabled, Gilbert was the enabler.Then Gilbert said James' actions Thursday night revealed "who he really is." Well, perhaps James is saying the same thing about Gilbert. Perhaps he's known all along that Gilbert didn't respect him; that Gilbert thought he was a "coward;" that Gilbert thought his "King," "Chosen One" and "Witness" nicknames were a joke; that he'd mock and trash them, and him, as soon as James was no longer making him money.Maybe that's why James didn't return Gilbert's phone calls and e-mails over the past two months -- because he knew the owner looked at him as a moneymaker and nothing more. Maybe James no longer wanted to play for someone like that: someone who, in the heat of the moment, refuses to act his age. 
 
[h1]Time for Cavs owner to act his age[/h1][h3]If Dan Gilbert felt this way about LeBron, why exactly did he want him back?[/h3]

By Chris Broussard
ESPN The Magazine
Archive




nba_a_gilbert1x_576.jpg
Cavs owner Dan Gilbert did not take the high road in addressing the departure of LeBron
James.
I'm beginning to wonder if Dan Gilbert's real name is Benjamin Button. You know, the character from the hit movie, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," who looks old when he's young and young when he's old.How else to explain a 48-year-old man -- an intelligent, accomplished, incredibly wealthy 48-year-old man -- sounding off like an acne-riddled 13-year-old who'd just been jilted by his first love?LeBron James has been roundly criticized for the stunning way he handled his departure from the Cleveland Cavaliers on Thursday, and rightly so. James should have informed the team of his decision to leave in person and as soon as he could, thus giving it the chance to formulate a practical Plan B rather than having to react to such devastating news on the fly.He dumped them -- and northeast Ohio -- on national TV, making the ending unnecessarily dramatic and harsh.But Gilbert's nearly twice James' age. And when you're two winters away from 50, you should know better than to act off pure emotion. If you want to react spontaneously in your living room, ranting and raving like a heartbroken teenager, immaturely pointing out flaws in the one you'd gladly spend the rest of your life with, issuing ridiculous threats that are about as likely as purple rain, and -- get this -- casting spellsBut to do that publicly? Uhh, two words:Grow up.But the childishness didn't stop there. On Friday, Gilbert, the owner of Fathead, dropped the price of James fatheads from $99.99 to $17.41. Benedict Arnold was born in 1741.With the way this is going, I'm expecting Gilbert to tape "Kick Me" signs to the seats on the visitors bench when Miami visits The Q next season. That'll be a good one!Let's be honest: Gilbert, and most every other owner or league executive, makes a habit of being just as cold-blooded and callous as James was in making his decision. They do it with NBA players all the time, telling them to their faces they have no intention of trading them and then picking up their cell phone and offering them to a competitor as soon as the player leaves the room.Heck, the Cavs are doing that at this very moment. Everyone on that roster not named LeBron has been available in a trade since that May semifinals series loss to Boston. Think Gilbert's told them that?What Gilbert did was especially reckless and immature when you consider how volatile the situation in Cleveland was Thursday night. With fans burning James jerseys and throwing things at murals and paintings of James, he thought it best to exacerbate their anger rather than to call for calm.So now, I'm told, James' close friends -- and perhaps even the player himself -- have been threatened with violence, told that their homes in Cleveland and Akron may be burned down. They've got friends and relatives living in the area, and Gilbert thought it right to stir up the fury of the masses even more?In his incendiary e-mail, Gilbert wrote that James' decision to leave Cleveland was "the exact opposite lesson of what we would want our children to learn." Yet in his letter, he seemed to threaten to expose potentially embarrassing information about James, writing that he plans to communicate "events of the recent past" to the public over "the next several days and weeks." Is that how Gilbert wants children to act when they don't get their way?Gilbert's diatribes -- he further attacked James' character in a subsequent interview with The Associated Press -- were hypocritical in so many ways.He called James a quitter, saying he quit in five playoff games over the past two years, yet he was willing to pay him $125 million to stay on his team. He called James a "self-declared King," yet failed to mention that it was he himself who promoted the "King James" brand throughout his arena. He said James has "gotten a free pass" and that "people have covered up for him for way too long," yet it was Gilbert who overruled the objections of former GM Danny Ferry and gave James and his friends carte blanche throughout the organization. If James was enabled, Gilbert was the enabler.Then Gilbert said James' actions Thursday night revealed "who he really is." Well, perhaps James is saying the same thing about Gilbert. Perhaps he's known all along that Gilbert didn't respect him; that Gilbert thought he was a "coward;" that Gilbert thought his "King," "Chosen One" and "Witness" nicknames were a joke; that he'd mock and trash them, and him, as soon as James was no longer making him money.Maybe that's why James didn't return Gilbert's phone calls and e-mails over the past two months -- because he knew the owner looked at him as a moneymaker and nothing more. Maybe James no longer wanted to play for someone like that: someone who, in the heat of the moment, refuses to act his age. 
 
Wow....Broussard was 100% spot-on with what he wrote. I think a lot of us feel that Dan Gilbert came off looking WORSE than Lebron with his actions over the course of Thursday/Friday. Also, Gilbert is going to have a hard time luring FA's to play in Cleveland due to how he handled himself. He did much more harm than good.
 
Wow....Broussard was 100% spot-on with what he wrote. I think a lot of us feel that Dan Gilbert came off looking WORSE than Lebron with his actions over the course of Thursday/Friday. Also, Gilbert is going to have a hard time luring FA's to play in Cleveland due to how he handled himself. He did much more harm than good.
 
Well okay but atleast we know that Gilbert didn't like having Lebron around but who would really want to be around someone who markets himself as King James and the Chosen One.


Nobody really likes self-absorbed superstars but you need them to have a chance at winning titles. So you do your best to take care of them.
 
Well okay but atleast we know that Gilbert didn't like having Lebron around but who would really want to be around someone who markets himself as King James and the Chosen One.


Nobody really likes self-absorbed superstars but you need them to have a chance at winning titles. So you do your best to take care of them.
 
I have been walking the fence on this one, and at this point I'll have to disagree with this article. On the surface, it's the right thing to say, as Dan Gilbert was very immature in his reaction to the situation. BUT.... What other choice did Dan Gilbert have? First of all, the "why would he want LeBron back if he quit" questions are crap. Franchise ownership is about profits and Dan Gilbert had his meal ticket. All stars are given special treatment, but I will say that LeBron's situation was a bit different.

Dan Gilbert's "mistake" puts itself into perspective: He treated LeBron like he was being courted by colleges and pro teams since he was a high-school freshman and had a 9-figure endorsement contract before he ever played a pro game. LeBron has had the league in his hand from day one and right now he's going "all in."

I'm not trying to put Dan Gilbert on a pedestal or make LeBron out to be a villain. It is what it is. Right now, Gilbert is trying to hold on to as many of his winy fans who now see him as the leader of the quickly forming anti-LeBron campaign. He's holding onto his customer and revenue base in the best way he knows how and I can't fault him for that.

LeBron could have been more tactful with his approach to the free agency process just like Dan Gilbert could have been more mature with his response to the situation. LeBron wanted to be the talk of sports and beyond. He came out looking self-centered (which he might be), but he got what he wanted. Dan Gilbert wanted to rally his remaining fan base and reassure business owners who he feels a lot of "HEAT" from if he can't keep fans interested in Cavs basketball. He came out looking like a psychopath (which he might be), but he got what he wanted. In the end though, there is no winner here.
 
I have been walking the fence on this one, and at this point I'll have to disagree with this article. On the surface, it's the right thing to say, as Dan Gilbert was very immature in his reaction to the situation. BUT.... What other choice did Dan Gilbert have? First of all, the "why would he want LeBron back if he quit" questions are crap. Franchise ownership is about profits and Dan Gilbert had his meal ticket. All stars are given special treatment, but I will say that LeBron's situation was a bit different.

Dan Gilbert's "mistake" puts itself into perspective: He treated LeBron like he was being courted by colleges and pro teams since he was a high-school freshman and had a 9-figure endorsement contract before he ever played a pro game. LeBron has had the league in his hand from day one and right now he's going "all in."

I'm not trying to put Dan Gilbert on a pedestal or make LeBron out to be a villain. It is what it is. Right now, Gilbert is trying to hold on to as many of his winy fans who now see him as the leader of the quickly forming anti-LeBron campaign. He's holding onto his customer and revenue base in the best way he knows how and I can't fault him for that.

LeBron could have been more tactful with his approach to the free agency process just like Dan Gilbert could have been more mature with his response to the situation. LeBron wanted to be the talk of sports and beyond. He came out looking self-centered (which he might be), but he got what he wanted. Dan Gilbert wanted to rally his remaining fan base and reassure business owners who he feels a lot of "HEAT" from if he can't keep fans interested in Cavs basketball. He came out looking like a psychopath (which he might be), but he got what he wanted. In the end though, there is no winner here.
 
Dan Gilbert lost $100,000,000. I would be irate if I lost $100.

He had every right in what he did. Period.
 
Dan Gilbert lost $100,000,000. I would be irate if I lost $100.

He had every right in what he did. Period.
 
Last time I checked we had freedom of speech, and I prefer that an owner didn't clear something with his PR before writing his email.

As far as luring FA's? Really? Like they were luring anyone to Cleveland anyway.

Dude lost mad dollars, and we want political correctness? In a world filled with BS- I am glad an owner kept it real despite consequences.  



p.s. If Hossard sad the earth was round i'd still have my doubts.
 
Last time I checked we had freedom of speech, and I prefer that an owner didn't clear something with his PR before writing his email.

As far as luring FA's? Really? Like they were luring anyone to Cleveland anyway.

Dude lost mad dollars, and we want political correctness? In a world filled with BS- I am glad an owner kept it real despite consequences.  



p.s. If Hossard sad the earth was round i'd still have my doubts.
 
Originally Posted by Animal Thug1539

Dan Gilbert lost $100,000,000. I would be irate if I lost $100.

He had every right in what he did. Period.
It was $100,000.*

Second, yeah he had the right to, but that doesn't make it right. People have already mentioned it but owners & GM's constantly tell their players "you're safe, we're not shopping you, you're not going to get traded." and go ahead and trade them anyway without any sort of note.

A ton of athletes find out their traded via text messages, friends and ESPN tickers.

LeBron had every right to do what he did, too. That doesn't make him right either.

The funny thing is, this happens more to athletes than owners and the players never lash out like Gilbert did. You'd think the owner understands that it's a business. *shrugs*
 
Back
Top Bottom