ReasonablySober wrote:Wooderson wrote:ReasonablySober wrote:
That was February 19th. Since then the Bucks again got bounced in the first round, and Dame blew out his ACL. If he was committed to the Bucks he could reaffirm that super easily.
What purpose does stating something publicly serve other than appeasing fans? If he is committed and told ownership/management, the best move is to keep it under cover and let other teams waste time and brainpower dreaming up Giannis deals.
I don't actually disagree. You can paint it as Giannis is under contract and he doesn't feel the need to respond to rumors that aren't true. Or you can think the silence is a statement in and of itself and both sides are working to resolve a trade demand.
Personally, I think that if Giannis is committed to the team long term he could do everyone a solid and make the statement he wants to be Milwaukee's Duncan. I wouldn't blame him if he didn't and wanted out, but some clarification would be great. The silence (IMO) speaks louder than words.
Even if Giannis made a statement that he was going to remain a Buck, the national media would respond by saying that means nothing, "what else was he supposed to say?", "this changes nothing" etc., etc.
Before Giannis signed the extension he is currently on, it was nearly universal in the media that there was zero percent chance Giannis was signing the extension, and it made way more sense for him to head to free agency the following offseason, in part so he could keep his options open and leave Milwaukee. They said the only way for him to change that narrative would be to sign the extension to indicate he wanted to say.
Giannis did sign the extension, and either that same day or the next day, you had national media like Howard Beck out there saying "this changes nothing!" " This just means he will ask for a trade!"
They will never give up on this false narrative they created.
Perhaps Giannis doesn't feel like bothering to try to appease the unappealable.
