2021 Oct 12, 1:14am
230 views 17 comments
The Brooklyn Nets appear to be coming to terms with the idea that Kyrie Irving won't play home games this season because he hasn't received a COVID-19 vaccine.Because of New York City's vaccine mandates, Irving isn't allowed to play in home games. San Francisco and Los Angeles are the only other cities with similar rules."I think we recognize he's not playing home games," Nash said, the New York Post reported. "We're going to have to, for sure, play without him this year, so it just depends on when, where, and how much."It was the first public admission from the team that Irving's situation may not be resolved when the regular season begins.It was first disclosed that Irving wasn't vaccinated when he wasn't available for the Nets' media day. He was the only player on the roster not present. When asked about his vaccination status, Irving repeatedly requested privacy over his decision.Last week, New York City said the Nets' practice facility, the HSS Training Center, is a private business and not subject to vaccine mandates, which allows Irving to join the team for practice. But he still can't play in Barclays Center.The Nets have been outwardly supportive of Irving, maintaining hope that Irving would eventually join them full time. But in recent days, it's sounded as though members of the team have grown more frustrated with Irving's part-time role.ESPN's Adrian Wojnarowski and Brian Windhorst reported last week that the Nets' hopes that Irving would get vaccinated were "waning," despite attempts to educate him on the issue. ESPN also reported that the franchise was getting less patient with Irving's partial commitment and was unsure whether it would accommodate him being with the team for only half the season.Irving's superstar teammates Kevin Durant and James Harden have also publicly expressed hope that Irving would commit to the team."At least he can practice," Kevin Durant told reporters on Friday, ESPN reported. "But we want him here for the whole thing. We want him for games, home games, practices, away games, shootarounds, all of it. So hopefully, we can figure this thing out."James Harden, Kyrie Irving, and Kevin Durant high-five during a game.The Nets' "Big Three" make the team championship favorites. Jeff Chiu/AP ImagesJames Harden told reporters that he'd leave it to Irving and the Nets' front office to chart a course forward, but he added, "I want him to be on the team."It's a stunning turn of events that throws Irving's and the Nets' future into immediate question.It's unprecedented to have a player only play in half of his team's games. It's even more noteworthy that it's a star of Irving's magnitude on a championship contender.Irving produced one of the best seasons of his career last year, averaging 27 points per game while posting a 50-40-90 shooting slash, a mark of supreme efficiency from the field. Irving played the most of Brooklyn's three stars, and his decision to relinquish point-guard duties to Harden allowed him to become a dangerous secondary ball handler and scoring guard.It's unclear what happens off the court. ESPN reported that Irving could miss game checks of around $380,000 for every home game he doesn't play.If Irving remains unvaccinated, it's fair to question how long the Nets would be willing to accommodate him. Irving has been the subject of trade rumors during the offseason and preseason: Fox Sports' Nick Wright reported that Irving would consider retiring if he were traded to another team, while ESPN's Stephen A. Smith said the Nets weighed trading Irving, only for Durant to shoot down the idea.But having a superstar available for only half the season (technically less, since the Nets is expected to play two "away" games against the New York Knicks) somewhat defeats the purpose of going all-in for a superteam. What would happen if the Nets played a Game 7 at home and didn't have Irving available?
His teammates should be outwardly supportive of him.
...I don't think he should be a media poster boy for this topic.
WookieMan says...I don't think he should be a media poster boy for this topic.I'm dumbfounded that there aren't some really big stars coming forward against these mandates. Incredibly good arguments can be made.
Sponsorship and future work.
I can't imagine being a big star with legacy changing money and worrying about future work.
WineHorror1 saysI can't imagine being a big star with legacy changing money and worrying about future work. Much of a celebrity's "value" is in future earnings potential. Just because someone is several years into big stardom, it doesn't mean they have >3MM in interest earning investments to keep them in income for life no matter what. Even if they do, willfully tanking millions of dollars worth of in-the-bag future earning potential for an abstract cause that few of your peers are committing to at this level is a HUGE expectation.
Fascinating. Who will be next?
Together we stand. It doesn't mean anything anymore, I guess.
Problem is maybe 1 in 10 people know pilots take a medical exam annually to keep their FAA pilots license