I love Sir Charles too and find him very entertaining and has been very supportive of Cleveland. But he has been overly critical of or towards the Cavs as of late, I believe without any basis, in line with the overall criticisms of the Cavs from the national media.
For the most part, I value Chuck's opinions, which have been shown to have a lot of validity. But again, not only were his recent comments about the Cavs anti-Cavs, he was emphatic, his opinions had no basis in fact and were, for the most part, wholly wrong.
He didn't just pick the Bulls to beat the Cavs, for those who did not watch him, he emphatically stated "there is no way the Cavs can beat the Bulls without Kevin Love". Now why is that, especially when Vegas had the Cavs favored for most games? In fact, he was pretty wrong and he didn't give LeBron the credit he deserved, in line with the national media. I think at least a sign restating his prediction to chide him is warranted.
He criticized the Cavs for using Kevin Love the wrong way and criticized Blatt. Okay, some valid points here, but the Cavs were winning the most games since January and Kevin's game took on new life the day before he was injured.
He lobbied the NBA ad naseum to suspend JR for FIVE PLAYOFF GAMES! Now, what is the basis for this? At the same time, he did not lobby the NBA to do anything about Kelly O.
He also emphatically chastised the NBA for ejecting Gibson, despite Gibson's clear kick towards Delly. He wasn't just trying to free his leg, he kicked towards Delly, which is not a leg freeing move. He also angrily stepped towards Delly while he was on the ground, evidencing intent. He and other national talking heads emphasized how Delly should have gotten a technical or been thrown out for his leg lock, while remaining silent about Crowder's similar or worse moves attacking JR's back, which led to JR's his arm swing, the same way as Gibson's kick. He also ignored Gibson's hard fouls on Delly the plays before the leg lock or how a Cavs player was pushed from behind during the skirmish without consequence.
It seemed to me he was pulling for the Bulls, for whatever reason, or showing an anti-Cleveland bias. Why?
Maybe I'm a little sensitive with all the negative national pundits taking shots at Cleveland and Blatt, with no or little credit or love for us, while Vegas--who is in the prediction business--keeps on making us favorites or one of the top two or three teams. Kenny Smith also seemed to be attacking the Cavs. The TNT/ESPN game announcers also seemed to be attacking the refs for making calls against the Bulls and defended calls against the Cavs.
NBA TV was not much better. After game 5 in the Bulls series, Isiah Thomas, who has been critical of the Cavs, actually said a number of times that the Bulls left game 5 feeling very confident and that the Cavs would be in trouble if the Bulls blew us out in game 6 and then came to game 7 feeling very confident. Now, what kind of statement was that?
Let's see if his love for Cleveland returns, now that he will be at the Q.
