With the Knicks, I mean, they are such a fucking punch line that he would need an entirely separate staff to police media critiques of their foolish activity. But with the Rangers, they will reach out and argue with you as if it were a fan message board and they were the over-reaching moderator. Recently a veteran writer suggested that the return they got in a trade was "underwhelming" in a very matter-of-fact hard news story about a trade. They were on top of him like Tristan Thompson on a thot with an Indian-hair wig at the club. Once a guy wrote in quotes with the opinions of scouts that they were one of the "losers" of the draft in a winners/losers feature. Not only did they argue with the points--which were made in quotation marks by the scouts he interviewed, not him personally--they accused him of fabricating some of the quotes (although apparently there was some misunderstanding behind that, which was never fully explained). The notion that a professional franchise is insecure enough to do things like that is rather telling, isn't it?