I don't really WANT to defend Durant, but a couple of things:
1. Yes, it would be nice if he would have responded exactly like you said. But the reality is that most guys don't do that. Maybe they aren't articulate enough. Maybe it isn't in their best interest to do that, for any number of reasons. Maybe they just don't think it's anyone else's business. And I don't think either the media or the fans have any right to demand that, no matter how much we want to know. IMO, a player has every right to play their future and their finances close to the vest. Of course, the corollary to that is that the fans thus have every right to feel however they want to feel about that (in other words, fair or not, there are consequences to such an approach).
The sports media's job is to ask questions of the athletes and report on topics of interest. Players, by contract (and it is in their contracts) are to be made available to the media. In every professional sports contract I have ever seen (and I have signed my own, albeit its not an NBA one), there is always a clause about media availability. The players have made that whole relationship adversarial, because in this day and age, they want control over what is said about them, at all times. The mature ones understand that's simply not possible, and do their best to be engaging. The bad ones, like Westbrook and Durant, come off as prima donnas, whiners, and overall, like big babies who can't have their way, so they act like spoiled brats. Durant is an incredible athlete. From everything I hear, he's also an incredible person and does a lot for various communities, but doesn't want attention for it. I TOTALLY get that. But when it comes to his basketball career, he does himself ZERO favors acting like he does with reporters.
2. You're description of Durant's response is not really accurate. He had given a more substantive response to the media that is very much along the lines of what you said he should say. He said essentially what you said. And after he said that, when reporters continued to prod and demand more, that is when he shut down. I'm not defending everything he has said and done, but it's not quite right to say that he just clammed up and refused to talk to them.
Link? Because no, he did not say that. He clammed up the moment he was asked about it after the end of LAST year. And got bitchy about it. He in no way did as you describe. If you're spot-on, I stand corrected, but I don't recall him doing that at all, and I very much pay attention to all of that (one, because I'm a hoops junkie, and two, because I used to be a member of the media, so I try and make sure I catch big story lines, and how athletes are questioned).
Regarding Steph's legacy, I mostly agree with you. But there can still be a tendency on the part of some to give him his due. It isn't quite as prevalent now as it was 2-4 years ago, but you saw a lot of players and fans then who didn't understand his style of play, were resentful because he was so different in how he played (and thus perceived as "not doing it right"), and too quick to look for reasons why he wasn't as good as the players you mentioned. There still is some of that. It has dissipated quite a bit. But there are some that still hold to that. But I think what has helped is just the sustained winning and sustained excellence, and him coming alive these playoffs has been a big help in that overall perception, I think. I really hope he can continue to perform at this level and grab a finals MVP, because I think that would also be a huge boost in that regard as well.
I think you meant "NOT" give him his due in the second sentence. And I agree with you on all of it. I think the holdouts are people very much stuck in that "Steph couldn't play in the 80s and 90s" mentality. Simply put, while I get those that feel that way, I do not agree at all that Steph should be judged because he plays the game in this era. The man transcends eras. He can shoot from anywhere on the court. He's a better pure shooter than anyone in NBA history, and that includes Bird and Reggie Miller. Sure, because the game is more open now, the records will all be Steph's. But they'd be his anyway.
I mean sure, back in the day, when they allowed hand-checking and actual defense, Steph would be beat up a little more. But his old man, Dell Curry, who DID play in the 80s and 90s, and was a great shooter in his own right, is only ONE inch taller, and they both weigh exactly the same. And Dell lit up defenses back then. So, to me, Steph's style of play transcends. I may not like the Warriors, but to deny Steph Curry's greatness as an NBA icon is foolhardy. On that, we can agree. LOL.
Curry is an icon - with or without KD. Can anyone argue it wasn't the one responsible for making the 3-point shot a mandatory requirement for success? Wins and losses often hinge on a teams 3-point %. It's absolutely a difference maker.
I wouldn't put him on par with Jordan (he's in class of his own imo). But I'll put him up there with Kobe/Shaq for sure.
I hear ya. I mean, Jordan...Jordan was the right guy, at the right time. HIs legend was built on his talent, obviously, and his athletic ability to soar, but also because of the advertising boom of the 80s that really took off with him. He was really the first one (and Dr. J and Magic to a lesser degree, but only because they came before Jordan) to really capture and use that advertising as a launch point for his own brand. He paved the way for everyone who did that after him. Will Curry reach those heights? Perhaps. But it'll be based less on basketball, and more on image and brand. Look at Iverson. He's the guy most NBA dudes remember. Why? Because he brought something entirely different to the NBA. Street culture. Tats, all that stuff. The culture of ISO play and one-on-one dominance. I could make a good argument that Iverson is more of an NBA Icon than Kobe or Shaq. Not that I think that personally, but I could make a damn compelling argument. Steph's icon status in the league is secure. Whether it gets up to the level of Jordan remains to be seen. I don't think it will, but he certainly has impacted the league very much in the same way Jordan and Iverson have.