What's different? Here, let me show you.
First, the quote you and Bobo ran with (
LINK):
"It's a shared sacrifice, all of us working together as a team. It's big deal for all of us. He needs to be here on a more consistent basis."
Then, let's look at the expanded quote which is from an older article (
LINK):
"It’s good to have him here. He needs to be here working,” linebacker Sean Lee said. “The more he’s here, the better it is for us, shared sacrifice, all of us working together as a team is a big deal for all of us. He needs to be here on a more consistent basis. He needs to be working more with us.”
Let's recap. In light of the discussion going on here about making accommodations or having zero tolerance, the quote you produced looks as if Lee is dismissing Irving's issues as not special, stating that all the team has issues they're dealing with and that Irving is screwing things up. Not only does the expanded quote show a completely different tone at the start (i.e., "It's good to have him here"), but shows that the truncated quote was reported wrong. There was no "It's" at the beginning of that sentence because
it wasn't the beginning of the sentence or his statement.
They left out "It's good to have him here" and "The more he's here, the better it is for us." Why do you think that is? It was reported mid sentence to make it look like a more critical statement from Lee (drama for clicks) and it hooked the gullible, knee-jerk people it was supposed to. Basically, you got duped by the media fishing for angry, leniency-for-self-zero-tolerance-for-everyone-else hypocrites like who've appeared in this thread.
Hope this lesson in critical thinking helps. Maybe you'll think twice before running with partial quotes as gospel.