Dillon Brooks: 'I Don't Like Draymond' Interview

On March 4, 2023, in an interview recapped by Sports Illustrated that cited an ESPN interview, Dillon Brooks made direct comments about Draymond Green and the Golden State Warriors. Brooks said, "I don't like Draymond [Green] at all. I just don’t like Golden State. I don’t like anything to do with them. Draymond talks a lot. Gets away with a lot, too" and added, "His game is cool—with Golden State—but if you put him anywhere else, you’re not going to know who Draymond is" [3]. Those remarks were delivered in a media setting rather than during game action and represented an explicit personal denunciation. Coverage placed Brooks' comments in the context of the May 3, 2022 Flagrant-2 on Gary Payton II and subsequent heated meetings between the clubs, noting that Brooks' public statements lengthened the list of public exchanges between players on both sides [1][3]. The interview drew immediate attention because it moved a rivalry that had been expressed on court into pointed off-court commentary, inviting responses from Warriors-affiliated media platforms and players [3].

Brooks' March 4, 2023 remarks matter because they shifted a rivalry that included physical on-court incidents into a clear, personal media attack: Brooks said he "didn't like Draymond" and criticized Green's reputation beyond Golden State, which increased the likelihood of public rebuttal and kept the dispute in national coverage rather than limiting it to in-game animus [3]. The comments raised the stakes for follow-up responses by Green and others and contributed to a pattern where the two figures used media platforms to address one another [3][4].

Draymond Green responded publicly five days later on his own media platform, The Draymond Green Show podcast, with a direct rebuttal (see the March 9, 2023 podcast incident), and coverage recorded a continued back-and-forth between the players in the weeks that followed [4]. In subsequent postgame remarks, Brooks dismissed Green's podcast as "cute," maintaining a public posture of dismissal rather than apology or de-escalation [4]. The exchange signaled that the rivalry now had both on-court and media-facing dimensions and that future incidents could appear in either domain [3][4].