People generally don't like athletes who are as outwardly and vocally arrogant as Draymond is, especially when their perceived skill doesn't match that attitude. For all his antics that was really never Rodman.
That's only a justification for why they don't like him, but it's not the reason for why do.
And I think you're misremembering, don't know, or not properly contextualizing the lack of media coverage of the era that Rodman existed in.
He was definitely
outwardly and vocally arrogant, and to the point where his
perceived skill didn't match his attitude. He acted like a diva everywhere he went (which to be fair to him, was a lot to do with his mental health), and whatever indiscretion that folks believe Draymond has done throughout his career, Rodman is guilty of, ten-fold.
His stint in SA is the most telling of all. He did everything in his power to sabotage that squad. It got so bad that the Spurs had to send him to a psychologist in Detroit because they weren't capable of dealing with his shyt, he got suspended (multiple times), then he only showed up for games he wanted to (rarely ever practiced with the team), then he wanted to retire mid-season, to him quitting in the playoffs because he thought he knew better, and then throwing the entire organization under the bus (players, coach, front office - you name it) when they bowed out of the '95 playoffs.
If Draymond did that shyt today, I couldn't even imagine the reception/reaction he'd face. He'd become the most-hated man in the history of the sport.
And to that point, what do you think the perception of Rodman would be, if he existed this era, exactly as he were?
