Clock play - poor sports or part of the game?

Stalling is "poor sports" and should be reported but didn't we just witness Hikaru Nakamura win the Speed Chess Championship Final 2022 against Magnus Carlsen by stalling? It was the usual case where the player in the losing position (Hikaru) lets the clock run out - an act that won the whole tournament. The same idea works in the chess.com daily arena tournaments. If you play against the tournament leader, you can stall in order to reduce the number of games they can start so that they'll have a harder time to hold on to their lead. It sounds like poor sports but what are we supposed to see when GMs do it? GM privilege?

Personally, I don't see the point in wasting my opponent's time by stalling because I'd also be wasting my own time. That's not to say that I don't take my time thinking of the next moves, including positions where I'm losing. In daily games, my interpretation of a losing position is that I didn't spend enough time thinking of the previous moves that landed me there, so the fix is simple: spend more time on each move because that's the only way out of trouble, to be optimistic. 

In rapid and blitz games at 1200-1600 rating levels, there seems to be a point in not stalling, even in a lost position: having more time in the clock adds pressure to your opponent who might eventually blunder just because they're trying to keep up with your pace. The blunders may not come so often at higher levels but the clock can definitely save the game at any level. Finally, bullet games are simply too short for stalling - there's no way to annoy or frustrate me by letting seconds run out.