# Blazers shut out media access



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Thanks to Jason Quick....the Blazers have now shut down all media access to predraft workouts.....



> STATEMENT FROM TRAIL BLAZERS REGARDING
> MEDIA ACCESS TO PRE-DRAFT WORKOUTS
> 
> PORTLAND, Ore. - Due to the actions of a reporter revealing sensitive information from the team's pre-draft workout session today, the Portland Trail Blazers regret to announce they will be forced to close workouts indefinitely.
> ...



:brokenhea


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

WOW!!


----------



## ThePrideOfClyde (Mar 28, 2006)

Both sides are basttards


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

nice job jason bond.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

A typical and predictably petty move by the Blazer organization.

Meh.

This franchise is borderline paranoid.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

papag said:


> A typical and predictably petty move by the Blazer organization.
> 
> Meh.
> 
> This franchise is borderline paranoid.


You are clueless... not borderline clueless... CLUELESS! You obviously understand why the media cant watch these workouts and report about them.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

papag said:


> A typical and predictably petty move by the Blazer organization.
> 
> Meh.
> 
> This franchise is borderline paranoid.


I call you out for BS sir!

The reason the workouts are Private is so the team can have confidentiality when it come to their workouts. If the Blazers were swayed by a players performance in a private workou and that result leaked to the rest of the country as it has, then what's the point of having private workouts? wheres the edge?


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

_The reason the workouts are Private is so the team can have confidentiality when it come to their workouts. If the Blazers were swayed by a players performance in a private workou and that result leaked to the rest of the country as it has, then what's the point of having private workouts? wheres the edge?_

So how do we all know about Morrison's Charlotte workout? Charlotte doesn't seem to be hunkering down in a dark closet of isolation.

It's typical and it's petty. It's PATTERSON.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Link?

I don't see that statement posted anywhere other than on this board. Not on Blazers.com, not on Oregonlive.com, not on kgw.com, etc.

-Pop


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

papag said:


> _The reason the workouts are Private is so the team can have confidentiality when it come to their workouts. If the Blazers were swayed by a players performance in a private workou and that result leaked to the rest of the country as it has, then what's the point of having private workouts? wheres the edge?_
> 
> So how do we all know about Morrison's Charlotte workout? Charlotte doesn't seem to be hunkering down in a dark closet of isolation.
> 
> It's typical and it's petty. It's PATTERSON.


What we know of Morrisons workout with Charlotte is based on the oepen media session like the one that was allowed to the local media for the end of the workout. We know about some uncontested shooting drills and that the team was pleased, nothing more.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

_You are clueless... not borderline clueless... CLUELESS! You obviously understand why the media cant watch these workouts and report about them_

I'm clueless because I call out the Blazers for a petty press release? It's pathetic and Steve Patterson should be above falling to the media's level.

Oh, and so much for the "these workouts don't change much in our drafting" stance that I heard Paul Allen say on the Fan.

Paranoia will destroy ya.


----------



## Blazer Freak (Jul 11, 2004)

I hate our reporters. Hate'em.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

papag said:


> So how do we all know about Morrison's Charlotte workout? Charlotte doesn't seem to be hunkering down in a dark closet of isolation.


Just to play devil's advocate, I'd say because Charlotte doesn't have Portland drafting in front of them (Toronto and Chicago will likely take bigs), or fear another team trading up in front of them to take the player they want. If I had the top pick in the draft, for example, I not only wouldn't worry one bit about teams guessing my moves, I'd purposely try to bait someone into making me a good offer. 

Also, it's possible that another team could use inside information to determine that they'd better trade up ahead of us, if they want the same player they think we do. 

Not that this report by Quick necessarily spilled the beans, but the idea is that confidentiality was expected, it was breached, and the team can't take that chance again. I think their public notice was a little odd (and poorly executed), but the concept is sound.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

_What we know of Morrisons workout with Charlotte is based on the oepen media session like the one that was allowed to the local media for the end of the workout. _

So Morrison's great workout consisted of him shooting open jump shots?

Hmm, take him, he seems like an All-Star.

In H-O-R-S-E


----------



## Peaceman (Jan 15, 2003)

Another stupid move by Patterson. Both Portland papers as well as our only sportstalk radio station are going to crusify Patterson and justifiably so. My god this guy doesn't get it. The media can help you eventually, but lets take a approach to make sure they are bitter another 5 years. That will help. Finally we don't hear much about the Sheed, Damon and Bonzi days, and now this idiot goes crazy over one incident that ANY reporter who is worth anything would do. Reporters get inside sources and get whatever angle the people want to hear. This guy needs to get fired. Maybe Paul will make Pritchard President and GM :biggrin:


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Ummm... again...

LINK?

Has anyone seen this anywhere other than on this site? Seems to me this would be rather big news, and I haven't seen it anywhere other than KMURPH's post.

-Pop


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Whats hilarious is that Quick was dumb enough to tell the world he peeked thru the blinds to watch a workout. What a moron. 

A friend in the media said he got a media release regarding this from the Trail Blazers, it's true.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

papag said:


> _What we know of Morrisons workout with Charlotte is based on the oepen media session like the one that was allowed to the local media for the end of the workout. _
> 
> So Morrison's great workout consisted of him shooting open jump shots?
> 
> ...


that's what Charlotte Media was allowed to see.....Other than that the organization has said they were pleased with his workout. I haven't seen any accounts of the media actually witnessing more than the shooting drills.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

The only link I have is from the guy at hoopsworld

http://www.hoopsworld.com/board3/showthread.php?tid=8910


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Peaceman said:


> Another stupid move by Patterson. Both Portland papers as well as our only sportstalk radio station are going to crusify Patterson and justifiably so. My god this guy doesn't get it. The media can help you eventually, but lets take a approach to make sure they are bitter another 5 years. That will help.


The media follows news. No matter how the Blazers treat them now, if the Blazers are in the WCF five years from now, the press will want their interviews.

In the meantime, the Oregonian's reporters have shown a pettiness while the team is bad and that won't change whether they have an open media policy or not.

I believe in fostering good relationships, but if the press is going to be dishonest and petty, I think it's a good idea to stand up to them and cut them off from what they want. The press will continue to write stories about the Blazers, some will be factual accounts, some will be "those dirty *******s." As per usual. But they won't get the interviews and reports they need to do their distortions.


----------



## Stepping Razor (Apr 24, 2004)

Man, what a clownshow, all around.

Steve Patterson's paranoid, bumbling, ham-fisted attempts to restrict access to information can only hurt the team.

On the other hand, Jason Quick and John Canzano have repeatedly demonstrated a shocking lack of professionalism in the way they cover the Blazers. Peeping through closed blinds? Stalking Patterson in Orlando and trying to read his lips from 100 yards away as he met with another GM in a park? Calling the management "The Three Amigos"?

If the Blazers were smart, they'd fire Patterson tomorrow.

If the Oregonian had any class or standards at all, they'd have fired Quick and Canzano years ago.

The fact that Quick and Canzano obviously loathe Steve Patterson as a human being, and vice versa, has completely poisoned all three guys' abilities to do their jobs with any modicum of professional competence, and that's nothing but bad news for the Blazers.

Boo.

Stepping Razor


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

People rip into Chad Ford, and Peter Vecsey, and all sort of other rumormongerers... but THIS is the reason they don't attribute their sources.

Quick got some good, good info. Even if it was imperfect, even if we don't believe in his ability to adequately describe what he's seeing... I really am happy that he peeked in and found out what he could.

I want to know as much as possible, and I was delighted that I didn't have to wait to see what Chad Ford had heard.

But Quick was too honest. He should have been more ambiguous about the source of the workout's details. He would have taken heat, perhaps, from some people on this board (who never trust unnamed sources, especially from media members that have a history of less than perfect accuracy) and the Blazers' brass MIGHT have figured out that he somehow had access he shouldn't have... but by shoving it in their face, it gave them the PR flak jacket to simply cut everyone off.

It IS in the best interests of the club, and it will be better for their draft day, if nothing accurate leaks out of the private workouts. As a Blazers fan, I want them to succeed, but I also want to know what's happening so I can enjoy these two weeks and the draft all the more.

I don't blame the Blazers. I don't blame Quick for peeking. I just wish he was more discreet. 

Ed O.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

I get that the guy who posted the statement covers the Blazers for Hoopsworld, but I can't help but question its legitimacy.

1) The "statement" actually said "peeping" through the blinds. What kind of professional statement uses a word like that?

2) No link on OL, nothing on Blazers.com, etc ...

3) The Blazers could have just come down on Quick or the Oregonian in general; why ban ALL media?

I don't know, it might be valid. We'll just wait until the official word comes down from the team tomorrow if something actually DOES change.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

wastro said:


> I get that the guy who posted the statement covers the Blazers for Hoopsworld, but I can't help but question its legitimacy.


I wondered, too, but as I read the thread I came to believe that it's legit.



> 1) The "statement" actually said "peeping" through the blinds. What kind of professional statement uses a word like that?


Well, one that is pissed off.  Which, maybe, takes it out of the realm of professionalism.



> 2) No link on OL, nothing on Blazers.com, etc ...


I don't think that OL would rush to publicize this, especially if the Oregonian and other outlets are going to try to talk the Blazers out of it.



> 3) The Blazers could have just come down on Quick or the Oregonian in general; why ban ALL media?


Nuclear option. Maybe for spite (to make the Oregonian and Quick look worse) or just because it's easier than posting someone in the media room to make sure it doesn't happen again with another outlet.

Ed O.


----------



## wastro (Dec 19, 2004)

Ed O said:


> I wondered, too, but as I read the thread I came to believe that it's legit.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You could be onto something there. I think a lot of it is that I don't _want_ to believe something like this situation could be blown out of proportion like it was.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

It will make all papers hate quick and the oregonian becuase like they do in the army if u do something wrong they take it out on everyone and that makes people pissed off at u.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

One thing to keep in mind is how Players agents could potentially respond. I mean I bet Morrisons agent is thrilled to know that a beat writter said he got torched by a very close competitor.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

If the Blazers want Morrison it might be a good thing but if they want Gay it could be a bad thing.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

Schilly said:


> One thing to keep in mind is how Players agents could potentially respond. I mean I bet Morrisons agent is thrilled to know that a beat writter said he got torched by a very close competitor.


Excellent point. I would not be surprised if Patterson did this so that in the future agents allow their players to work out for the blazers. As it stands now, if a player comes to portland and plays well, they may get selected by Portland, but if they do poorly, then they will just not be selected by Portland. However, if news of workouts gets out, then the players risk dropping many spots in the draft and losing millions of dollars. 

This is not a small issue and I understand exactly why the Blazers have decided not to allow media access.

On the other hand,

As a reporter Quick did exactly what he is supposed to do, get information and report it. It was the Blazers fault for putting "journalists"in a room where all they needed to do was look through the blinds to see the workouts. 

JQ was right and the Blazers screwed up, but once that happened, the Blazers did exactly what they needed to do in order to protect information and keep their ability to draw future draft picks to workout in portland.


----------



## soonerterp (Nov 13, 2005)

Like I've said, the days and weeks leading up the NBA Draft are better than a spy novel.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

I don't agree Jason Quick was just doing his job. He was invited for part of the workout with the knowledge that part was to be private. By not playing by the rules he jeopardizes his right to be there for any part of it. Why didn't all the reporters 'peek'? Because the rest were professionals.


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

mgb said:


> I don't agree Jason Quick was just doing his job. He was invited for part of the workout with the knowledge that part was to be private. By not playing by the rules he jeopardizes his right to be there for any part of it. Why didn't all the reporters 'peek'? Because the rest were professionals.


I have a very basic and strong belief (not built on sports reporting but on political and wartime reporting) that it is a journalists duty to do his/her best to get to the "truth".

*I have never had as much respect for Quick as I do right now.* 

In Iraq so far more reporters have died then in any other war in history and most of them died trying to get to the truth, being someplace where they were not supposed to be or doing something that was not recommended.

Now I am not trying to compare sports reporting to the truly honorable reporters who are risking their lives every day to report the events from Iraq accurately, but the idea of a reporter tying to get to the truth is still an admirable thing.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

You make it sound like the Blazers were trying to decieve someone and Quick got to the truth! This isn't such a case. Quick wouldn't have even been there if the Blazers didn't trust him to be a professional and abide by their rules that he fully understood when he was invited there. 

Bringing up what reporters in Iraq are going through(edit) is way off base. It simply doesn't compare.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

thylo said:


> I have a very basic and strong belief (not built on sports reporting but on political and wartime reporting) that it is a journalists duty to do his/her best to get to the "truth".
> 
> *I have never had as much respect for Quick as I do right now.*
> 
> ...


To carry your analogy one step further - what if "the truth" involves troop movements or battleplans? Reporting that kind of "truth" is generally regarded as treason.

Granted, NBA workouts are not matters of national security. OTOH, the Blazers are a *private business*. They have the right to bar reporters entirely, or to place conditions on their presence on *private* property.

I would bet the rules were explained to the media. Quick made a conscious choice to break them AND shove that fact in the team's face. 

IMHO, Patterson was completely within his rights to react the way he did. Quick was unprofessional.


----------



## soonerterp (Nov 13, 2005)

SodaPopinski said:


> Ummm... again...
> 
> LINK?
> 
> ...


Statement @ Blazers.com. For reals, FWIW

Also, the Blazers blog at the Columbian mentions the blockage (second item, scroll down). Also includes some nice remarks about Morrison meeting with fans outside the facility.


----------



## maxiep (May 7, 2003)

When I read his review on the "Behind The Beat" blog today I was troubled. It doesn't really bother me he screwed the Blazers a little; it's not his job to defend them, but to be objective.

What bothered me was that in the echo chamber that is the internet, his story and viewpoint is going to get picked up and it's going to affect these kids. The grouping at the top of the draft is close, but the difference between being drafted #1 and #6 is millions of dollars. This was the only workout I know of where all these guys got together, so NBA scouts and execs will take a close look at his thoughts, take the facts and come to their own conclusion.

Quick broke a rule today, but more than the media will pay for it.


----------



## maxiep (May 7, 2003)

Stepping Razor said:


> Man, what a clownshow, all around.
> 
> Steve Patterson's paranoid, bumbling, ham-fisted attempts to restrict access to information can only hurt the team.
> 
> ...


I really don't put too much blame on Quick for what's happened over the past few years. I think he's a victim of his editorial board. I know for a fact that he's submitted stories and has been told to make them more negative. He also doesn't write the headlines, but he has to defend them as his name is on the article.

As for Canzano, he's a hack whose goal it is to be read and discussed. He's focused on circulation. I doubt he has any strong allegiance to an idea, as he seems to change his position unashamedly with regularity.

Quick messed up today. The Blazers have decided to make it a large issue by punishing the group, which I think is the most effective way to send the message they're not kidding around. It is my hope Quick apologizes in the Oregonian at the first opportunity, not just to the team for breaking the rules they set down on coverage, but also to the players whose draft stock he may have affected.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

maxiep said:


> I really don't put too much blame on Quick for what's happened over the past few years. I think he's a victim of his editorial board. I know for a fact that he's submitted stories and has been told to make them more negative.


You don't know that for a fact. You've read that. That's a real convenient out for Quick but I don't buy it. It just allows him to push the blame onto someone completely nameless. Convenient.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

I'm not sure Quick printed anything that was groundbreaking. He said what we all knew. Gay was athletic, Morrison competes hard, Roy wasn't great at anything. I mean why is that so bad. Quick should have told the team that he was able to look and asked what would be appropriate to them to print. The Blazers should have gone to Quick and asked him to run it by them first...whatever the case they should be able to work together.


Quick is a reporter. He is paid to report and that's what he did.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Here's the *O's* response...

_In response to an item on Thursday's workouts posted by The Oregonian on the Behind the Blazers Beat Web log on OregonLive.com, the Trail Blazers said that they indefinitely will close future player workouts to reporters. The team was upset because reporter Jason Quick observed part of the workout by looking through a window in the media room. The team previously had allowed reporters to view the final minutes of workouts and interview players afterward._

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/sports/1150431914137040.xml&coll=7

looking through a window? Thats the half-truth spin I've come to expect from them.

STOMP


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

STOMP said:


> Here's the *O's* response...
> 
> _In response to an item on Thursday's workouts posted by The Oregonian on the Behind the Blazers Beat Web log on OregonLive.com, the Trail Blazers said that they indefinitely will close future player workouts to reporters. The team was upset because reporter Jason Quick observed part of the workout by looking through a window in the media room. The team previously had allowed reporters to view the final minutes of workouts and interview players afterward._
> 
> ...


Ya, that's the first thing I thought. Of course no mention of the closed blinds.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Great posts maxiep!


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

Quick did go over the line. This is not getting breaking news. It is more comparable to paparazzi using binoculars to try and catch some celeb on the toilet or in bed or somesuch. 
No business conducts all its business in front of the media. Does your employer? The Blazers gave the media opportunities to view part of the workout and talk to the potential draftees. They wanted to conduct some confidential business as well. In a couple of weeks everyone will know the outcome.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

the blazers should have locked them out of the building till the end and of course the snoregion spins it with omitting the blinds were closed.

Always the papers needs this kind of crap I dont get it, why have a bad realation with the only team worth covering in the state? do they want to cover the supersonics?


----------



## GOD (Jun 22, 2003)

crandc said:


> Quick did go over the line. This is not getting breaking news. It is more comparable to paparazzi using binoculars to try and catch some celeb on the toilet or in bed or somesuch.
> No business conducts all its business in front of the media. Does your employer? The Blazers gave the media opportunities to view part of the workout and talk to the potential draftees. They wanted to conduct some confidential business as well. In a couple of weeks everyone will know the outcome.


I dissagree. In the would of sports, this is breaking news. That does not mean that its earth shattering news, but its news that could potentially affect the makeup of several NBA teams. Quick was doing his job. 

And as far as comparing this to giving away troop positions as was stated in an earlier post, there is no comparison there, people will not die because of what Quick does.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Welcome to the bush leagues Blazers fans. If there was any question that the Blazers and the local media are the laughing stocks of the rest of the league, this latest incident removes any doubt. Thanks to these clowns, the Blazers remain the punchline to countless bad jokes (hey, at least we aren't the Knicks). Due to their obvious hatred of each other, Quick, Canzano and Patterson constantly make themselves, their employers and the city of Portland look bad. They are so focused on making each other look bad that they are blinded to the fact that they are their own worst enemies. Thanks to their petty little war none of them are acting in the best interest of the team. This is just the latest example of them screwing themselves in a pathetic and transparent attempt to screw each other.

What Quick did was totally unprofessional. In spite of his track record, the team allowed him the same access as the rest of the media. They trusted him to behave in a professional and trustworthy manner. By peeking through those closed blinds, observing the part of the workout that was supposed to be private and then being stupid enough to post what he observed online, he totally betrayed the trust he was granted but never earned. I can't believe this clod was clueless enough to publically "out" himself as the source of this leaked information. You think he would have learned from his buddy Canzano that the only sources you ever quote are Anonymous and Nameless. Geez, if I didn't know better I'd say the Blazers set him up to be hoisted by his own petard by placing him in a room with nothing more than a closed set of blinds separating him from something he wasn't supposed to see, let alone disclose publically. If they did, he certainly fell for it hook, line and sinker and then went on to rat himself out in the process. God, what a loser.

And, of course, Patterson's response was predictably another ham-fisted over reaction. This guy has all the tact, grace, likability and common sense of a hubcap weilding Tonya Harding making a 911 call. It's like he went to the Idi Amin school of public relations. All righty Stevie, you screwed Quicker and in the process every other member of the media and the fans you expect to support the worst team in the league. But hey, you really got Quick this time. Good for you you pathetic loser. Get a clue. Just when the fans have a reason to get excited about the future of your team, you call for a media blockade. Good move.

If this team and this city's media ever hope to return to respectability, Patterson, Quick and Canzano all need to be fired (and I'd personally help all three pack and drive them to the airport). I think it's ironic that Canzano referred to Nash, Patterson and Pritchard as the Three Amigos in a derogatory manner. To call Canzono, Quick and Patterson the Three Stooges would be a disservice to Mo, Larry and Curly, but I can think of no better nickname for this trio of bumbling incompetents. They are all hopelessly miserable at the jobs they are paid to do. I have never seen such a confluence of unprofessionalism, pettiness, paranoia and stupidity in one place at one time. Please, fire them all and give us our team and our local media back. They are the 2006 version of Maury Povich, Connie Chung and Tonya Harding. All are an embarrassment to their professions and to our city. They have to go for the good of the team and the good of our city.

BNM


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

After a night of blissful rest I still stick to my contention that Patterson is acting on the same level as newspaper reporters. The guy is a loose cannon and Paul Allen needs to assess him ASAP. As has been previously mentioned, people are excited about the draft, the city has a coach that won't take bullcrud from players, and there is a young nucleus that could be a lot of fun to watch grow. Instead, Steve Patterson decides to shut out all access to not only his beat writer but also to every potential ticket buyer.

This all goes back to the bogus "25 Points" pledge that got ripped up as soon as Darius Miles' pseudo-fine was made public by John Canzano. You can cry all that you want about that, but Canzano did what any journalist worth his salt woud do and exposed Steve Patterson and his policy as one big fraud. Since that point, things have only gotten worse, and "Rabbit Ears" Patterson seems to be more concerned about the keyboards of two local journalists than he is about the future of this team. Throw in bringing in the FREAKING FBI to torment employees and find the "leakers", and you have a very insecure team President who is clearly out of his league. If Portland, one of the most laid back cities/atmospheres in the NBA, is too much for him, I suggest running a CBA franchise. I won't absolve Quick completely, but the distrust has been there from the beginning, and one person in all of this should be above this petty sniping. I know what I'm getting from a sportswriter. A team President should have a different standard of conduct.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

I have a question for all of you who are bashing Patterson for responding the way he did to Quick's actions. What do you expect him to do? What would you do if you where in his shoes? Let Quick get away with it?


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> I have a question for all of you who are bashing Patterson for responding the way he did to Quick's actions. What do you expect him to do? What would you do if you where in his shoes? Let Quick get away with it?


I would've denied Quick and only Quick media access. Punishing all media for one journalists is dumb.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> I have a question for all of you who are bashing Patterson for responding the way he did to Quick's actions. What do you expect him to do? What would you do if you where in his shoes? Let Quick get away with it?


Let it roll off of your shoulders. Seal the media window. Anything but author a petty, vindictive press release on the same night of the day in which your likely draft pick came to town to perform for you.

It's ridiculous. So yes, I would let Quick get away with it, I'd change a few things for Monday's workout, and I'd let the reporters duke it out in the gutter while I worried about who I was going to draft. Just like any average professional businessman would do.


----------



## chromekilla (Aug 21, 2005)

Foulzilla said:


> I would've denied Quick and only Quick media access. Punishing all media for one journalists is dumb.


no its not i think its a good idea it will make a point.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

papag said:


> Just like any average professional businessman would do.


 WRONG!


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Foulzilla said:


> I would've denied Quick and only Quick media access. Punishing all media for one journalists is dumb.


I kinda agree with that. Quick and all other Oregonian reporters being banned would have been a good response.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> I have a question for all of you who are bashing Patterson for responding the way he did to Quick's actions. What do you expect him to do? What would you do if you where in his shoes? Let Quick get away with it?


One of two things:

1) As suggested, punish the guilty, not eveyone else. Punishing Quick and Quick alone would have sent the same message (break the rules, face the consequences) without punishing the other journalists and denying fans access to any morsels that may be gleaned from the public portion and post workout interviews. Patteron's media blockade is stupid, counter-productive and self-defeating. It punishes all media members for the stupidity of one and puts another unecessary barrier between your team and the fans you are counting on to buy tickets.

2) Ignore it and do a better job next time insuring something more substantial than a set of Levelor mini-blinds stands between your so-called private workout and the prying eyes of the local muckraker.

BNM


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Boob-No-More said:


> One of two things:
> 
> 1) As suggested, punish the guilty, not eveyone else. Punishing Quick and Quick alone would have sent the same message (break the rules, face the consequences) without punishing the other journalists and denying fans access to any morsels that may be gleaned from the public portion and post workout interviews. Patteron's media blockade is stupid, counter-productive and self-defeating. It punishes all media members for the stupidity of one and puts another unecessary barrier between your team and the fans you are counting on to buy tickets.
> 
> ...


Good points.

One good thing is that it happened during this workout and not a workout before this. I would have hated to miss out on reports from this workout. Doesnt seem to be anymore big workouts here in Portland before the draft.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> WRONG!


Wrong? Tell me, what do you do for a living? I have to act in a professional manner in my job. Sometimes I see unethical things. These are handled internally. Involving the public is stupid and Patterson should know better. 

Tell me this. Do you see area business leaders buying up seats at the Rose Garden? I sure don't, and my employers can't stand what is going on at One Center Court. "WRONG" isn't an answer. It's an admission.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> Good points.
> 
> One good thing is that it happened during this workout and not a workout before this. I would have hated to miss out on reports from this workout. Doesnt seem to be anymore big workouts here in Portland before the draft.


Wait a sec? My point is "WRONG!", but another poster types the same thing as their #2 option and your answer is "good points". You don't have a position on this, do you.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

papag said:


> Wait a sec? My point is "WRONG!", but another poster types the same thing as their #2 option and your answer is "good points". You don't have a position on this, do you.


A "average professional businessman" let reporters in on their private meetings? No. 

Comparing the Trail Blazers organization to an "average" business is hilarious.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

What does invisible mean?


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

Foulzilla said:


> I would've denied Quick and only Quick media access. Punishing all media for one journalists is dumb.


I agree.

But I wonder if they can do that?


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> A "average professional businessman" let reporters in on their private meetings? No.
> 
> Comparing the Trail Blazers organization to an "average" business is hilarious.


No, I said an average businessman wouldn't react the way Patterson did. What I should have added, since you clearly have comprehension issues, is that Steve Patterson is hardly average, so I'd expect even greater restraint from him.

Is it so wrong to criticize what I think is a major overreaction followed by an unprofessional press release? It's best to ignore these things. Why go down to the media's level?


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

the more i read papag the more it seems he was personaly affect by the new policy, what that means i dont know but just maybe he is....! 

it was nice to hear about what when on but I can see why the blazers had to do it since there is no more trust between the O (cannedhamzano, jason slows and the editors(maybe the real hate lies here)) and the team. How long has it been since the blazers at a good relationship with the I anyways? When did it go sour? 95? 96? 

I am very tired of the 3 dumbos (j slows, canned and the editor) always trying to find the dirt on the team, its like they are trying to push the team out of town. Which is retarded because they will have to cover the local IBL or Joe's Paint crew softball team or the beavers woohoo! Everytime I think quick is going to be good he messes up and cannedhamzano well he has never been good, what lame Os why cant the snoregion hire better people? is it really that hard?


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

papag said:


> No, I said an average businessman wouldn't react the way Patterson did. What I should have added, since you clearly have comprehension issues, is that Steve Patterson is hardly average, so I'd expect even greater restraint from him.
> 
> Is it so wrong to criticize what I think is a major overreaction followed by an unprofessional press release? It's best to ignore these things. Why go down to the media's level?


because the witch hunt by the snoregion has been going on for at least 6 years now and maybe more.

Ohok can i spy on your planning meetings and report what you were planning to do to your computition? how does that sound? let me come on down to give up your trade secrets to your enemies and you would let me wouldnt you?


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

papag said:


> No, I said an average businessman wouldn't react the way Patterson did. What I should have added, since you clearly have comprehension issues, is that Steve Patterson is hardly average, so I'd expect even greater restraint from him.
> 
> Is it so wrong to criticize what I think is a major overreaction followed by an unprofessional press release? It's best to ignore these things. Why go down to the media's level?



In my opinion, ignoring the problem doesnt make it go away. I personally dont feel he "went down to their level". I guess we'll just agree to disagree.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Utherhimo said:


> why cant the snoregion hire better people? is it really that hard?


Fire Quick, fire Canzano and bring back Kenny Vance - and pay him enough that he can stop selling real estate and give us the perspective of a true NBA insider, not some patheitc wannabe like Quick who is hated by the players, the front office, the ballboys and all the other media members that are cut off from covering the workouts because of his selfish, stupid actions.

BNM


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Boob-No-More said:


> Fire Quick, fire Canzano and bring back Kenny Vance - and pay him enough that he can stop selling real estate and give us the perspective of a true NBA insider, not some patheitc wannabe like Quick who is hated by the players, the front office, the ballboys and all the other media members that are cut off from covering the workouts because of his selfish, stupid actions.
> 
> BNM


Great idea. I loved Kenny Vance!


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> Great idea. I loved Kenny Vance!


Yep, he treated the players like human beings with kindness and respect and they didn't feel threatened by him. Heck, they actually LIKED talking to the guy. What a refreshing change that would be.

BNM


----------



## Oil Can (May 25, 2006)

Funny, I thought Kenny Vance was awful. IMO-the guy was not a very good writer at all. 

I think both Quick and Canzano are victims of the times. The state of Blazer management is hyper sensitive right now. Rough tiems for a reporter and I think virtually any local beat writer doing his job correctly right now would be treated with contempt and suspicion.

It could be that Kenny Vance is selling Real Estate for a reason?


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

BEER&BASKETBALL said:


> In my opinion, ignoring the problem doesnt make it go away. I personally dont feel he "went down to their level". I guess we'll just agree to disagree.


I never said ignore it. I said make the necessary changes by Monday and let the reporters whine about it.

Just don't overreact and subsequently make a public relations mess. Which is exactly what happened. Blaming this entirely on the media is intellectually dishonest IMO. Not one person will address the pseudo-fine for Darius Miles that started this squabble? Canzano should get an award for that investigatory report.


----------



## Foulzilla (Jan 11, 2005)

Fork said:


> I agree.
> 
> But I wonder if they can do that?


That's a good point. It's also worthy of considering that some agents for players who haven't yet worked out may have said they won't send their players unless Portland does this. Or some other factors we don't know about.


----------



## PapaG (Oct 4, 2004)

Utherhimo said:


> because the witch hunt by the snoregion has been going on for at least 6 years now and maybe more.
> 
> *Ohok can i spy on your planning meetings and report what you were planning to do to your computition?* how does that sound? let me come on down to give up your trade secrets to your enemies and you would let me wouldnt you?


Quick was spying on the actual conversations between Pritchard, Patterson, and Allen? Here I thought he caught a few minutes of a 2-on-2 basketball game and then gave his opinion, which many people here disregard out of hand anyway. Obviously this is grounds to ban every member of the media from the property during workouts. It's like the Blazer PR person is TRYING to sabotage the team's attempt to get back into good graces with the city. :greatjob: 

I'm also confused about something else. In another thread people are saying these workouts don't matter much. Somebody had better call Steve Patterson's secretary and tell him this bit of info. As for me being affected by this policy, nope, it doesn't impact me one bit other than to reinforce my opinion of Blazer leadership.


----------



## Boob-No-More (Apr 24, 2006)

Oil Can said:


> Funny, I thought Kenny Vance was awful. IMO-the guy was not a very good writer at all.
> 
> I think both Quick and Canzano are victims of the times. The state of Blazer management is hyper sensitive right now. Rough tiems for a reporter and I think virtually any local beat writer doing his job correctly right now would be treated with contempt and suspicion.
> 
> It could be that Kenny Vance is selling Real Estate for a reason?


Yeah, Kenny never won a Pulitzer, but at least the players would talk to him. For a beat writer, I'll take take someone with access to the players over a good wordsmith any day.

Quick and Canzano have made their own beds. They have a vendetta against Patterson and several of the players and try to make him/them look bad every chance they get. Kerry Egger and Dwight Jaynes aren't exactly great journalists, but they seem to offer more balanced, less biased reporting/opinions than Quick and Canzano. I've disliked Canzano from the start. He's lazy, doesn't bother to check his facts and relies on anonymous sources WAY too often (and I'm really tired of the weekly tear-jerker columns reminding us how insignificant sports are compared to life's real drama - just what I want in my sports section). Quick has had to work a little harder, but he has also earned my disrespect.

I'm sure Kenny Vance makes a lot more selling real estate than he did writing for the Columbian. I suspect his career change was more motivated by financial reasons than his writing "skill".

BNM


----------



## RipCity9 (Jan 30, 2004)

Jason Quick is now being hailed as a heroic seeker of the truth on par with journalists placing their lives at risk to cover the war in Iraq? Does Jason's mother post here? Gag me.

Quick is a hack with no professionalism whatsoever.


----------



## mgb (Jun 26, 2004)

papag said:


> I never said ignore it. I said make the necessary changes by Monday and let the reporters whine about it.
> 
> Just don't overreact and subsequently make a public relations mess. Which is exactly what happened. Blaming this entirely on the media is intellectually dishonest IMO. * Not one person will address the pseudo-fine for Darius Miles that started this squabble? Canzano should get an award for that investigatory report*.


That was so much ado about nothing. It was comical. Canzona act like it was watergate, To funny. That is what is wrong with Canzano and sometimes Quick is they'll just tell one side of the story. So what if they had a option where he didn't have to pay the fine. Damon ended up paying a charity instead of his fine and they match the same. That could have happen with Miles. With a business there are a lot of options that you have to take into account. Other teams do the same type of thing but of course Canzona has to try to make it like he got a big scoop. What a joke. 

I think Utherhimo hit it right on the head, you have to be Canzona. I was wondering that myself and after this post I'm pretty sure of it. Did you say something about a higher standard too? That's to funny. To bad the Oregonian doesn't hold itself to a higher standard or any for that matter.


----------



## The Professional Fan (Nov 5, 2003)

Oil Can said:


> Funny, I thought Kenny Vance was awful. IMO-the guy was not a very good writer at all.
> 
> I think both Quick and Canzano are victims of the times. The state of Blazer management is hyper sensitive right now. Rough tiems for a reporter and I think virtually any local beat writer doing his job correctly right now would be treated with contempt and suspicion.
> 
> It could be that Kenny Vance is selling Real Estate for a reason?


Exactly. The Portland media had it easy reporting on a 50+ win team full of model citizens. 

Things have changed. Blaming the Portland media for damaging the Blazers image is beyond rediculous. The Blazers have done this to themselves. I'm shocked by how many people here (people that i would consider intelligent) defend the Blazers organization and rip Quick and Canzano apart. I just don't get it.


----------



## Captain Chaos (Dec 1, 2004)

The Professional Fan said:


> Exactly. The Portland media had it easy reporting on a 50+ win team full of model citizens.
> 
> Things have changed. Blaming the Portland media for damaging the Blazers image is beyond rediculous. The Blazers have done this to themselves. I'm shocked by how many people here (people that i would consider intelligent) defend the Blazers organization and rip Quick and Canzano apart. I just don't get it.


I couldn't agree more. The Portland media may not be the best around but they are hardly to blame for the Blazers downhill slide on and off the court. And so what if the Blazers shutdown media access for the workouts. They can do what they want.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

its the dirty mucking that we fans rip and always puts the team in a negetive light even during the "good" times, we are tired of it.


----------

