A J Quick Vindication, rec this
by hobobob on Oct 24, 2008 8:55 AM PDT
Email
PrintAt the end of the Olive podcast yesterday (http://blog.oregonlive.com/blazers/2008/10/1023_quick_chat_oden_improving.html) Quick had a few comments for the fans about his article on Oden. He wasn't all that pleased with us as a fan base.
I'm with him.
I won't defend him based on the tenor and tone of his article. It needs no defense. If you thought he was somehow incriminating Oden, you simply misread and misintrepreted the article. A writer has an obligation to make his point obvious, or apparent, only to a certain degree. He did so. If you misread it, you'd do well to seek interpretive assistance at a community college prior to posting comments again.
Let's get things very clear: reading doesn't mean recognizing the language and forming an opinion based on nothing more than the concomittance of a few sentences. There is an implicit obligation on the part of the reader to try to understand the point of the author. The project of journalism is discursive (a matter of discourse). A reader who does not attempt to interpret the point of view of the author is guilty of trangressing the intellectual endeavor. In lay speak, if you don't try to understand what the author is trying to say, you make the world dumber (it doesn't have electrolytes). Why bother reading if you don't try?
Our population has become accustomed to hearing and reading what it wants to read and hear.
Journalism is a business. Because of business interests in an ever more crowded market, Panda Bear journalism replaces the critical and fact checking press we used to have (or at least I pretend we used to have). Big money figured out that if you tell people what they already think, they give you their money: the lesson of Fox News. Can we blame Murdock for trying to make a buck? Not really. But, because it worked, it totally destroyed television news' coverage of political events. You simply cannot trust what you see on TV.
This is the audience that reacted so vehemently to Quick's article. These readers didn't want to read that Oden was 'underwhelming.' Nothing in their worlds taught them recently that they ought to attempt to understand why Quick wasn't telling them what they wanted to hear. Instead of considering the point, they lashed out, telling Quick he had no right to write or say such things.
He had the right. Even the obligation as a journalist. As a beat write, Quick creates a narrative with his columns. They aren't isolated snapshots of time. He gives us a sense of how things are moving, shaping and developing. It's a peek into the world the Blazers let him see everyday.
Part of the narrative he created was that Oden would be AWESOME. Quick reported more than a few times that that would be the case. He's still reporting that. He probably mentioned that he thought Oden wasn't quite playing as well as he'd expected (and thus relayed to us) because he felt obliged to update us on the narrative he brings us. But, that hardly seemed like the point of the article that drew the ire of so many.
Quick lamented publicly that Oden had a lot of pressure on him, that he was part of it. Anyone that's read Quick knows he loves this team and cares for them tremendously as people and players. That article read as an apology to Greg, and a map for fans to show support and a possible indictment on the fans and media for putting so much pressure on Greg. It read of an impending tragedy: Greg might lose his personality under the weight of our combined gazes. The tone Quick struck was clearly a message to us, not to Greg.
Well, maybe he was subtextually saying sorry for calling Greg underwhelming. But that seems a stretch. Quick had no need to apologize.
Quick's care for the team, and diligence in reporting on the team should be recognized and appreciated. He clearly established a relationship that is something beyond what the casual reader understands.
I've been following Quick since he arrived at the Oregonian. He's dedicated, intelligent, and committed to writing solid narratives of the team. He KNOWS BASKETBALL, and what he ought and ought not to say. He's established that many times over. It's time we respect him for the things he gives us: his insight, expertise and access.
Quick, you took a beating on this one. Totally underserved. I'm embarrassed to be categorized with the fans that bashed you so harshly. (Also, I've been drunk for like 8 years, so if I wrote something to bash you, I'm so sorry, but I don't think I did, and if I did, I didn't mean it that way)
As an aside: the comments on Olive never seem well thought out. I never bother posting over there because it seems like the riff raff get to it and dominate it. One liners are lame.
150 comments
|
11 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I agree, people are particularly senstive right now
I don’t think most people read the entire article, throughout which quick calls into question the media attention as well as having both nate and Roy agree with his take.
OK
To start with, your phrase (“If you misread it, you’d do well to seek interpretive assistance at a community college prior to posting comments again.”) is both unhelpful and condescending and undermines what is otherwise a well written piece by creating a negative tone. Inherent is the implication that should the reader disagree with you, they are either illiterate or stupid. As a law student with a degree in political science I can assure you that my reading comprehension/intellegence levels are just fine, and yet, I disagree with you.
Secondly, people took issue with Quick’s usage of the word “underwhelming” because objectively Oden has done very well on a per minute/Reina Value/Winscore/PER/ etc. basis, especially having sat out a year due to injury. The difficulty is that expectations are subjective and so if Quick expected Oden to drop 50 is first few games and hit 40% of his threes, Oden’s performance would indeed “underwhelm” Quick.
The fanbase took issue with Quick’s assessment not because they don’t want to hear anything negative about Oden, but rather because they disagreed with Quick’s assertion that Oden was underwhelming and felt that Quick’s usage of the phrase was uncalled for, especially to Oden’s face.
Perhaps you might want to re-read your post and edit it a bit. I am sure that the negative tone was unintentional/melodramatic/intended for humor. However, it ends up coming off as mildly offensive and insulting.
I appreciate your opinion and your effort in posting your thoughts and look forward to your reply.
Blazer's fan since '84, Currently exiled in San Antonio
↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A
by HurraKane212 on Oct 24, 2008 9:16 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Disagreement is fine
As long as it’s merited by argument, which I’m sure you appreciate as a law student.
I did mean the phrase to be mildly offensive. I’m not the nicest person. The act of cursory reading is extremely offensive. I’m not accusing any one in particular, but if a person is mad simply because an author said something he didn’t favor, that’s not exactly a reason to dismiss an article.
Taking issue with the characterization of Oden’s play is fine, and even encouraged here, I think. However, Quick clearly established a narrative over the last few months contrary to what he saw in preseason. You may conjure up relative reflections of what it means to be underwhelming all you want, but the astute reader would know that Quick is only talking about his expectations. I don’t recall Quick saying, “HurraKane212 was underwhelmed.” He said he was. With that in mind, you can justly call his expectations into question, but the use of the word "underwhelmed’ was merited by HIS expectation. It was HIS article after all. If you superimpose your understanding of what it means to be underwhelmed, you deny the author his point of view, and deny the possibility of you understanding his point.
You may argue with his expectations of course, but the use of the word underwhelmed derived from a premise. As such it became a stipulated definition. One you have an obligation to understand. The point of the article didn’t hinge on what the definition of the word underwhelmed meant in any case. It was a tool to tell the story.
His expectations were a barometer for the pressure Oden’s under. His expectations were relayed as fact, not as something you ought to believe or not. He laid them out as a piece of wood on a beach. It’s there. Whether or not you feel this way is totally irrelevant to the story. Many people do. That’s where the pressure comes from.
Argue about those expectations all you want, but that had VERY LITTLE to do with his story.
Seizing on the definition of the word makes it impossible to see the point of the article.
Where did you study PS?
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
by hobobob on Oct 24, 2008 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Um, I say "you" a lot
but I don’t mean you. It’s generic. Write ‘a person’ or ‘one’ always seemed really cheesy.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Right on all of this stuff.
Quicks article had nothing to do with Oden being underwhelming, and rather it had everything to do with Quick apologizing for our, as the fans, media, etc…, out of control expectations of him.
I agree with Hobobob, that it would be extremely difficult not to understand this had you read the entire article.
Also, HurraKane, where do you go to school? O-law 2011 here.
Wrong! And so was Jason Quick!
I read the entire article. And while no lawyer, I can play one on BE.
Jason Quick was doing his best Canzano. Yes, I said it. We don’t need Oregonian hatchet jobs perpetrated against members of this Blazers team. The guys, none of them, deserve it! I remember the comments about Miles’ marriage in that paper. The Oregonian pitied the fool marry Darius Miles. Whether that is even accurate is beside the point. If you say anything, congratulate the man and hope for the best. JQ Canzano did a tank job on Oden. No ifs, ands or ho-buts.
And the funny thing was the article wasn’t even about Oden. It was about Jason Quick’s FEELINGS. How he was scared of Oden, him being so big. What JQ did say about Oden assumes so much about Greg’s interior life that it is ludicrous. He was too scared to ask the next question, so he made up some answers. If I was The Oregonian’s sports editor, and I am a professional editor, JQ’s article hits the round file — I would never publish destructive, stream of consciousness tripe like that.
The only positive I took away from the piece when was Roy came out of the locker room and tried to help Mr. Quick catch a clue or grow a conscience. It is ironic that in a piece so about interior life that Mr. Quick (ironic, yes?) displays so little interior access to himself.
Let’s all hope that this article was an aberration not representative of Jason Quick’s efforts to come.
There once was a Sea’ Cap’n Nate
Whom with Blazers did negotiate.
The pool, t’was so deep!
"That KP don’t sleep."
Gold medals and rings were his fate.
I admire and fear (I think there's a Chinese word that covers both terms) your certainty
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
I think that's a good point about Quick's expectations.
He mention that on one of those podcasts. That really every time he asked the players on the team about Greg, they said things like “His a monster. " "He’s a man-child.” etc. What are they gonna say though? So Quick took all that and assumed Greg was gonna be off the charts better than anyone ever expected, and then when he didn’t go for 20/15 and 5 blocks (or whatever he was expecting) he was underwhelmed.
exactly
Greg is a monster, but that doesn’t translate to skill. Additionally, KP and others said a few things too.
We haven't done anything yet... but don't blink.
Oden by himself
has done fine.
Oden with the expectations that the team has set with words such as “he’s done things I’ve never seen before” create an expectation that is higher. This isn’t Oden’s fault, but it does leave one underwhelmed when teh expectations were already high.
Oden is doing awesome. Raised expectations caused that awesome to be underwhelmed.
We haven't done anything yet... but don't blink.
I will assert again that I am
quite whelmed — think development is coming along nicely….and wasn’t he playing better against LAClips than prior games…I remember a double double..
Expectations increased with extended anticipation after 1st season missed…this kid would be a red shirt sophomore now, am I right?
by LetsBlaze on Oct 24, 2008 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm not sure what a red shirt sophomore is, but one thing I know is that
you get a big ’ol plus 1 for the use of “whelmed.”
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
If he had stayed in college and susatined that same injury
so early in year 2, he’d of sat out the year, maintained his NCAA eligibility (red shirt) and come back as a “red shirt sophpomore” meaning he was there for three years but only using his 2nd year of NCAA eligibility
ha
a drunk using a bunch of 15cent words. I’m with you, drunk! Also, didn’t most of the vitriol come through over at the OLive site? We’re all so sophisticated here; you’re preaching to the choir!
Oden will DUNK on bynum’s FACE tuesday and this will all be water under the bridge.
Yep, it was the Olive site. Just thought I'd write about it, you know, for fun
man I’m lame
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
quick’s article was fantastic. he shouldn’t need to say a single word in his defense.
honor terry porter
by Ben Golliver on Oct 24, 2008 9:55 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
THANK YOU!
Man I love tongue tacos - Mortimer
Only thing better is Trout on a stick roasted over an open fire - annthefan
I have a pic like that of my dog - tominhawaii
by Outlaw is Rejector on Oct 24, 2008 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Agreed, and he shouldn't do so, but others ought to defend him as he deserves defense.
The onslought against him was unwarranted. Sometimes, it’s ok to ignore, and sometimes a person should say something. I don’t mean to drag this out. I just couldn’t stand by and watch him be villified like that.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
I'm not surprised you liked it Ben
You seem to be the type of writer who likes to have ad hoc editorials within an article.
BINGO, BANGO, BONGO
It's also the responsibility
of any communicator – whether in print or in person – to choose how to use his/her particular medium in order to get across the idea he/she is trying to communicate.
Let’s assume that this particular article was mis-interpreted by the majority of readers (and I’m not saying that’s true, but just for the point of argumentation) – tens of thousands of people – then perhaps any ‘fault’ to be placed lies in the one who chose the words, not the ones who read them.
This has nothing to do with Jason Quick’s commitment to his craft, or his knowledge of basketball or of people. He perhaps simply chose the wrong words to communicate his idea, so a different idea (an un-intended one) was interpreted by the readers.
There’s a 6 stage communication process that we all use thousands of times a day – taking an idea in our minds and trying to communicate so that the recipient(s) of the communication get the same idea. Successful communication has happened when the two ideas are the same. That doesn’t seem to have happened here. But I’m not comfortable laying the entire blame on the audience, any more than I am with laying it all on Jason.
Fair enough. Although this seems like a case
where once the reader (I’m referencing the comments over at Olive mostly) reacted in a way that showed an unfair interpretation. I’m 100% with you on the obligations both parties show. Thanks for the post.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
I’m reminded of many books that are standard reading in any literature class. After reading some of them I thought, “Wow, I really didn’t care for that book.”
The answer usually was, “Well you just didn’t understand the author.”
Even worse was when I actually enjoyed the book and then was told it was never the author’s intent for me to enjoy it.
superfluous
Hans-Georg Gadamer ...
… who was a close associate of Martin Heidegger, wrote in his book, Truth and Method, that language takes on a life of its own, independent of either the author/speaker or reader/listener. This argument would simultaneously vindicate and condemn Quick and those who disagreed with him, even those who agreed with him. Either that or make any assessment or assertion of value toward that article entirely beside the point.
Greg Oden rocks.
quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur
I was agreeing with you
until you used Fox News as your example of sloppy journalism. Why pick on them, when the vast majority of print and TV journalists have been blatantly lobbying for Obama since well before the Democrat convention? Now I have to question everything else you wrote.
I do agree with Ben. Quick owes no one an apology. Maybe if he had written that Greg was whining…
"Personally, I'd rather give an elephant a prostate exam on Chili Day." --Dave on rooting for the Lakers or Celtics
you might want to check out
OutFoxed if you want to learn more about why Fox news is the worst of the worst. I cant even watch the news anymore as it is so poor in quality these days. I am all Democracy Now! these days.
Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.
I don't mean to say that Fox news is the worst.
I’m not in a position to judge that, as I can’t fact check and all. But, I do know Fox News was the first to specifcally cater to the interests of a certain type of ideology. They were the first to TARGET an audience. It’s genius as far as a business is concerned, but it’s not necessarily good journalism.
The bias of other news agencies prior to Fox is fairly argued. But, in these cases, what could be seen were the biases of individual reporters (who usually tried to hide them, for it used to be shamefule to be biased). It wasn’t a concerted effort by an organization as a whole to report favorably with a particular point of view.
I look at Fox News as an instance of shrew business acumen. Whatever else it is, it makes boat loads of money. Now, that, more than anything else, raises questions about its credence. Good news organizations don’t make much money.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Mass media has ALWAYS been an adjunct of the ruling class...
……………………….. there was NEVER a golden glory days of “good, honest journalism.” The press (and later broadcasting) has ALWAYS been cooked in favor of the big money movers and shakers…
Fox is just the most blatant mouthpiece of the big bourgeoisie and their political lackies.
"It's not a joke -- it's not a game." — B-Rex
I'm sure that's true
but as I live in this era, I’ll blend in with old people (I’m only 30) from every generation and say “those were the good old days.”
That said, the media in America (particularly TV) did have a golden age. Integrity used to mean something, the goal used to be something akin to truth (the version of truth’s suspect, of course). But, at least they seemed to have tried.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Media
The press almost universally portrayed Ronald Reagan as a vile idiot during his administration. Those who took offense at the media believed the press was absurdly biased, that the press was only interested in an argument that vilified their politics, faith and traditions. Perhaps some people who now take offense to Fox News think the populace should only be allowed to genuflect to their particular indoctrination.
I am convinced that there is a social engineering component to most news organizations; one offender is Fred Newhouse owner of the Oregonian.
quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur
Actually, the man had Alzheimer's.................... information which wasn't reported until AFTER he left office...
…………………………………… even though it was pretty clear to me at least, and to millions of others, that he had a mental disorder DURING his Presidency…
“My fellow Americans, I’m pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation which will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes.”
What a JOKER, the press agreed. Ha ha, they said.
Dr. Strangelove lived.
Reagan got a free pass from a press that went smoochie-smoochie. It was America’s most dangerous period — perhaps to be exceeded if the unstable McCainiac is elected.
t
"It's not a joke -- it's not a game." — B-Rex
Reagan was brilliant -- read his speeches.
He wrote them himself. The man had Alzheimer’s while in office to the same extent that you are voting for John McCain. Obama and Biden have made so many verbal gaffes that they make Dan Quayle sound like Abraham Lincoln, yet the Leftmedia ignores all such examples.
"Personally, I'd rather give an elephant a prostate exam on Chili Day." --Dave on rooting for the Lakers or Celtics
by MiledAnimal on Oct 27, 2008 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions
Wrote them himself? Really?
I know he had input on his speeches -Like the tear down this wall comment…but wrote them?
To his credit, he could defend his positions well – not that I agreed with them..and he had the good sense to tag W. as an underachiever (read his diary entry)….
And in hindsight he looks like an intellectual next to W. — but he had some real problems towards the end holding it together. His Iran-Contra excuse was that he forgot..and no one had much trouble believing it.
You might be right.
I automatically position myself opposite of anything timbo says politically. Reagan may well have been in the early stages of Alzheimer’s toward the end of his second term in office, I really don’t know. It hardly matters, given his accomplishments and performance right up to the time he left the White House.
Bush is far from stupid. He pounded the Dems and liberals on every issue until Iraq. The war, regardless of how history will ultimately view it, was Bush’s personal Waterloo, but otherwise he has often shown excellent political instincts. His enemies hammer him because he’s not glib, a “skill” that is admired nowadays more highly than wimpy, old-school traits like self-sacrifice, courage, and commitment.
"Personally, I'd rather give an elephant a prostate exam on Chili Day." --Dave on rooting for the Lakers or Celtics
I don't recall any achievements
I just recall 3+ trillion in debt while trashing our social programs and creating our homeless population, selling off national forests to logging and mining interests, fleeing from the mid east after the Beirut bombing, me having to register for the draft, I could go on…if you were already wealthy it was great — if you were on your way up — not so great…I voted for him the first time, but that was my last time on that side..
Another poster referenced the documentary "Outfoxed"
If you haven’t checked it out, you really should. What’s disturbing about Fox News isn’t just the blatant right-wing slant. (One could at least argue—as you have—that we’ve had the mirror image of that before.) It’s the close connection with the current administration that is so concerning. The whole thing smacks uncomfortably of a state-run media outlet.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
Blazers?
Could anyone recommend a good blog that discusses the Blazers?
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 26, 2008 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions
There's plenty of Blazer talk in Outfoxed
You just have to pay attention
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
I look forward to you writing the same comment
about the Leftmedia when Obama takes office and Dems control the House and Senate.
I don’t watch TV news. Whatever its slant, TV news is the retarded stepchild compared to magazine articles. I’ve seen maybe a minute of Fox News while I was channel-surfing, and the little I saw was a straight news report, just the facts. I understand they have right-wing commentary, but that’s different from the reporting of events. In any case, even if Fox News is as biased as some of you say, complaining about them when almost every other news and entertainment media outlet is slanted to the left politically is like the spoiled child crying because he received a box of chocolates and one of them was vanilla.
"Personally, I'd rather give an elephant a prostate exam on Chili Day." --Dave on rooting for the Lakers or Celtics
by MiledAnimal on Oct 27, 2008 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions
Part of the problem now is that the right pushed itself so far
to the right, not letting facts get in the way of their opinions, that the truth became the enemy — and the reporting of the facts became left wing bias -
Early on in Bush adm I usta get so much grief for being a left-wing democratic wingnut for thinking W was a damn fool. Truth is, I have no party affiliationss and can usually see both (or all) sides of any reasonable argument – now, most everyone realizes that he is a damn fool (or at least 75% of those polled realize it), so one doesn’t have to be a partisan democrat to point out the obvious. Reagan called him a fool and I’m pretty sure he was not a left-wing nut job.
Its the problem with an either/or, 2 choice only political system – as soon as you disagree with me I’ll just lable you as being an “other” an invalidate you
I'm enjoying this political thread
but I just realized this is not a junk drawer, so I’ll end by saying I agree with your last sentence.
"Personally, I'd rather give an elephant a prostate exam on Chili Day." --Dave on rooting for the Lakers or Celtics
Quick's Article was Fine
But I don’t think it is Quick’s place to tell a player that he is underwhelming. This smacks of sensationalism, Quick saying something to create an article. A journalist should report what is happening and not create a story.
Who's to judge that?
I would think that if it wasn’t Quick’s place to say so, then who’s saying who’s place it is to say so? Are you qualified to say so? Maybe you are. I don’t know.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Coaches, management other players maybe...they can "judge" a bit..
But a writer? Nope sorry…It wasn’t even an “I find your playing…” it was a “your playing is…” it was judgemental, it was rude, it was inappropriate.
This guy has no idea how hard it is out on the floor, does he? Did I miss something, or was this fella ever IN the game or just an obsessed spectator with a pen? The great ones eventually make it look easy — eventually. But it isn’t.
It’s a completely different thing to dominate in practice, or look good alone on the floor, but in a situation where other monsters are trying to rip your head off and make you look bad — different world. And he’s just testing the waters for the first time….all the competition is brand new to him..and he would be what, a red shirt sophomore right now?
Players are just people, kids are kids..take it easy on him, ay? As long as his effort is 100%, the results just are to be what they are. He is a person, not a story. And Jason should be thankful that Greg is even around, so as to give the talking heads and writers something to do.
It seems to me that Greg’s expectations for himself are very high..Comments like that if taken too seriously can erode confidence or lead to “over-trying”, where you start thinking about what others are thinking rather than just doing what you do…
Reporters job is not necessarily to pass judment in the face of the one he’s interviewing…how about asking Greg what Greg thought about his own play? We would have probably heard him say that he wants to contribute more — which is all we can ask for.
There – my 2.5 cents
by LetsBlaze on Oct 24, 2008 5:17 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Those were exactly my thoughts-
Quick created the mess by provoking a response from Greg. He went from telling the news to being the news.
That being said, I think that Quick’s actual article was intelligently written, and extrapolated well from the reaction to his comment to the reasons behind the reaction (pressure, personality changes, his teammates take). If Quick had simply written the article without telling Greg, unsolicited, that he had been underwhelmed by his game, I think he would have been lauded for his insight.
Travis Outlaw is an alien, but in a good way.
Awesome Graphic was provided by CIC, because he felt like he should be hazed.
by Clevelander among roses on Oct 24, 2008 6:49 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly.
JQ’s mistake was inserting himself into the story. He is the beat writer, not Canzano. In hindsight the article would be Pulitzer if Roy’s comments could have been illicited without confronting Greg with his (JQ’s) feelings.
As it stands JQ may have compromised his access to Greg. Maybe not, but wouldn’t suprise me.
"Brandon Roy a une énorme confiance en lui et un niveau de maturité assez impressionnant, et en plus c’est un vrai leader" - Nic Batum
by G_dubs on Oct 25, 2008 12:50 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Exactly x2!
There once was a Sea’ Cap’n Nate
Whom with Blazers did negotiate.
The pool, t’was so deep!
"That KP don’t sleep."
Gold medals and rings were his fate.
you just don't get it do you
the whole reason that quick is able to give us such incredible insight into this team is because of the rapport that he has with the players. having rapport with someone means that you are communicating both ways, when you have a relationship with someone and obviously someone you care about as a person, you speak your mind.
sensationalism. good god. he was passing judgment he was giving his opinion to someone he respects. big difference.
by blazersunited on Oct 27, 2008 5:55 PM PDT up reply actions
I think that if you listened to the last eighth of the quick chat podcast you might re-think that stance. That’s just me though.
Quick for 6th man of the year! Ha ha ha.
by 50backflips on Oct 24, 2008 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions
I disagree with all of you folks.
Let me preface this by saying, while the article certainly raised my eyebrows, JQuick is a journalist and was doing his job (and pretty well considering how much this article has been passed around).
However, I think the reason people took offense to this particular article was their emotional “attachment” to Greg. Quick asked Greg some tough questions (the infamous “underwhelming” comment in particular). Greg’s response showed a side of the big man that Blazer fans hadn’t really seen before.
So many people’s hopes are riding on this 20 year old kid. When something (in this case, a Quick interview) comes out that challenges him, many people’s reaction was to panic and blame the interviewer. Fans felt that, instead of reporting ON the team, Quick was reporting AGAINST the team, searching for a controversial article that will get him readers. The consensus was that, since GO was upset with Quick, all Blazer fans need to be upset with Quick.
But this is silly. Not only was this article great and insightful, I think it showed promise for GO and the Blazers. When Oden says
“It’s understandable,” Oden said after I was done. “And I know it’s out there. That’s the big thing with me. That’s why I’m out here working and trying to get better. Trying to understand this, and doing what I need to do so people don’t think that way.”
Think which way?, I asked.
“Underwhelmed,” he said slowly with more than a hint of disgust.
it only shows Greg’s motivation and drive. The fact that Greg’s response to Quick’s term “underwhelming” was one of disgust and outrage is a relief. If GO didn’t get fired up by that kind of talk, fans should be worried. JQ is paid to ask the tough questions. We should be happy with Oden’s tough answer.
Word.
Thanks for (dis)agreeing? I'm not sure, but it sounds like you're saying the same thing.
Maybe a little more clearly than I did.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Haha
yeah well I wrote that at the top and the comment seemed to change itself as I wrote it. I did disagree with you on my one point though: that the reason Blazer fans got so worked up was because they are worried about Greg and almost feel like “defending” him. The truth is, this article should make us realize we don’t have to defend him, that he is tough enough and good enough to do it himself.
Word.
You did. I thought the same thing, but didn't really feel like defending them
I’m not fair. That’s an excellent point, of course. I meant to say something about it but forgot. Why am I always so drunk?!?!?!
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
So the point is to drive all of our lottery picks out of town?
Rasheed was never Mr. Nice Guy. But I am not alone in stating that I think the aggressive stance from The Oregonian caused more problems than it solved. Are we looking to create that atmosphere, again?
How ’bout we get behind making these young guys feel at home here and happy to resign in stumptown.
There once was a Sea’ Cap’n Nate
Whom with Blazers did negotiate.
The pool, t’was so deep!
"That KP don’t sleep."
Gold medals and rings were his fate.
by LaoTzu on Oct 25, 2008 4:24 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'll have to agree with you.
I too want these guys to stay, and not go to larger markets. And I agree with the comment above that Greg may not be as candid with Quick after this. But don’t get me wrong, I usually like Quick’s writing. And I love the fact that he is always willing to do the pod casts, and share fun stories about the guys.
My favorite teams are the Blazers and any team that is playing the Lakers.
by OCBlazerFan1 on Oct 25, 2008 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, I wasn't crazy about this article
But I look forward to reading Quick’s stuff. He helped me make it through the dreaded dog days. I just don’t feel like my gaining unfiltered access is worth alienating these young Blazers—who are such a breath of fresh air. I was also less than thrilled when Quick quoted Roy saying Blake should start and when he quoted Outlaw saying he wanted more shots. I don’t doubt that those guys said those things, but Quick chose to ask the questions and to put the answers in print.
A big part of this team’s success last year was due to its rare chemistry. It doesn’t take much journalistic digging to stir up resentments. As I said elsewhere, this ain’t Watergate; a little discretion wouldn’t cause Quick to be voted off the journalistic island. That’s just my two cents.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
"voted off the journalistic island"
lol
There once was a Sea’ Cap’n Nate
Whom with Blazers did negotiate.
The pool, t’was so deep!
"That KP don’t sleep."
Gold medals and rings were his fate.
I agree with you and that makes both you and me wrong.
Sergio + Rudy = 16
Sergio + Bayless = 16
Batum 8+8=16
by amlmart1 on Oct 24, 2008 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
If you were French, I'd call you Foucault
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Was this written
with a quill pen right before a fox hunt?
Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.
LOL!!!! I sound old school.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
meh, this story is dead after 4000 comments in 12 different threads, but I'll bite
all of Jason Quick’s experience is great, I’m sure he knows basketball, but that doesn’ mean he is incapable of making an err in judgment. And you say that the media is making money from writing what we all want to hear? sensationalism sells my friend, the buzz his “underwhelming” comment made was MONEY. Look, even Quick has to regret using that word, he admitted as much as soon as he said it and got that look from Greg. You’re making it out to be more complicated than it is. Writers make mistakes all the time, but I guess writing this post is a good idea if one wanted to attract attention like a car wreck, or in BE terms, a bad trade idea. You know what? People are so retarded when it comes tor “rec’ing” things here I’m gonna go ahead and rec this, just for spite. Even though I wholeheartedly disagree with your message and this subject has been absolutely beaten to death, it was well written and the language you used will probably irritate enough people to generate quite a buzz…Hey, just like Jason Quick’s article!
Afew years ago, a broadcaster once said Pryzbilla's name is "Polish for 'personal foul.'" Ouch.
by chrischa on Oct 24, 2008 10:17 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
I have a standing policy
not to rec any post that asks me to rec it. This one didn’t even ask – it told me to do so in the title.
by Storyteller on Oct 24, 2008 10:21 AM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
+1
"Personally, I'd rather give an elephant a prostate exam on Chili Day." --Dave on rooting for the Lakers or Celtics
by MiledAnimal on Oct 24, 2008 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions
I worry about a man witha standing policy
He sounds like a company, not a human. Can I bargain for your rec? I’ll delete the demand.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
LOL!
What can you offer? I won’t give it to someone who demands or asks for it, but I’ll certainly trade it.
BTW, I had a call the other night from the police asking for a contribution. I used the same phrase with her – that I have a standing policy of not sending money to phone solicitations. Her response was something like, “I’m not trying to sell you anything so this isn’t a solicitation.” After she waited for me to finish laughing, I told her I simply wasn’t interested in making a contribution at this time.
As an aside, donating money to think Police is a SOLID investment
That little sticker they give you gets you out of tickets here and there. Based on the fact that you have policies, I’m inclined to believe you also drive very well. Still, you never know when you’ll miss that one stop sign.
I could take out the demand for the rec. Then, I would remove material provoking a policy action. Seriously, though, it was a little cheezy to say that. I should have written, rec if you want to support Quick, or something like it.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Thanks for the rec
I tried to return something the other day with the whole spite reason. The clerk was pretty young and didn’t remember the Seinfeld episode. I looked pretty stupid. But, I’m recing your comment just because that was really funny. As with a comment above, I’m not sure we disagree as much as it looks like.
I never said Quick was right. Only that he was doing his job, and that the point of the post wasn’t about his admission of being wrong (by showing his expectations were a little off). The point was about the pressure. That’s all.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
The article wasn't about pressure, but it turned into one.
Quick was asking about the “underwhelming” performance of Greg Oden and somehow got a story about pressure. The irony of it all is that Quick fails to understand that his questions about Oden’s underwhelming performance illustrates the absurd pressure of expectation that Oden is facing. Oden basically flat out told him that he is carrying a burden of almost unrealistic expectations from people. By people, he meant people like Quick. Oh the irony of it all and Quick still didn’t get it. LOL.
BINGO, BANGO, BONGO
by blzrfan on Oct 24, 2008 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I agree that Quick never got the fact that he was a part of the problem ...
I listened to Quick’s podcast today, and he expressing a lot of disappointment at the fan’s reaction to his piece. Obviously Quick feels that he’s entitled to write whatever he wants, but apparently fans aren’t allowed to have their own opinions about his work. That sounds like a double standard, if ever I heard one …
Ben called Oden a whiner because of Greg’s reaction to Quick telling Greg to his face that his performance after four pre-Season games was “underwhelming”. That reaction consisted of Greg saying “yeah” when Quick asked Greg if he was mad. Shouldn’t Ben call Quick a whiner for being disappointed that so many fans didn’t like his piece ? I doubt that Ben ever would say anything negative about Quick though … once again the double standard …
Phil
by Philski on Oct 24, 2008 4:25 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
And Ben
is looking for more BE quotes and scraps from The Oregonian’s table. Sorry if you are offended, but that’s what I think. Honesty cuts both ways.
There once was a Sea’ Cap’n Nate
Whom with Blazers did negotiate.
The pool, t’was so deep!
"That KP don’t sleep."
Gold medals and rings were his fate.
That's not my take at all
I think that was exactly the point Quick was making. He’s pretty clearly stating that he loves Oden (smiling kid references and all) and that his remark was the ultimate example of the pressure on the kid. There’s many who’d agree that the irony lies in your comment.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Nah
It just looks like to me many people here disagree with your argument. My stance is from a pure journalistic standpoint. Quick’s narrative is a logical fallacy. He inserts himself into the article and mystifies the reader into a faulty narrative between Quick’s own opinion(which most Blazers disagree with), Oden’s response, Nate/Roy’s observations, Oden’s pressure, and how it is affecting his performance on the court. It was bad journalism, not the reader’s interpretation of it. If he wanted a story on Oden, then he should have left himself out of it.
Here is some more delicious irony from Quick. Oden handled the criticism better than Quick.
BINGO, BANGO, BONGO
by blzrfan on Oct 25, 2008 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Heh! Last sentence.
"Brandon Roy a une énorme confiance en lui et un niveau de maturité assez impressionnant, et en plus c’est un vrai leader" - Nic Batum
And GO is 20 years old.
How do you like them apples?
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
"When Quick was Slow"
Ironic, it is!
There once was a Sea’ Cap’n Nate
Whom with Blazers did negotiate.
The pool, t’was so deep!
"That KP don’t sleep."
Gold medals and rings were his fate.
how can they not remember that seinfeld episode?!
that was a classic, what was the clerk, 16? and I’ve seen more than a few people on BE rec things for spite. I’ve seen Bedgers rec hot steaming piles of crap before and again, although people disagree with this, its not a crappy peice. I remember I wrote a title for one of my posts that included “serious comments only” which was totally tongue in cheek because if you went on to read the post it was just a bunch of funny lines about the KP and the team, but I pretty much got hated on for it so I kinda know how this feels.
Afew years ago, a broadcaster once said Pryzbilla's name is "Polish for 'personal foul.'" Ouch.
Honestly I could care less...
this is the first post, (on any website) I have read regarding this issue, although there seem to be alot out there. How the Blazers and J. Quick act toward each other is not something I put a whole lot of weight into. I guess I can understand where Greg is coming from, as well as Jason, but in the grand plan of a NBA season who really cares how the players feel toward a beat reporters thoughts/column/etc… I know I just don’t care. I am not saying it is not news worthy or anything like that, just that I don’t see it as such a big deal to warrant all of this extra attention.
GO BLAZERS.
This isn't politics
JQ does not have to ‘spin’ Oden in order to capture the minds/hearts of Blazers fans.
I have not seen him play so I do not know if he is ‘underwhelming’ or not. It sounds like he takes up space and is already getting double-teamed…that is a good sign.
wa wa wa wa wa.....
:’( WA WA WA!!!
so who’s complaining this time? :)
The faith (and I'm a guy) perverts. :)
Hypocritical Blazer fans
As a middle school teacher, the way many people so negatively and passionately responded to Quick’s original article is about what I would expect from a bunch of 8th grade drama queen girls.
Quick never accused Oden of being underwhelming. He opened the conversation by allowing Greg to consider some of the criticism that has been put out there by a number of people. Here is what Quick did not say. He did not say, “Quite frankly Greg, your performance has been really underwhelming so far this pre-season.”
He was giving Greg the opportunity to address the naysayers. To his credit, Jason Quick admitted that he himself might have been guilty of creating expectations that might be too high for Greg.
Yeah, Greg Oden is a big deal. I just find the venom people have towards Jason Quick, (in a situation where his words were open to interpretation, and I believe many have in fact misinterpreted them) as being silly and hypocritical. Quick has a pretty good track record, he says one thing that might be slightly questionable, and then people turn on him like he is a Benedict Arnold. I’m glad all of you back-stabbers aren’t related to me.
Had Quick said the same exact thing to someone like an Ike Diogu, you would be hard pressed to find one person who would rush to defend Ike as being young, impressionable, and blah blah blah blah blah.
Stop acting like you care about Greg Oden as a person, when all you truly care about is wins and losses. I obviously want us to win as much as anyone else. But be honest. The day you complain about criticism against Ike Diogue the same way you would about Greg Oden, is the day you’ll prove what I’m saying wrong.
Can I buy you a fish sandwich?
Supposing you know about other fans inner feelings
I have been a blazers fan since i can remember probably about 1992 is my first memory of them when i was 5. I care about the players on this team and if you don’t maybe your a different sort of fan. If you want to make statements about your feelings that’s fine but don’t tell me i don’t care about the players on this team.
Who said I don't care about the players on this team? Or you for that matter?
I didn’t say that at all. And…you seemed to miss my whole point, which was that there are many fans who are more concerned about wins and losses, then what the players may or may not be going through. Many of them are the ones who were so willing to go for Jason Quick’s throat, yet you would never see many of those people get bent out of shape if JQ did the same thing to Shavlik Randolph, Ike Diogu, or anyone else at the end of our bench. I fail to see where you are coming from in your response.
Can I buy you a fish sandwich?
To be fair
Quick’s own words:
“It was late last week, and I told the Trail Blazers’ rookie center that I had to be honest: Through four exhibition games, I had been underwhelmed by his performance.”
That sounds like Quick accusing Oden of being underwhelming. I understand where Quick is coming from but I also understand where Oden is coming from in his response. And I understand why fans are choosing to side with Oden.
And yes, fans are going to be much more emotional about an assumed attack on Oden than an assumed attack on Diogu. But do you really expect any different?
You are right.
I was wrong about how I remembered the quote, so I’ll take ownership for that gross error. That being said, it doesn’t really change the sentiment of things for me. I can’t say I know for sure the motives JQ had when he spoke to Greg, but I believe he felt he had developed a close enough of a relationship with him that he could speak his feelings. After Greg responded the way he did, Quick immediately apologized, and that says a lot about his heart and character. He didn’t mean for Greg to be offended, and he definitely didn’t want to endanger that working relationship.
I say Kudos to JQ for having the gonads to be honest. If it ends up bringing a more competitive side out of Greg, I think the fans should stp cursing Quick and start thanking him.
Can I buy you a fish sandwich?
How about a comment of substance rather than name calling. Are you Republican?
There once was a Sea’ Cap’n Nate
Whom with Blazers did negotiate.
The pool, t’was so deep!
"That KP don’t sleep."
Gold medals and rings were his fate.
Name calling
That is such a crutch. That’s right up there with calling someone out for doing the wrong thing, and then their comeback is, “Don’t judge me.” Are you a Democrat?
Can I buy you a fish sandwich?
Demo all the way, baby!
There once was a Sea’ Cap’n Nate
Whom with Blazers did negotiate.
The pool, t’was so deep!
"That KP don’t sleep."
Gold medals and rings were his fate.
the criticism of Ike Diogu would be different
because this is his fourth year in the NBA, and while he also has suffered injuries, he’s had more of a chance to prove himself than has Oden. Also, to say that people don’t care about Oden as a person is patently wrong. Unless you’ve personally met and talked with everyone on here, you’re making an inaccurate judgement on Blazers fans as a whole. Furthermore, Quick would have seen “an Ike Diogu” less than he’d seen Oden in person, and since Diogu doesn’t have the expectations on him that Oden does, to say someone competing for a backup PF spot is “underwhelming” would be ridiculous. Its not like we took Ike 9th overall. At that point, had we drafted him and he’d been on our roster to this point and had only done what he has throughout his career, then it might be fair to say he has been somewhat underwhelming.
Quick is a stupid idiot and so are all the fans attacking him
Now that I got your attention, no, I don’t think Quick is a stupid idiot nor any fan who has a disagreement with his article. But the way people are trying to frame this “controversy” makes it seem like it. I don’t think any argument that makes an ad hominem attack is worth any value.
The Oden article is interesting because it reveals the stressful pressures that Oden is facing under the scrutiny of fans and national media. Quick is able to communicate that burden and humanize Oden. I don’t think any Blazer fan has a beef with that aspect of the article.
The general outrage comes from Quick confronting Oden with the “underwhelming” comment and the premise of the article transpired from that point of view. Majority of Blazer fans don’t feel the same and Quick admitted it was a poor choice of word. I think his choice of using the word “underwhelming” to describe Oden’s preseason performance ultimately discloses his own expectations to be much too high to begin with. I think Quick was wrong on his expectations and most Blazer fans are just expressing their disagreement. I also believe this will somewhat diminish Quick’s credibility as a Blazer commentator and analyst.
BINGO, BANGO, BONGO
Funny thing...
I read the article before I was aware of any of the controversy and I didn’t think much of it. I thought it was kind of a strange story that didn’t seem to fit how Quick usually reports and showed a side of Oden I hadn’t seen before. I really didn’t think much of it except to think Oden hasn’t broken out yet but it is way too early to think he won’t.
Then I noticed Ben posted the link with an intepretation of Oden as “whining.” That is when I took exception to Ben’s view of the article. (By that I mean I did not agree with him, not that he couldn’t express his opinion in a posting on BE.)
The only thing Quick did, in my opinion, is risk his future access to an open and honest Greg Oden. My guess is Greg will be a bit guarded with Quick in the future.
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
Exactly
I wasn’t crazy about Quick’s piece, but it was Ben’s take—calling Shaq a “whiner”—that I seriously objected to. Greg has been such a breath of fresh air, despite being subjected to a ridiculous amount of pressure & scrutiny. (Try reading Mike Barrett’s recent blog on this subject to get some idea of the fishbowl this 20-year-old is living in.)
I fear that, as another poster said, Oden will turn into yet another guarded, mumbling, “Both teams played hard” NBA star if this continues. As for “freedom of the press” and all that—sure, no one’s denying the right of Quick, Ben, or anyone else to be critical of Trailblazers. But come on: this ain’t Watergate here. Looking for the negative angle in covering the current crop of Blazers smacks more of TMZ and the National Enquirer than the Washington Post or NY Times.
This is sports, and these journalists are covering the local team. With a little creativity, they should be able to get people to read and comment on their stuff without going negative.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
Strange
Is the word I keep coming back to in this “controversy.” I was very surprised by the level of fan reaction to Quick’s story. Even when I commented in Ben’s thread, I thought I would be one of maybe 15 to 20 comments and it would be over. I struggle comparing Quick and Ben to TMZ but it did seem out of character for them. The original article just had a giddy “and then he said and then he said…” feel to it and I haven’t gotten that from Quick before.
Now I feel like I am doing the same thing…
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
I cited TMZ and the Enquirer...
as examples of lightweight “gotcha” entertainment journalism. Freedom of the press applies to all journalists, of course. But its importance lies in its role in keeping the high and mighty in line so as to preserve democracy.
Demonstrating that GO’s feelings can be hurt by calling his performance “underwhelming” (or calling him a whiner) hardly rises to that level. If anything, I overrated the importance of what Quick & Ben do by citing the Enquirer, because that outlet has actually broken some important stories. Come on, guys: this is local sports journalism. Don’t put it on a pedestal.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
Not sure where you are going with that last comment...
My view of TMZ and the Enquirer is that they are willing to do or say anything to get a sensational story whether it is true or not. I was making it clear that I don’t think that is what happened with Quick and Ben. I certainly wasn’t trying to place “local sports journalism” on some level with muckrakers exposing political hypocrisy and corporate greed.
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
I dunno...
From what I’ve seen, the Enquirer is generally pretty accurate—these days, anyhow. I cited “gotcha entertainment journalism”; I wasn’t suggesting Quick or Ben had made stuff up. That’s more along the lines of what you see in those other supermarket tabloids (the ones with the stories about space aliens abducting Obama & Palin’s illicit love child).
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
Quick's style in that article was a lil different.
I didn’t like it as much. I totally understand your fears of Greg shutting him and others out. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen. The chances of him becoming paranoid like Sheed seem small. They’re from different worlds.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Quick can write whatever but...
IMO Jason does a great job of covering the Blazers and I know that he loves this team. That being said, what he said to GO wasn’t helpful to Greg or the Blazers. Coaches can say whatever, but Jason isn’t the coach. Quick has a responsibility not to take advantage of his window if you will. I think that using the term “underwhelming” was a mistake and I’m glad that Jason realizes his mistake. Greg is over it so let’s move on!
I once heard Glady's Knight thank all the nice and all the not-so-nice people she'd encountered
She said you need both kinds. But that doesn’t mean the not-so-nice ones aren’t jerks.
Now, I don’t think Jason Quick is a jerk by any means. My point is this: just because Brandon said what Quick had said might help G.O. doesn’t mean Brandon approved of Quick saying it.
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
Answers
Replying to a few things here:
Mostly, I thought Quick’s comment was uncouth. It’s not a huge deal, but I thought that the phrase I quoted was a bit snarky and I was illustrating a reasonable difference of opinion. I, personally am just happy Oden is on the court. I think if Quick knows that Greg is in the pressure cooker, it’s kinda prick-ish (can I say that Dave?) to tell him he’s underwhelming to his face.
Hobobob said he wasn’t trying to be snarky. I’ll take that.
B.A. Political Science @ Lee University
I go to St. Mary’s School of Law in San Antonio. It’s the only Law school in the US with a DHS funded Center for National Security and Terrorism Law and I think that the discussion over the balance between liberty and safety will be one of the great debates of our time and will shape the future of our democracy.
I think I covered all the questions thanks.
Blazer's fan since '84, Currently exiled in San Antonio
↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A
So you musta have like Steven Colberts idea
to change New Hampshire’s motto to “Live Free or Do ANything You Have to do so I DOn’t Die”
Nah,
I’m a “Live free or move somewhere that you can be free” type person. Big on individual rights, anti-governmental intervention into private affairs, I’m going to stop know before people get upset that I am speaking of politics in a non-junk-drawer-thread. Just my luck,I can’t talk to anyone at a bar… my degrees are in politics and theology, two things you don’t wanna get a drinker started on…
Blazer's fan since '84, Currently exiled in San Antonio
↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A
by HurraKane212 on Oct 24, 2008 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions
I be we have an awful lot that we agree on
cause those are my favorite topics – I also agree that here’s not the place – we’ll have to meet on a non-basketball blog – would generate diharmony here – -
How about a simple GO BLAZERS! for agreement points?
No talking to people is annoying
I have an MA in Political Theory and International Relations. It’s just not worth talking to people any more. I feel your pain.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Hobbes. It's been going on for a while, and it does seem to be heating up
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
No, it's an old political theorist. I couldn't tell if you were joking or not.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Steve Colbert mocks the far right
by going even farther than them … It was him mocking the amount of freedom we are willing/forced to give up for the illusion of safety and the consequential loss of freedom in the quest for being free.. AND the risk of being kept in fear so as to be further controlled thinking falsely that it is in our interest.
He is a brilliant satirist BTW
Colbert is pretty clearly well to Jon Stewart's left...
……………………………….. Jon being basically a “pox on both houses” Libertarian…
"It's not a joke -- it's not a game." — B-Rex
Stewart is a blazing liberal
Takes one to know one.
Stewart pokes fun at everyone because he is a professional comedian. Colbert found a niche market banging on Bush and McCain. His stock futures must be wavering.
There once was a Sea’ Cap’n Nate
Whom with Blazers did negotiate.
The pool, t’was so deep!
"That KP don’t sleep."
Gold medals and rings were his fate.
Um...
No offense, but it’s pretty hypocritical to attack fans for voicing their opinions of Jason’s article which was itself an opinion piece. And you’ve done an excellent job of sounding like a condescending hypocrite.
by koyote on Oct 24, 2008 6:01 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Condescending? Yes. Hypocritical? No.
I’m talking about the obligations of discourse. The reader must strive to understand the intent of the author prior to attacking him. The reader is clearly different than the author. A poster above did well to cover some of the obligations the author has.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
So now you are saying those who disagree with you must be stupid?
There once was a Sea’ Cap’n Nate
Whom with Blazers did negotiate.
The pool, t’was so deep!
"That KP don’t sleep."
Gold medals and rings were his fate.
What the duece is going on here?
This is getting beyond ridiculous.
And how did this get 7 rec’s (well 6 rec’s and 1 “ironic” rec)?
This should probably have 7 flags instead.
Skadoosh
Past performance:
J.Q. has been exemplary!
Also in Quick’s defense — as he has stated on multiple occasions — a number of sources in the Blazer’s hierarchy had built Greg up (to Jason) to extremely high levels. In Quick’s mind (and many of us others) that level had yet to be approached. Too much hype from the Blazer brass could be contributory to the issue here.
Also, Greg could have explained the perceived shortcomings away by admitting to not being in good shape yet thereby diffusing much of this controversy. And I’ll admit, it’s concerned me to a fair degree that Greg isn’t/wasn’t in nearly the shape I thought he would be considering the length of his “bring him on slowly” rehabilitation. OK, I understand they didn’t want him playing 5 on 5 basketball until recently, but there are few excuses for him being overweight and seemingly in far less than optimum cardiovascular shape. Jason could have been hinting at this. And in my mind, “underwhelming” is way more hinting for an explanation than it is an attack.
Hobobo, that was one hell of a post. Quick in no way deserves the criticism he’s taken. At the same time, I would love to see all the unrealistic expectations and pressure taken off Goden.
P.S. Gawd, I can’t believe how superbly so many of you Bedgers write and express yourselves. Actually, it makes me more than hesitant to do a post of my own (a few celebratory beers tonight removed some of that inhibition thus you had to suffer through my words).
I had no problem with Quick's article, what I had a problem with
was the use of the lead of that article as a premise for a post on this fansite accusing Oden of being a whiner.
That was out of line. It took Quick out of context and then went him one better with no evidence.
If there was a crap storm on the Bedge, it was over that, not over Quick.
I'm not going to rec this thread.
Everyone is being incredibly juvenile. Folks who cares what anyone says? Form your own opinion when the opportunity presents itself, and until then simmer down!
Man I love tongue tacos - Mortimer
Only thing better is Trout on a stick roasted over an open fire - annthefan
I have a pic like that of my dog - tominhawaii
by Outlaw is Rejector on Oct 24, 2008 11:55 PM PDT reply actions
Why are we here if we don't care what anyone says? Why read the comments?
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Some conflicts have two sides,
some have multiple. This one has at least 3.
1. There are those who believe JQ was right in his original assessment that GO was underwhelming. I believe that Ben was definitely in this camp, if his obnoxious post comparing Oden and Durant is taken at face value.
2. There are those who believe JQ shouldn’t have used the word underwhelming, but realize and accept that he made an error in judgement, and call it good. These people object to JQ expressing his opinion because they believe it was wrong, but are cool with him because he realized his mistake, apologized for it, and wrote a good article regardless.
3. There are also those who have a neutral opinion about this issue because they believe JQ had every right to express his opinion, and it doesn’t matter if his opinion is right or wrong. They are different from the people in camp (2) in that they are not critiquing the content of JQ’s opinion and are not disagreeable with Quick for expressing said opinion to GO. They also like JQ’s article.
4. Then there are those people that are condemning JQ for his belief that GO was ever underwhelming. They do not realize that JQ no longer holds that opinion, and choose to view his article secondarily to his actual comment (which means they can’t stand anything about it).
Personally for me, people in camps 1 and 4 are both wrong because they represent a certain intractability about the nature of opinions. I fall right between 2-3, as I was originally hung up on the content of his opinion but had good feelings about the article because JQ put up the disclaimer that he realized he shouldn’t have said it. Now I believe that I have no business being upset with JQ for expressing his opinion, regardless of whether it is in agreement with my own.
Anyway, I rambled a lot here, but I tried my best to break down this issue so that I could see exactly where the divisions lie between types of fans. If you believe I missed out on a category, please edit it as you see fit.
You are missing that Quick 5) may have been unprofessional in several important ways and 6) this sort of piece creates an ugly work environment for my team
There once was a Sea’ Cap’n Nate
Whom with Blazers did negotiate.
The pool, t’was so deep!
"That KP don’t sleep."
Gold medals and rings were his fate.
Are you involved with the team?
I could certainly understand how that might happen. If it does create an ugly working environment, that’s a valid concern. You won’t find me arguing with you. Sometimes, it’s within a journalists role to create a bad environment. That hardly means anyone should be happy about it.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
I am a fan.
is that involved / invested enough?
Do you think reporters-beat writers (as opposed to columnists) should insert themselves into their stories?
Not that this particular bru-hah won’t blow over, but I believe JQ commited a journalistic faux pas. He should have called Canzano to relay the message then canzano write about it. Then Canzano be the story, as it should be, instead of JQ, primary beat writer. See below to confirm I agree there was a legit story. He got it the wrong way, IMO.
"Brandon Roy a une énorme confiance en lui et un niveau de maturité assez impressionnant, et en plus c’est un vrai leader" - Nic Batum
by G_dubs on Oct 25, 2008 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
You've got a good point about style
It wasn’t normal. Sometimes the best way to tease a story out is to tell it as a story rather than a report. Style is style.
You seem to be hinting at the arrogance of journalists who become the story. That could be considered a journalistic transgression, but you’d have to compare it with Quick’s whole body of work and also decide that Quick was the story. In this case, Quick was only part of the story as a device to demonstrate the pressure. The story clearly wasn’t about him, his trials or travails. It centered solidly on Greg.
In general, I’m with you. Conzano does that sort of thing all the time, but Quick merely used himself as a piece. It certainly gained him no favor. In fact, the tone was somewhat self-effacing. The point of the article he as a member of the press were doing so and so to Greg. Since the story centered on the pressure the media placed on Greg, he could insert himself without making it about him. Likewise, it was the safest bet. Who else could he point the finger at?
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
A reasoned response...
I agree JQ’s body of work is exempliary. I in no way believe JQ is arrogant, and I don’t mean to imply that.
My opinion at the moment is that this was an unfortunate mistake. Just that. I in no way would want JQ disciplined, and I hope he retains confidence with the players and organization he reports on.
I do believe there was / is a valid story…but I am not going to re-write it for him. I can only suggest generalities, e.g., wish he could have gleaned Roy’s comments without Roy coming out to smooth things over. I am not sure how he does that specifically. And I am not sure how he does the story without pointing the finger at himself relative to the media hype. I do wish he had found some other way.
I am done with this thread. I still feel something was borderline with the reporting and publishing of this story as it stands. I do tend to believe this will blow over. JQ is a good beat writer. I am not going to go bonkers over this one report. If this mode becomes a habit, I may re-evaluate. But I don’t anticipate I’ll have to.
"Brandon Roy a une énorme confiance en lui et un niveau de maturité assez impressionnant, et en plus c’est un vrai leader" - Nic Batum
by G_dubs on Oct 25, 2008 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Absolutely. That's pure Hunter S. Thompson gonzo journalism...
Do you think reporters-beat writers (as opposed to columnists) should insert themselves into their stories?
"It's not a joke -- it's not a game." — B-Rex
Quick could do that once a week and it would be fine with me, although he needs to hone his jokewriting and prose if he does.
"It's not a joke -- it's not a game." — B-Rex
I wonder how long he would have access to the locker room
you remember the whole Sonny B. thing yes? Hate for Greg to go all Sonny on poor Jason’s a—. :-p
"Brandon Roy a une énorme confiance en lui et un niveau de maturité assez impressionnant, et en plus c’est un vrai leader" - Nic Batum
category x
Quick’s opinion is irrelevant, “right or wrong”. However, he made it relevant by inserting himself into the story in a confrontational way. This is unprofessional for a beat writer. Canzano, sure. That is what he does as a columnist.
There was a story here, evidenced by Roy’s comments. If JQ can get the story, without injecting himself into it, Pulitzer.
Ben’s post is inconsequential as this is his blog and he is free to express his opinion, in whatever obnoxious tone he wishes. He is free to flirt with his access in this way.
I suppose by extension, so is JQ, and the editors of The O. But as the most circulated beat writer for this team, I would hope for more professionalism.
"Brandon Roy a une énorme confiance en lui et un niveau de maturité assez impressionnant, et en plus c’est un vrai leader" - Nic Batum
Ben post was somehow unpleasant.
Ben post was about Oden being unable to handle a slight critic and about its meaning in such a hard environment as the NBA. Somehow the “whinning” thing was a window opened to the Oden´s future if he doesn´t understand what is all about and react. You better get a thick skin, Oden, if you can´t take it easy when a friend is talking to you so. Similar story with the "Good by Sergio, you better react Sergio, post. Frequently who flatters you more is not your best friend but who warns you.
Sergio + Rudy = 16
Sergio + Bayless = 16
Batum 8+8=16
by amlmart1 on Oct 25, 2008 5:35 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I always enjoy your insights
I agree a window of visibility was opened up with Ben’s post. I understand it from a certain critical point of view.
That said, I found Ben’s piece barely readable. The tone reminded me of “that guy”. If Ben wants to be percieved as “that guy” on his own blog, that’s fine I guess. E.g.: “Can you all still tell that I wanted Durant, and that I’m not over it to this day. And because this golden opportunity to fling loaded terms at the guy we did draft presents itself, e.g. ‘whiner’, ‘man up’, etc., I’m going to take it”.
As contrast, I would expect a similar tone coming from the stereotypical ‘Bayless As Leader’…I do not imagine BG leading like that in the locker room. Caveat, I’m not there so I don’t really kNow
"Brandon Roy a une énorme confiance en lui et un niveau de maturité assez impressionnant, et en plus c’est un vrai leader" - Nic Batum
BR, not BG. Typo.
"Brandon Roy a une énorme confiance en lui et un niveau de maturité assez impressionnant, et en plus c’est un vrai leader" - Nic Batum
+1 becuase it made more sense than the 70 or so, english thinkers thoughts above this comment.
either that or I think better reading thoughts of spanish people….strange to think about?
The faith (and I'm a guy) perverts. :)
Agreed - HurraKane212
You are the man HurraKane212. I couldn’t have said it better myself – (literally). Thanks for saving me the effort.
Re: Disagreement is fine
Yes disagreement is in fact what this is all about. Jason Quick was wrong when he over-hyped Oden initially, and he was wrong again when he labeled Oden’s early performances underwhelming shortly thereafter. — End of Story —
Everyone has the “right” to be wrong, hobobob. You are right about that. And Jason Quick excercised that right.
If only the difference were so clear to us as it is to you.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
Quick, he didn't know he'd offend Oden with his comments.....
Come on, nothing could be further from the truth. Quick’s a smart man, he knew what he was doing, and now that he’s receiving the backlash from the community, he’s trying to save face. If anything, I don’t think Quick expected quite the stir, but this is what he was going for, controversial.
He told a ROOKIE center, fresh off of MICROFRACTURE SURGERY, who HASN’T PLAYED IN A YEAR, with HUGE EXPECTATIONS, that through a mere 4 PRESEASON GAMES, the ONLY NBA GAMES OF ODEN’s CAREER, that he was UNDERWHELMING.
The only possible conclusion I can come to, is that Quick was fishing for a reaction from Oden so he could have a controversial story that gets national attention. It was a lowball article in my opinion.
Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game
+1
I like Quick, generally. But here, he was fishing for attention, and he got it.
No, the “underwhelming” label wasn’t really the point of the article. His point was (or should have been) this: Oden is feeling the weight of irrational expectations, and he’s lost the love of the game, and he needs to relax. That would have fine. I agree.
But here’s the irony of Quick’s take: in an article about Oden feeling the weight of inordinate expectations, Quick called him “underwhelming” – despite the fact that he’s a rookie coming off microfracture and he’s STILL drawing consistent double teams and putting up solid per minute stats.
So, Quick is both CREATING the inordinate expectations and bemoaning Oden’s reaction to those expectations. Quick should know better.
But maybe a few courses at community college would change my mind…
Q: Is Greg favoring his knee?
Frye: He favors dunking on your head, that's what he favors.
LOL, maybe it would. I don't know.
Given the respect you’ve earned from me in recent posts, I’m a little surprise by your comments. I would have thought you’d be one of the first to comprehend what Quick did in that article. We have completely different takes.
I can’t figure out why you’re saying Quick bemoaned Oden’s reaction. On the contrary, he does nothing of the sort. The tone shows regret for the pressure he put Oden under with his lofty expectations.
I'm a really really ridiculously good looking orange mocha frappaccino drinking manhammer sandwich
goodness.
is this what we can expect anytime someone speaks even mildly in the negative about a blazer? the eighth grade teacher was right, this is probably the most childish interaction i’ve ever seen on this site. let’s hope it’s an anomaly.
keep up the good work, jason.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
