I get that LA is on contract and can't really do anything but play hard, so in reality the question doesn't mean anything. But I can't figure out why Neil didn't just come out and say, "yes" if he really believed that LA was committed to the team going forward. The private comment implies that the answer might be "no."
Well if you've seen the way goliver has been pimping the Aldridge wants out; olshey was just being careful. He was flagged and the way he wagged the dog only means anything can be taken out of context. Kinda like how quick took aldridges comments out
I think this is really positive news. It seems to hint that they were in talks with LaMarcus about his future with the Blazers, and LaMarcus was involved in the decision to get Lopez.
He also brought up the Lillard 2AM ordeal in SL interview. I know he doesn't have to act like a fan, but I don't think many sports reporters ask questions like that, so far after the fact.
That's just it. They have a template on how to drive traffic to their site. The heart felt "feel good" stories don't drive traffic like the "negative press". The more dirt you find, the more you're watched.
Golliver hasn't been pimping the rumor, he's been dutifully reporting every mention of the Trailblazers anywhere with even the faintest hint of legitimacy...
When taken as what it is, its a fine interview. Nothing really out of line, Ben obviously had an agenda going in to try and find more out about the Star on the Blazers and the Rumors surrounding him but thats something pretty much everyone wants to know about so its not surprising. When its take in the context of everything Ben has written about the last year and what he has been harping about on Twitter/BE it seems, and this is just my opinion, that he is trying to get Olshey to slip up about LMA. I will freely admit I don't like Ben and think he has gotten to big for his breeches. He seems to over analyze everything and more often then not that over analyzing of the situation leads him to write very negative views about the Blazers and seems to try and refuse/refute anything remotely positive about the Blazer and the situation they are in. He takes the Jaynes approach because it gets him more views but it also makes him look like a quack.
I didn't see anything wrong with the questions. What would anyone else liked to seen asked. I would've ask if there was anything else in the works.
No, it's also hysterical fans, too, who believe only the things they want to believe in the local media because it's how they feel, too, while discounting things that conflict with their opinions.
Blaze should know how you've been advocating a trade for Aldridge. The fact that you've called him out like we have, gives further proof that Ben is a fucking cock sucker
I don't read BE all that much, seems I go on binges where I do but for the most part stay away. As a reporter myself, it seems the questions on the face aren't that big a deal. He's digging for answers and he didn't seem to be that big of a jerk. It does seem he had an agenda going into the interview, but (sadly) that seems to be the way "journalism" is handled these days.
This is close to what I would say. Standing alone, the questions are not out of line. (You can tell from Olshey's near-sarcasm that he's tired of Golliver's always-aggressive questions.) The problem is the context of Golliver's national writing, in which he uses his template of negative stereotypes against all teams. In writing, it's called "hackneyed" and he's a "hack."
