It has been going on with the media well before Olshey came along. It was the peeking through the blinds during pre draft workouts and trying to read Pritchards lips while looking through bushes and even before that.
I agree Stotts doesnt have to answer a question. I also think Quick’s questions were relevant and fine questions to ask. I think the idea that Quicks reputation is so bad with them that he’s not allowed to ask questions that make Stotts uncomfortable is weird though. So who is allowed to ask tough questions? It really seems to me that tough questions are almost never answered by Stotts or NO. Most of the time NO just hijacks the conversation with long diatribes that rarely actually say anything and Stotts is liked/likeable enough they’re rarely asked.
Welcome to the Neil Olshey administration. Where media isn't allowed to ask questions that would bring awareness to their lack of ability and accountability.
Deleting posts. The ultimate reach-around from the reach-around king! But really.... let’s be “frankly” honest.... if you start deleting off-topic posts from every thread, most threads would be left with maybe 20% of their post counts.
Nothing is "WRONG" with the question. What you have to think about is the next question. Stotts already knew where that line of questioning was going. If you can't see it then i guess you can't see it. I personally see exactly what Quick was working for. I have been reading the dude since he started with the Oregonian in 99-2000. It's what he does. He even proved it by going for the drop on the "Meeting later In His Office" jab. You ask a question and get an answer. The original answer by Stotts covered CJ's shooting issues and it covered making an impact. The Quick went after that course. and Stotts agreed. Then Quick decided to push for Stotts to drag his player through the mud. Stotts refused! If you want a coach that is willing to drag one of his players through the mud then you might as well go root for the Clippers. Rivers would be your guy. But if you want a coach with integrity then don't look to Stotts, Pops, Carlisle, Kerr, even DiAntoni not to mention a whole host of others that simply would have shut Quick down also.
I have answered the Quicks question thing already enough times as I was simply pointing out that the media situation (especially Quick and Canzano along with their respective reputations) has been well before Olshey came to this team. We have become a media frenzy society and in some cases demand that we get more where as the Blazers prefer to keep information internally and not play it out in the media. I think a lot of that had to do with Paul Allen as well. Some businesses like to play it out in the media while others like to keep it internally.
I don't see anything wrong with the questions Quick asked. It's just that the Coach/GM are so used to soft questions with no follow up from the majority of the Portland media that when an actual legit question comes out, they bristle. Those were the obvious follow up questions and I'm impressed someone finally asked them As for MeJ's mentions of 'there not being many rebounds', that is a joke. How about getting some assists and playing better defense. I could care less about him getting many rebounds. The fact that his answer went immediately there is telling to me.
lol, yes, but what would be left would be on topic. One thing I have noticed with this forum is that almost every thread ends up going sideways or completely off track. I would think mods would interject posts into threads reminding posters to stick to the topic. I have been guilty of it as well as most others have also.
Actually there is a little more to that story than you might know? Blazers Edge burned it's own bridge. In particular Dave Deckard.
But it was Stotts that suggested McCollum was making an impact in other areas beyond scoring. He initiated that. Then when Quick followed up on it, he got super defensive. If he didn’t honestly believe McCollum was making an impact in other areas, he shouldn’t have been dishonest about it. That’s not on Quick. Sorry you got caught in your bullshit.
You know what, you're right. I should have put in a caveat: if it was personal insults on people AND off the thread topic.
This is a fair statement. But i wouldn't trust Quick asking questions and reporting it in a way that didn't tear the team down. Just my take. But yes CJ's struggles are definitely an issue and should be fair game.
I talked about the "next question" in a post... If he says "he's great in these areas and impacts the game" then what does Quick say that could then make stotts say something bad? But he didn't say that, so YES the questions stopped, BUT, there are still questions that come from him NOT answering. That's all I'm saying. I know there's a song out there called "You say it best, when you say nothing at all" but in certain situations, it can lead to more questions.
Because people love being micromanaged in a place where they want to relax. We want to treat you like adults, not the kids that are tethered in groups walking around downtown. For the most part, people almost always go back to the topic at hand. This thread went away from the topic so aggressively and so fast it had to be done. Now we're back on topic for the most part.
I agree, but where I differentiate from some in this thread, those issues should be handled internally and not in the press as that's how locker rooms become divided and internal issues begin to magnify as like you pointed out, Quick often twists what is said to fit whatever agenda he is looking for. I wouldn't ever consider Quick a friend of the team and thus the reason he got the reaction he did from Stotts. How often does Quick ever break any big news regarding the Blazers?
Look what Terry said before your highlighted part though: “He hasn’t shot the ball as well as he’d like...but I don’t think that’s the sole determinant of how he’s playing this year.” That to me (and obviously Jason) suggests he’s doing other things well, making his follow up question pretty appropriate imo.
