Can someone explain to me when we started taking Bleacher report as gospel? When did they magically become a source that people automatically believe to be true? So far the only source who seems to know anything is Woj and that has always been the case. Not the Oregonian. Not any of the local radio shows. Certainly not Bleacher report. None of them have been consistent or really shown any ability to break Blazer related news. Hell, we have sources on this board who seem to know more about the team than these "trusted" media sources. So people, please calm down on automatically believing something that claims to have sources. There's a lot of misinformation going around, and the worst part is that there are other media outlets who take an article like the one from Bleacher report and then just rebrand it to mean whatever they want. No new information. Just a different click bait title and spin. Other than Woj, can someone give me other sources that have a proven track record of being right about the Blazers?
Haynes = Dame Shams & Amick = ? Woj = Neil Jaynes = always defends Neil on Twitter, so i guess they are cool together Quick = ? That's all, everyone else is not close enough to the Blazers
What is this in reference to? The Hammon stuff? Because that was written by Jake Fischer who’s probably the best NBA writer BR has and will undoubtedly move to a bigger publication eventually.
Has Quick really broken anything though? I don't remember him actually breaking anything. Actually, that's not true. I was literally in the room when he got a call from Sheed's agent that Sheed had been traded to ATL. So I, being the good little internet rumor monger quickly got Hoopsworld to run with the story. So I guess he did break something and I witnessed it.
Ok, but why would he have sources in the Blazers? Has he shown a track record of breaking Blazer news? Or did the Hammon stuff come from outside the Blazers?
Quick has repeatedly distanced himself from the rumormill and being the FIRST to report stuff. I don't think breaking news interests him as much as the articles he can write from his deeper connections with the team. I don't really blame him on that respect.
Quick is also the most “fair” local reporter. He’s the only person that doesn’t just write articles on one side or the other.
yeah back in ‘15 he was all over Portland wanting to trade their pick for a big man (we eventually got Plumlee) I think he also has some sort of relationship with CJ. He’s legit. The real hack is Haynes.
and he can actually WRITE, unlike people like Haynes and Freeman (who has seemingly since moved off the Blazers beat) who write like they're middle schoolers. what Quick did this past year, and the quality of journalism after having access to only zoom interviews was nothing short of amazing.
That’s like saying you can’t fire me I quit. He’s distanced himself because you can count the amount of moves he’s broken on one hand. I like his writing though and he’s the only guy in Portland with a pulse on the team.
I don’t know if he actually has sources anymore or he just doesn’t try to pass them off as fact. Whenever he does a Q&A he avoids the word sources and usually just says “my opinion” or “my thoughts”. We know he texts Dame from time to time, but he’s probably realized if he passes off information he knows as facts that’s a quick ticket for him to never get any information in the future. When he’s tagged in an actual report on the athletic it’s always with another name attached, ie sources tell Sam Amick and Jason Quick, etc.
i don't think breaking news is part of his job description at the Athletic. Maybe that was expectation at NBCSNW and the O, but their long form, no deadline paradigm is perfect for him.
It's the difference between a beat reporter and a columnist. At the Oregonian, Quick was the beat reporter and Canzano was the columnist. There is definitely an expectation if you're the beat reporter that you're going to break news. Back in the day they would travel with the team. Cover games on the road. They were plugged in. I don't think that's the case anymore, as print journalism is dying, but at that time that's how things were. Now Quick is more of a columnist. He's a better version of Canzano.
This is too upscale, the much bigger problem, as I see it, is more fundamental. You were involved in the old days. GMs lie, or at least distort the truth, and leak it to a reporter. The goal as a fan was to separate the facts from the fiction. Regardless, all were considered "rumors" because they came from actual sources. Never would I have imagined that this WAS THE GOLDEN AGE OF MEDIA COVERAGE. Now, "media" members use the words "may" or "might" - they can't even use the word "considering" because that would imply they actually talked to someone. THEN, another idiot writes an "article" erasing the "may" suggesting it's going to happen. tldr; We used to live in the age of MEDIA DECEPTION, now we live in the era of CLICKBAIT. At least we had the illusion of actual journalism before, now we don't.
...and Jake wrote something like "from sources around the league" and now the mob has skewed that to mean the corrupt Blazers organization is throwing female candidates under the bus (because they hate women and progressive thought) talk about the off-season blues!!
