OK, he didn't answer them all, but did make an effort. If you feel the desire to e-mailing him directly, he can be reached at:
JohnCanzano@aol.com
Here they are....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*Q. Does Martell Webster look better in practice than he does in games?
*
I like Martell Webster's size, and work ethic. He looks terrific in practice. He's usually one of the players who ends up shooting late. And I talked to Blazers GM John Nash the other day and even Nash said he feels much more certain about Webster (over Telfair) becoming a big-time talent because he has NBA size.
*
Q. Did upper managment coax McMillen into benching Monia in favor of Outlaw? Monia is a more well-rounded player at this point. ie. doesn't suck at defense and shooting.
*
McMillan's system favors thinking players. I love Outlaw's athleticism, but he's not going to play here until he can play within the system.
*
Q. When are you going to get an elementary understanding of the collective bargaining agreement?
*
I have a very good understanding of the CBA.
*
Q. Why did he feel the need to taint the UoP Women's soccer team semi-finials victory?
*
I have high expectations. "Taint" is a strange choice of words. I think what you really mean is, "Why was I critical of Lindsay Huie and Christine Sinclair?" And the answer there is that they didn't play well in the semifinal, and left what should have been a sure victory to a shootout. Title IX guarantees equality of opportunity for women athletes? Well, how about equality of expectation? I hope you're not suggesting I should have gone soft on them because they're female. Point is, they stepped up in the final. And UP doesn't win if they don't step up.
*
Q. What are you most proud of in your writing about the Blazers?
*
I attend a lot of practices. I write a lot. I report. I have good relationships with the people I need to cover. But I think what I really value is that I know what's going on with the team. Period.
*
Q. Where do you and Jason Quick get all your information for the Collective Bargaining Agreement? Do you think it's important to understand the CBA when discussing trade options with the Blazers? For example, you've complained that Portland wasn't doing enough to retain Przybilla, when it's obvious to anyone who understands the CBA that their hands are tied. Where do you go to for CBA information?
*
I'd love to see where I wrote that Portland wasn't doing enough to retain Przybilla. Go on, I dare you. Because it doesn't exist. I was among the first a year ago to write that the team couldn't negotiate with him until the end of the season. Where do we get CBA information? From the CBA itself. From attorneys who are paid to study these things. From GMs. I know what you're asking, but seriously….
*
Q. What is the biggest mistake you've made in writing about the Blazers in the past year?
*
How about my column in the early season that said the team was good enough to make the playoffs? I still think they were good enough, and I clarified that in the column by saying they needed A) Zach/Darius healthy and engaged; B) Young players to grow; and C) to scrap night to night ---- and they're 0-for-3 there. But still, even if they go nuts, they're going to fall short this season.
*
Q. How often do you attend Blazer practices?
It really depends. Remember, I'm a columnist. I'm answering these questions from the press box in Seattle at an NFC playoff game. I cover more than the Blazers. So I'll say that I attend anywhere from 2 to 5 practices a week, depending. But it's one of the most valuable resources any journalist can have.
*
Q. When our team was filled with "knuckleheads" that the community (and you) couldn't stand, the Rose Garden had far better attendance than it does now. Why?
*
Hope.
*
At that point, even with the bad characters, you had the hope that things would work out. Now, you know this team isn't going to win consistently. Don't sacrifice your morality, though. You should expect the team to be competitive and behave itself in society. This isn't an 'either or' situation.
*
Q. You said that Portland would never be a playoff team with Miles on our team. Since he's been out, we've gone 6-20. He was easily our second or best player, playing through a lot of injury. Has your opinion changed about him? If so, do you think it's newsworthy?
*
I'd argue that Darius was the team's best player in the early season. And my original column what that the team couldn't win*big*with Darius and Theo --- not just Darius. The reason for that is that I don't think Theo and Darius*are the best complement to Zach as a teammate. I think you needed someone, at the small forward or shooting guard, who could stretch the defense a little. Zach loves to be on the low block. Darius loves to get to the basket. And I don't think Darius' attitude, for a long time, was solid. I still don't think he can stay engaged long-term. One assistant last season said that Darius would get his "next five coaches fired." I like the fire he played with for 5-6 games early in the season, but again, he needs more consistency.
*
Q.*If you were GM what viable moves would you make if any?
*
Right now, they've tied their hands with the Darius, Zach, Theo contracts. Joel, because of his contract, can't be dealt with until the end of the season. The rest of the team is too young, or not an attractive commodity. Zach, as a base-year compensation player, becomes a more attractive trade possibility at the end of the season. Me? I'd move Miles, if possible at the end of the season. But I don't think anyone wants him.
Q. What would your draft strategy for the Blazers be? Best Player Available? PF? SF? Youngster or 4 year Grad?
*
Best available player. It's why I wrote a column prior to the last draft urging the team to take Chris Paul.
*
Q. What will the Blazers have to do to overcome their national media stigma?
*
Win, with good characters, over an extended period of time. And management needs to deal with players/coaches on the level. Remember, I came here after covering MLB, the NFL, and Notre Dame Football and Indiana basketball and I can tell you that people were talking then about things that happened WAY, WAY in the past. The national reputation won't change overnight.
*
Q. How is Ha coming along? Does he have a legitimate starting or backup role in his future or is he a permanent "look at this huge guy we found"?
*
Ha will go down as one of John Nash's successes, but it's going to take more time. He has soft hands. Good feet. And he's giant.
*
Q. Does he think there is any positive aspect at all going on with the Blazer organization or any of the players and if so has he written any articles about it?
*
I've written lots of positive columns on the Blazers. Juan Dixon's upbringing? 'Blazer Betty' on Christmas*Day?*Steve Blake? Nate McMillan? Damon Stoudamire? Brad and Melody Lowe? I can go on and on, and on. And on. The interesting thing to me is that some readers don't remember the positive ones until I direct them to my Oregonlive.com archive. Maybe it's human nature for readers to recall the negative columns.
*
Q. Ask him if he thinks Telfair is 6 feet tall or under 6 feet tall.
*
Telfair was measured at 5-11 ½ by the Blazers.
*
Q. Was it a conscious decision to make yourself a hated Blazer columnist?
*
I write what I feel. I don't really worry too much if people like me or dislike me. I have lots of friends. I came here to write columns, and sometimes people aren't going to like hearing*what I think. That's ok. Turn the channel. Or listen and write me. I answer all email.*Again, this is sport. Not life or death. It's not war. We can disagree. Doesn't mean we have to dislike each other.
*
Q. Which is your favorite NBA team?
I don't really have a favorite team. I can't. I root for good stories. And when I was in Athens for the Olympics, I really got to see some of the NBA players such as Tim Duncan, Lamar Odom, Carmelo Anthony, Allan Iverson on a daily basis.
*
Q. Do you feel that the Blazers players are worse/better character wise then the athletes on other pro franchises, or more or less about the same?
*
The Blazers right now? Or the Blazers of the past? Because right now, they're about the same. The teams of the past were record setters in league tech's, and were in a lot more trouble.
*
Q. Why don't you (or anyone at the O) devote some collumn space to the games instead of focusing on petty nonsense and making mountains out of molehills from bland post game quotes? Do the editors feel that covering the actual games is boring and that readers instead want soap operas?
*
We cover the games with stories and columns. If you don't think the off-court stuff affects the on-court stuff, you're pretty naïve. The Oregonian has a tremendous national reputation and is one of the 25 largest papers in the country. If a player is berating a coach, or showing up late to shoot-around, it absolutely can affect the on-court performance, team chemistry, coaching, etc. That is, it's relevant. Again, your choice to read or not to read.
*
Q. Regarding memogate... since the Blazer's initial public posturing of withholding Darius's money obviously wouldn't stand up to the rules of the CBA, why did you feel the need to paint their behind the seen retraction as a scandal? Omitting the relevancy of the rules seemed to be an intellectually dishonest stance towards your readers.
*
Is that what you think the team did?
*
Seriously. They fined Darius. Then, attempted*to negotiate a settlement behind the back of fans, and the coaching staff. It never got to the*CBA, and it would have very likely been upheld, in some form, had it.*The whole situation was only revealed because it was reported in the newspaper, and even then the team waited a week to figure out how it could salvage the mess it created. Management screwed up. It got caught. You should hold the team to a higher standard. And the team's initial reaction should have been, "Look, we screwed up." Fans would have forgiven them for what amounted to a ridiculous negotiation. They cut the coaching staff off at the knees. Again, one of the times I knew much, much more than I could ever write.
*
Q. Do you feel that the coverage that you and Quick provide has in any way influenced the current pathetic state of the franchise and it's negative image around the country?
*
No.
*
Sorry. That's a cop-out. We're all responsible for our actions. You can't blame the media, or your neighbor. If you do something that ends up painting the franchise in a negative light, that's not the media's fault. Zach understands that. We had the same conversation. He gets it.
*
Q. Given the nature of your coverage, why do you blame players for not being willing to talk to you?
*
Who doesn't talk to me?
*
I have good relationships with management, and players. Even when Rasheed was here, I had good conversations with him. The players understand that I'm doing my job. And that I write what I feel, and I walk into the gym the next day. If they want to discuss it, I'm there.*If they don't, that's ok too.
*
Q. Has the success that Rasheed has gone on to enjoy as a key member of the Pistons at all made you reevaluate the reasons you derided him?
*
No.
*
Rasheed's window of opportunity in Portland closed in the fourth quarter of that Lakers loss in the Western Conference Finals. He wasn't going to win in Portland. What you may not know? Rasheed wasn't going to re-sign in Portland. He'd already expressed that in a closed-door meeting prior to the end of the season.
*
Q. Who is John Galt?
*
Atlas Shrugged. Ayn Rand.*John Galt is the heroic potential in each of us.
*
Q. Going back to your first column in Portland, wherein you suggested the Beavers should get rid of Erickson and hire Fresno State's Pat Hill - is it still your position that a coach who has yet to win a single WAC championship (unlike Nevada, Boise State, Hawaii, etc) is the best thing since sliced bread?
*
Again, re-read the column. I wrote that Erickson had taken Oregon State as far as he could, without a lick of trouble. So again, I wondered if this wasn't a good time for both parties to say goodbye, and thanks, and move forward before something went wrong.
*
A week later, Erickson was gone.
*
Q. John, is Adam Morrison the next Larry Bird?
*
No.
*
But he's a touch better than Luke Jackson.
*
Q. John, is the payscale at the Oregonian significantly lower than at comparable newspapers?
*
The Oregonian payscale is probably much higher than most papers nationally. I've worked at six newspapers. It's a great newspaper with a fantastic reputation.
*
Q. How much of your hate mail mentions your baldness?
*
I'm bald?
*
Q. Why do so many sportswriters consider it their duty to be petty moralizers, when they are trained to write about sports and have no particular qualifications or demonstrated superiority in commenting on human character or motivations?
*
Because I have expectations for college and pro athletes, and they relate to more than the actions on the court.
Canzano Responds
Interesting reading.
