A-Rod to have surgery, out until at least May

[Gom]

The issue isn't to bring the topic up again' date=' dummy. It's the hypocrisy of ridiculing a person for believing the words a doctor and then some time later, putting faith in the words of a doctor.[/quote']

 

Good point. However, what that doctor said didn't make sense to me. How can pitching more be LESS stressful? Anyways, not the point, and your point is valid.

[BoSox21]

Doesn't it have to do with starting pitchers being on a regular schedule pitching every 5th day as opposed to relievers who might pitch two days in a row, have three games off, etc. not allowing the body to get into any sort of rhythm?

[Gom]

Most pitcher injuries tend to happen due to fatigue. One reason that relievers can pitch so frequently is that they don't get fatigued as much per appearance.

[yankees228]

Every doctor strongly believes in the diagnosis he gives patients so the most optimistic a doctor will ever be about a prognosis is immediately after a procedure. But the terms "complications" and "setbacks in recovery" are pretty common in rehab so anything the doctor says about a surgery, especially a surgery that needs another, more major surgery after the season.

 

How confident can Phillippon be about the effects A-Rod charging a bunt, planting his leg and making an off-balance throw will have on his hip?

 

There were a few options that Phillippon and A-Rod had (a couple types of surgery or just rehab). This was not the only option. Phillippon was in favor of the decision that they made. Clearly he truly believes in it, and believes A-Rod will have full mobility.

[BoSox21]

There were a few options that Phillippon and A-Rod had (a couple types of surgery or just rehab). This was not the only option. Phillippon was in favor of the decision that they made. Clearly he truly believes in it' date=' and believes A-Rod will have full mobility.[/quote']

 

Yea, I'm sure he is but he still left open the possibility that the hip could fail him by saying he's 85-90% sure he can make it through the season. Time will tell...

[rician blast]

Most pitcher injuries tend to happen due to fatigue. One reason that relievers can pitch so frequently is that they don't get fatigued as much per appearance.

 

 

That's true. If you equate it to, say, lifting weights, you see that extremes under either approach can result in fatigue and injury.

 

Consider those who hit a body part once per week vs. those who hit every body part 3 times per week.

 

The once per week guys annihilate whatever muscle group they're hitting that day...and hope that the week rest gives sufficient time for recovery/healing. Go too heavy or too many sets and it sometimes catches up with them...sometimes additional rest/time off is prescribed.

 

The 3x per week for each body part guys generally do less sets per body part and less weight...knowing they'll tax that body part again in 2 days. Go a little too many sets or too heavy and there's a good chance of fatigue and injury.

 

The key is to (1) identify what approach works best for this lifter..or in the case of baseball players, each player and (2) manage not only the players game-time load, but pre and post performance conditioning. In the case of lifter, those who stick to the approach that keeps them fresh and healthy perform better over the long-run...some simply can't stick to the plan (push too much weight, don't rest enough) and hurt themselves.

 

Since pitchers are managed by their manager/pitching coach, they alone don't make the decisions of what situation to be in, how much rest to get etc. right?

 

Where I'm going with this is that I think GENERALLY teams try and identify where a player is best suited...body wise...to perform with the least chance for injury and other complications. Unfortunately, even once that is identified, SOMETIMES I think a team considers what is best for the TEAM, despite the data and observations they might have regarding that pitcher's best interests.

[Gom]

That's true. If you equate it to, say, lifting weights, you see that extremes under either approach can result in fatigue and injury.

 

Consider those who hit a body part once per week vs. those who hit every body part 3 times per week.

 

The once per week guys annihilate whatever muscle group they're hitting that day...and hope that the week rest gives sufficient time for recovery/healing. Go too heavy or too many sets and it sometimes catches up with them...sometimes additional rest/time off is prescribed.

 

The 3x per week for each body part guys generally do less sets per body part and less weight...knowing they'll tax that body part again in 2 days. Go a little too many sets or too heavy and there's a good chance of fatigue and injury.

 

The key is to (1) identify what approach works best for this lifter..or in the case of baseball players, each player and (2) manage not only the players game-time load, but pre and post performance conditioning. In the case of lifter, those who stick to the approach that keeps them fresh and healthy perform better over the long-run...some simply can't stick to the plan (push too much weight, don't rest enough) and hurt themselves.

 

Since pitchers are managed by their manager/pitching coach, they alone don't make the decisions of what situation to be in, how much rest to get etc. right?

 

Where I'm going with this is that I think GENERALLY teams try and identify where a player is best suited...body wise...to perform with the least chance for injury and other complications. Unfortunately, even once that is identified, SOMETIMES I think a team considers what is best for the TEAM, despite the data and observations they might have regarding that pitcher's best interests.

I respectfully disagree. I will explain why.

 

Throwing a baseball effectively is not the result of exercise as much as it is due to a genetic pre-disposition. In other words, you're born with the ability to throw a fastball. Unlike working out, where pretty much anyone with the right diet and exercise regimen can be an adonis, pitching is not the same. It is basically the flexibility in the tendons and ligaments and their elasticity in the elbow and shoulder.

 

This is not to say that you can't improve it to a degree, but it is generally a product of genetics.

 

The propensity for injury is best correlated by the number of times this activity takes place. Most injuries happen when the pitcher is fatigued, and a pitcher is fatigued more as he logs more pitches in his arm. This is pretty much common sense, regardless of other factors. A base-line truth, so to speak.

 

A better example would have been runners. Starting pitchers are marathon-runners, while relievers are sprinters. By their very nature, starting pitchers/runners need a longer period of rest between activities, to allow the body to heal and to rest and recover. You can't go out and run a marathon every day. Relivers/sprinters often exert more energy in a short period of time, however, their recovery period is shorter. You can relieve pretty much every day, and you can sprint every day.

 

However, the total amount of pitches/distance run is the biggest factor in predicting injury probabilities. Somehow, ORS found the only Doctor who disagreed with logic. :thumbsup:

 

Jab aside, I respectfully believe that your analogy is not very accurate.

[CrespoBlows]

 

Jab aside, I respectfully believe that your analogy is not very accurate.

 

I didn't quote the rest of your argument, because I didn't read it, but it's idiotic, strawman, or both. However, I'll give you chance to come away from this without looking totally clueless.

 

Papelbon is a starting pitcher, and that's a strawman.

 

LOL!

[Gom]

I didn't quote the rest of your argument, because I didn't read it, but it's idiotic, strawman, or both. However, I'll give you chance to come away from this without looking totally clueless.

 

Papelbon is a starting pitcher, and that's a strawman.

 

LOL!

 

What? I don't understand what you're trying to say. Papelbon is a starting pitcher? Huh?

 

Someone please explain.

[CrespoBlows]

Papelbon is a starting pitcher?

 

Someone please explain.

 

I give you the point where you say Papelbon is a starting pitcher. You have been consistent on this.

 

I didn't quote the rest of your post, because it was idiotic, strawman, or both.

[Gom]

I give you the point where you say Papelbon is a starting pitcher. You have been consistent on this.

 

I didn't quote the rest of your post, because it was idiotic, strawman, or both.

 

Ok...you were making the analogy of pitchers being weight-lifters, and I was saying they were more like runners. That's all. I tried to make an analogy like you did...but when I do it, it's idiotic, strawman, or both?

 

That makes sense, I guess. :thumbdown

[CrespoBlows]

Ok...you were making the analogy of pitchers being weight-lifters' date=' and I was saying they were more like runners. That's all. I [b']tried[/b] to make an analogy like you did...but when I do it, it's idiotic, strawman, or both?

 

That makes sense, I guess. :thumbdown

 

You're failing Gom. What is it about you and failure?

[Gom]

You're failing Gom. What is it about you and failure?

 

You're an idiot. You made a s***** analogy stressing weight-lifting as a reason for pitchers. I tried another one as runners, showing the wear and tear on the joints. You're f***ing clueless.

 

According to you, if you bust your ass multiple times a week, you'll get better. Moron. Go back to sleep.

[yankees228]

Yea' date=' I'm sure he is but he still left open the possibility that the hip could fail him by saying he's 85-90% sure he can make it through the season. Time will tell...[/quote']

 

Yeah, absolutely. Believe me, I understand the value of a good debate, even while knowing that a conclusion will not be reached. But I just felt that this was one that wasn't worth having simply because a man much more qualified than any of us shared his opinion, but as you said anything can happen, and none of us really have a clue about what will happen.

[yankees228]

You're an idiot. You made a s***** analogy stressing weight-lifting as a reason for pitchers. I tried another one as runners, showing the wear and tear on the joints. You're f***ing clueless.

 

According to you, if you bust your ass multiple times a week, you'll get better. Moron. Go back to sleep.

 

I may really be missing something, but I don't think crespo was the one who made that analogy.

[CrespoBlows]

 

Go back to sleep.

 

I didn't quote the rest of your argument because it was idiotic, strawman, or both. However, I'll give you a chance to come away from this without looking totally clueless.

[Gom]

You've gotta stop hitting that bong Crespo.

[CrespoBlows]

You've gotta stop hitting that bong Crespo.

 

I actually took that from one of your pathetic responses to ORS. How did you manage to lose against your own words? It only took three posts, too.

 

That's f***ing incredible.

[ORS]

The runner analogy is a very poor one in that the end conclusion is that more running is more likely to result in more injuries. This is wrong. It's more likely the distance runner suffers from a specific type of injury associated with wear and tear, but sprinters are far more proned to other types, specifically muscle injuries as the activity is much more intense. Papelbon's issue was the shoulder muscles weren't holding the shoulder joint together. The "logic" Gom is unable to see is the connection between the more intense activity and muscle failure.

 

Speaking of logic, it's comical how often Gom uses that word and incorrectly assigns it to his position. There is no logical system into which his trains of thought will fit. Let's look at a simple Aristotilian example:

 

I like flowers.

Roses are flowers.

I like roses.

 

This is true. All of me likes all flowers. All roses are part of all flowers. Therefore, all of me likes all roses. But what about....

 

I like flowers.

I am tall.

Tall people like flowers.

 

This is false. All of me likes all flowers, however, I am only one person out of many who is tall, and the conclusion is an "all" statement.

 

Here's a mathematical example, probably the most simple that everyone has seen.

 

A=B

B=C

therefore, A=C

 

Gom's would be something akin to this.

 

Gom likes flowers.

No connecting statement

ORS is afraid of clowns.

 

Seriously, he doesn't connect the first statement to the last. And, true to Gom-form, the last is an arbitrary insult.

 

Logic? Certainly not.