re: The health staff will limit this team

So, what you're saying is you don't know if they lied to us. Got it, thanks.

6.9 days is an average, it could be longer, it's not the case for every single grade 1 strain. Now factor in him being sick and not knowing how long for or how much that affected rehab, and it's pretty clear the team never gave us a return timetable, so you were never proven right about anything you're claiming.

quote:

---

6.9 days with a 9% of reinjury rate.

---

So BI sat out 20 days and everyone is in agreement he didn't look 100% even on a 25 minutes restriction.

Maybe, just maybe, we don't actually have any basis to make these judgements because we have no access to BI's recovery benchmarks or imaging, and, it's clear based on what we saw yesterday, he was not close to 100% after 6.9 days because he still isnt back to form after 20.

6.9 is a statistical average, a quick look at the Mayo Clinic on Grade 1 hamstring injuries shows a recovery window of 2 days to 4 weeks. BI's return was within that window and to draw any conclusion beyond that about rushed or conservative is to engage in baseless speculation

quote:

---

Based on how the normal population responds clinically

---

Again, you've already admitted the team is not 100% transparent with the severity of injuries, but you are CHOOSING to take that at face value to make this argument stick. Using what you know to be questionable information and taking it at face value and then drawing conclusions based on non-expert, knowingly questionable information

Seems flawed no?

And lets also be clear here, the way the Pels report things, Zion aside, is how the league does it writ large. How sports largely does it. We should all by now know this

I'm glad we are at least at the part you admit you have no credible basis to make any of these statements

quote:

---

But, trust me, it is 100% okay to be questioning the timelines of these injuries based on the reported injury

---

Dr. Pistol, you’ve already stated that they aren’t being completely honest with the reporting, so how can you use that as a base to question anything?

Unless of course you’re on the medical team and disagree with how it’s being handled. I doubt that’s the case though.

quote:

---

you’ve already stated that they aren’t being completely honest with the reporting, so how can you use that as a base to question anything?

---

Because BI did not leave a game with a significant hamstring injury. He also did not leave a game with a significant hip injury earlier in the season, which set us on a huge losing streak. I have already said it is based on the mechanism of injury, severity of injury when it happened, and the reporting from the team. Could it be an issue with reporting? Absolutely. But the reporting seems to be more in line with the injury in this case.

quote:

---

2nd goalpost shift we've seen from you now.

---

Never moved any goal post, Jack

"—-are they lying? Where the new update?"

Posted on 3/22/22

Dr. Pistol, I never claimed to have experience in this area. What makes you qualified to come to that answer? I’ve played sports and know injuries feel worse a few hours later than when they happen.

quote:

---

Neither of us know anything outside of what is reported. I see team's report Grade 1, 2, 3 etc. hamstring injuries all the time. So yes, I do think it was noteworthy that it was that it was termed "hamstring soreness" as opposed to something else. Also, we do know that BI did not leave a game early nor did he have any noticeable injury in his last game before the injury. Using this and the team's reporting of "hamstring soreness" helped form my opinion on this matter.

What are you basing a more severe injury that required a three week rehab on other than the fact that he was held out for 10 games?

This is a message board for discussion. It is more than fair to take the side of this organization has been extra cautious in return from injury at times this year. If Trey doesn't go crazy in the second half last night, this discussion would have a much different tone.

---

You dont see the inherent problem from admitting that your conclusions are drawn from unreliable information and general ignorance of the necessary facts, or expertise to interpret the facts, to draw an informed conclusion and yet still deciding to favor a particular narrative?

And I never said it was a more severe injury, we don't know. We do know the initial reporting was soreness, which changed after further evaluation to essentially a a grade 1, which has a recovery window of a few days to several weeks. We also know that BI was not 100% last night, so the idea they just held him out for extra precaution appears entirely baseless.

We also know that several players have played despite being questionable or still having some lingering issues. Including two last night.

And I will point out again, we also know none of us have the requisite expertise or access to medical records to determine what sort of recovery schedule and return to activity qualifies as aggressive, conservative, or industry standard. So any claim that it is one or the other is entirely uninformed and speculative.

But what we do have is results over a long period, and on the long-term results Nelson has proven himself to keep teams healthier than the average.

quote:

---

If Trey doesn't go crazy in the second half last night, this discussion would have a much different tone.

---

Only because this board has a tendency to be hyper reactionary and have extreme swings in emotions and is always looking to point fingers after losses, which leads to interesting threads that make a lot of people look silly in hindsight.