ptatc

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Sep 12, 2011 -> 06:05 PM) That one reliever blew up his elbow due to steroids. Pulling a muscle off the bone seems possible. Take it easy with the attacks. I truly don't believe you'll last long here. What usually happens with steriods is that the muscle is so strong that there is an avulsion fracture. This is where the force is so great that the muscle pulls off a piece of bone. Of course you can tear the tendon off the bone but from my experience it is more likely that the piece of bone comes off.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 2, 2011 -> 10:44 AM) I think Torborg did a better job with less talent. Possibly. I really did like him. He was a better in game manager for sure. He had robin and Frank and a decent pitching staff. No one thought much of what Ozzie had in 2005 prior to the year. I still go by wins and nobody has won like Ozzie.

I think Ozzie is a good (not great) manager. He is the best manager the Sox have had in decades, although that really isn't saying much. All that being said I think he has worn out his welcome and it's time for him to go. He will go on and be successful in Florida or wherever and it will drive me nuts but he has finally convinced me that it's time to go.

QUOTE (buhbuhburrrrlz @ Aug 16, 2011 -> 06:36 PM) He just said on CSN they'll re-evaluate in 10 days. If it's not healing correctly he'll probably need surgery and would be out for the year. Then it most likely is the scaphoid, lunate or capitate. Those are the three bones which are the most important to wrist function. The most commonly fractured is the scaphoid which is the one that Quentin fractured a couple of years ago.

QUOTE (bobryansson @ Aug 16, 2011 -> 04:34 PM) You misread. I include "scaphoid" after "others," as in the ones that sometimes don't heal as well, so require more careful observation & follow-up. That being said, what you say is true. And not to get pissy here, well, ok, to get pissy, the scariest problem with scaphoid fractures is with nonunion and avascular necrosis. The blood supply is mostly from the far to the near end and a fracure in the middle can disrupt the blood supply to the near end. When this happens the fracture can fail to heal and the fracture fragment at the near end can die. Whether we love or hate AJP, we'd like for this to not happen to him. Correct the AVN is the most serious problem that could occur. The resultant loss of stability and ROM will be the problem that AJ would need to deal with. However, if it was the scaphoid and the medical staff was worried about this, he probably would be scheduled for surgery and have a screw put in. Since they haven't done this and put him only on the 15 day DL my guess is that it isn't a significant fracture in the scaphoid.

QUOTE (bobryansson @ Aug 16, 2011 -> 03:40 PM) Has anyone published which bone? Some fractures (triquetral) heal more quickly with less risk than others (scaphoid/navicular). The scaphoid doesn't really heal faster, it's just that who have to be more careful with the immobilization. The scaphoid is shaped like a peanut and fractures usually occur in the middle, thinner part. The bone is really important to the wrist motion so you have to immobilize it longer to make sure you don't lose range of motion, this would be terrible for a ballplayer. This usually occurs in more obvious fractures, however it can occur in harder to detect ones.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 16, 2011 -> 03:16 PM) That isn't unusual in the wrist. There are a lot of small bones, plus I am sure there was a ton of swelling in the area. You're right. X-rays are usually inconclusive in the wrist. The standard protocol is to wait a few days and do a bone scan or CT later to determine if the is a fracture. Good news is that it's likely a small one so it's probably only about a 3 week immobilization period. Could be as much a 6 but those are rare.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Aug 16, 2011 -> 10:41 AM) Yea, I've thought about this. I'm in the club level to try to minimize the chances of this...and if the baby gets loud or something I can take her in so shes not bothering people. I always brought a glove to make sure I could stop the ball before it got to the child. If you are in the club seats where the sun is on you, be sure to bring something to cover the child. It amazing what the sun even that late in the evening can do to a child's skin.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 14, 2011 -> 10:46 PM) I sense the general feeling is Humber hasn't been very good of late and I've read a lot of comments indicating he's spent, or out of gas. To the pitching experts, maybe ptatc ... is this natural? What are the technical reasons for his being spent at this time? Can we expect his arm to be all strong next season at this same juncture? Or will he be spent after the all-star break again? I'm just wondering why his reaching a certain amount of innings is suddenly the reason for his being not as effective as the first half. If we are to assume his arm is fatigued because he's pitched more innings than ever before ... my question is, when can we expect him to be able to pitch into August, September, October effectively? Would that be next year? Never? I truly would love to be enlightened on arm strength. Pretty much what the other replies says is accurrate. Pitching is like any other physical activity, you need to train to do it efficiently and have increased endurance. Compare it to running. You can't train at a 5K distance and expect to finish a marathon without struggling with form and cause tissue breakdown with injury. You need to slowly build up. You can do cross training like bike riding to help some but it won't get you in the best form possible. Humber could continue to pitch regularly but it will add extra stress on his arm and cause him to be inconsistent with his form. This generally doesn't turn out well.He needs either more rest or going to the pen to decrease the amount of work. Peavy is the same but different story. He needs to throw to build strength to go deeper in games. His decrease in performance after 75-80 pitches has been discussed but the solution isn't as straight forward due to the unique injury. He needs to throw to build strength so you don't want to limit his pitches. However, no one knows how long or if the strength will return to do this. This has been the X factor with him all along. Everyone knew he would throw again and he did it in a reasonale time table. What non one knew and still doesn't know is how long it will take for the lat strength and subsequent shoulder motion to return. Most professional athletes say that it takes 18 months after major surgery to feel "near normal" again. They return usually around 9-12 months after but need to re-acclimate the body to sports again. The only way to do this is to participate in the sport but it can be a frustrating process with performance

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 11, 2011 -> 08:35 AM) Moron. And as far as other organizations go, the Bears required season ticket holders to pay for their seats months and months ago, despite no evidence that there would even be a season this year. I'm sure it was going towards operating expenses while the players were locked out. And Greg, you remind me of the guy in the Geico commercial that's been living under a rock. It is much worse for the Bears. They said with the payment invoice that they had up to 60 days after each game was supposed to be played to refund our money for that game. The Bears are a much more stingy and poorly run organization than the Sox ever have been. But I continue to get season tickets there as well. I enjoy going to sporting events live.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 11, 2011 -> 08:29 AM) That's good to know, I'll take that option. Apparently, I'm a moron. I've been a season ticket holder since 2004, and I don't plan to give that up because of this season. And since we've moved into a primo location for our section, and I don't want to lose it, I'll be renewing, which means paying the postseason invoice. Moron here as well. I like the seats I have as well. I look at it as more of a payment plan than anything else. I was going to keep the season tickets anyway so this isn't extra money just an earlier down payment.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Aug 10, 2011 -> 04:58 PM) You can get a refund I believe or apply it to next season. I will not be doing either. If you take the refund option you lose your season ticket seat and senoirty.

There was a show in the late 80's or early 90's called the Nutt House. It was histerical. Cloris Leachman ran this old hotel. The bits were great. It was produced by Mel Brooks I believe. It lasted less than a season.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 9, 2011 -> 03:42 PM) Can you actually worsen a damaged nerve in your leg? Or is it one of those things that "if can handle the pain you can play through it" type of situations? Yes you can. The most likely nerve that would be damaged is the common peroneal nerve which winds around the top part of the fibula. If you feel the outside of your knee it is the large bump you feel. It is very superficial and it very susceptible to compression injuries at this point. This nerve innervates all of the muscle which lift your foot. An injury here can cause "drop foot." It is difficult to run or even walk with this condition. He could hit because his foot is planted but couldn't control the foot once it's off the ground. The nerve is commonly injured in 2 ways. It can be hit directly which causes a neuropraxia and the nerve needs to heal. You need to not stretch it by keeping the knee and ankle from going to either end of range of motion. The other way is the inflammation from a bruise is compressing the nerve causing similar problems. To heal this you need to calm down the inflammation. This is usually done with meds and rest. It's possible they triend the meds and it wasn't helping as much as they wanted so they added more rest time. I'm not positive this is the nerve involved but it's the most likely. Regardless of the nerve involved, the treatment is usually the same.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 8, 2011 -> 03:13 PM) So we have established that players' performance may be impacted by negative treatment from fans. The statistical evidence in our sample size (this season) doesn't show much of a correlation. Statistical evidence is much more representative of what actually occurs during baseball games than Ptatc's anecdotal evidence. All we need now is Robert Stack and we can have our own episode of "Unsolved Mysteries." don't go there unless you've run a power analysis to determine what sample size you need. If you are truly going to run stats that is the first step. Nothing else matters until you've done that. Any statistical analysis is invalid until you know what sample size is needed. Afterall who ever heard of looking at a person's behaviour with a qualitaive study as opposed to a quantitative study? Everyone. How do you know that a players performance wouldn't have improve if they weren't booed. How do you know that a players performance wouldn't have decreased if they weren't cheered and given more confidence? Your numbers will not tell you any of those factors. Qualitative information will tell you more about a person than the qualitaitve analysis.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 8, 2011 -> 03:02 PM) Everything sounded extremely anecdotal as far as I gathered. he didn't say how many or who he actually talked to and what specifically was discussed. How you turned that into "fans booing is the reason we suck at home" is beyond me. If you really want to know it's the Milwaukee Brewers from 1987-1989 and the Florida Marlins minor league system from 1994-1996. There are too many players to list but if you look up the rosters you can put the names in. As to what was specifically discussed it was everyday during the season while I was working with them, the injured ones more than the healthy ones but usually everyone on the team at least once a day during the season. However, I'm sure there are numbers somewhere that'll say that I just can't figure out how a person feels when he is talking to you. I know you don't feel (sorry I can't tell how you feel by a discussion) I know you don't think that how people treats others effects them or how they go about their daily lives but it does. I don't know why I feel the need to defend this but the players are people and their performance is effected on how they are treated. It of course is not an entire team as everyone is different and reacts differently. But to deny that the players are effected by how they are treated is wrong. I've said all I can, take it for what it's worth.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 8, 2011 -> 02:53 PM) I would have sworn we've covered this already in today's class. There is little to no statistical evidence to prove what you're arguing, which isn't surprising, because as someone else has pointed out, it is most likely only noise statistically. In fact, the players who show the largest disparity between home and road are those who don't get negative treatment at home at all. Finally, the player you swear revels in negative treatment, because "he talks about it alot," AJ, is by far a better player at home this season than on the road. another factor you may be missing is the press. Fans aren't the only ones telling them how bad they are. It's in every paper, it's on the news, it's on the colbert report. Do you think that magically the player forgets everything when they are on the road. Geography makes them forget how they were treated yesterday. This is only about home and road. Human behaviour is not tied to timeframes either. I never said that is was only home or only away just that players talk about it and are effected by it. I know you don't agree but people are influenced by the reaction of others around them.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 8, 2011 -> 02:46 PM) The problem is you really have no quantifiable information to prove anything. Hanging out in the locker room does not prove a thing. When players hang their head and are dejected by the way the fans treat them, it effects them. Human behaviour is rarely quantifiable and if you think it can be your wrong. No I don't have numbers to prove that behaviour can change numbers. But you can see by a player's body language if he is confident and ready or unfocused and not ready. You cannot judge everything by number. Not everything is a quantitative study when it comes to people most studies are qualitative in nature. This is because people cannot be reduced to numbers. The players aren't open about this in the locker room where it can be heard and disseminated by reporters or many others there. However, in the training room where no one else is allowed they will talk about it and let loose. I did more than hang out in a locker room I worked with these guys for hours everyday and got to know them quite well. They would tell us stuff they wouldn't even tell the coaches. Believe what your numbers say but player performance is influenced by fans reactions.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 8, 2011 -> 02:37 PM) No. Most people would agree with you. And most are wrong. Working at a university I find that to be the case most often. Most people take a little bit of information and perceive it to mean whatever they want. Instead of getting all of the information and allowing everything to form a a more inclusive picture.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 8, 2011 -> 01:54 PM) If he wants others to show up to watch in my building he's going to have to buy the beer. This is getting better and better... Only if we get to throw it at you.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 8, 2011 -> 01:48 PM) So who is going to let me berate them at work to test out and see if this theory holds any water? Don't forget to do it out in the middle of a room where everyone else can see them and the focus is on them. Also make an announcement before hand so everyone knows that person will be out there alone.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 8, 2011 -> 01:36 PM) First of all, that really says nothing about what is really going on in his mind when he is playing... And secondly, that is exactly my point. There is really no causal link anyone can establish between the fans' behavior and the player's performance. I would guess there is a larger incidence of referees/umpires falling victim to the influence of the fans and having an impact than the players... when dealing with people there is rarely conclusive evidence to say anything in terms of causal relationships unless you run a true double blind, random sample study. In MLB clubhouses the players will talk about how they are treated by fans. It effects players in different ways. It can effect their play if they take it personally. I've seen it happen to many players in slumps. Players do react to fans. Remember when a white sox player went into the stand in Milwaukee because of what a fan said? It does effect them and can effect their play.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 8, 2011 -> 01:37 PM) But they didn't start booing until June. So you're telling me the team just sucked for some mysterious reason in April and May, was about to completely turn things around but the fans stopped that from occurring because they started to occasionally boo? No. What I'm saying is that once the players were playing bad, they fans booed them. Booing effects players and this can contribute to a players performance. I'm not saying it caused the whole year. I've even said it is no way the only reason they are playing poorly. all I'm saying is that fans effect the players and this can effect their performance. To think otherwise is short sighted and wrong. These are prima donna people not robots.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 8, 2011 -> 01:32 PM) But does he really? He has a .604 OPS on the road and an .817 OPS at home.... If you had ever met him, you would know he does. He talks about it alot.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Aug 8, 2011 -> 01:29 PM) Why does Rios have better numbers at home if he's getting booed? They certainly aren't good numbers so maybe they would be better. This is not a black and white variable that you can apply to everyone in every situation like so many like to do. All I'm saying is that if spent any amount of time in a MLB clubhouse, you would know that the fans can do do effect players which in turn can effect their play.