ptatc

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Mar 23, 2010 -> 10:09 PM) When did he have a knee problem? I know he's had 2 surgeries on his right elbow, a strained calf, Plantar Fasciitis, the strained oblique and some lower back problems early in '06 but the only problem he's had with his knee that I'm aware of was a contusion from sliding in '08. I'm not disagreeing with you or anything, I'm just curious for the sake of continuity. Wasn't the oblique injury a red flag? I can't find the knee problem now that I look back. I thought a previous chronic soft tissue injury was the knee. Must have been the recurrent elbow problems. The number of chronic soft tissue injuries was my point.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 23, 2010 -> 08:44 AM) Pujols is having back spasms, went in for an MRI, got an anti-inflammation shot. There's very little possibility that they use an injection for muscle spasms in a professional athlete. The injection was to decrease inflammation around a nerve. The muscle spasms are there to protect the nerves from the instability in the spine. He could be in some trouble this year. PS. Hmmmm lots of soft tissue injuries (knee, plantar fasciitis) progressing to lower back problems. Sounds a lot like what happened to McGwire.

QUOTE (knightni @ Mar 21, 2010 -> 04:34 PM) I wonder if the pin in his elbow has loosened due to his violent curve and his velocity is down because of it... If this happened it would show up as elbow pain and difficulty with his breaking pitches more than the fastball. If anything he seems to be throwing more breaking pitches than before.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 21, 2010 -> 10:10 AM) Alex Rios' contract has no merit? I just stated facts. KW said he had a trade for a pitcher that could have made his rotation the best ever. He said they ran into a problem with an extension. These are facts. I said not having to owe $60 million to Rios probably would have helped with the extension. I also said maybe not, because it may not have been the extension. Perhaps Halladay or whoever it was just said no. IIRC, Halladay has a NTC. I also love how you rip me for speculating, then speculate yourself. As for spending, the White Sox have recently spent a lot more money on starting pitching if you break it down $/player than any other position. 2006 the only 2 players on the roster being paid more than the 5 starters were Thome and half of his salary was being paid by Philadelphia, and Konerko who was a post season star for a championship team. Konerko at that stage was owed about the same as Rios is right now. If KW was at least semi- prepared to make a deal with Halladay or whatever pitcher it was that was going to make his rotation the best of all-time in his words, I'm sure he knew it would cost a pretty penny not only prospect-wise, but money-wise as well. Adrian Gonzalez, if the Sox somehow get him, is going to be just as expensive, if not more if they want to extend him. Rios has a lot to live up to. Paying someone $60 million for 5 years is expecting he will perform a lot better than an average player. He needs to be better than the "well he's better than Dewayne Wise" thoughts. I don't see where 25 or so spring training ABs shows he's ready to live up to his end of the deal. I hope he does, but nothing has been answered yet. I'd bet the ranch if he was placed on waivers, he wouldn't be claimed. If he was making $1 million a year, he most certainly would be claimed. His contract has plenty of merit. I would bet that if this was truly the case it had more to do with the length of the contract. The Sox have shown they will offer pitchers good money it's usually the length of the contract with which they have a problem.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 18, 2010 -> 08:04 AM) Thank you for helping my point. The results and numbers have nothing to do with it. If you havent SEEN Andruw Jones play, you cant make one call or the other on how he looks based on ST numbers. Of course based on how he is hitting the ball to all fields, staying back in his stance instead of the pull happy out in front approach he's been taking the last few years, I would say he is a much improved player and could be in for a good year. You can get excited when you see CLEAR changes in the way a player looks and is approaching the game, which has NOTHING to do with the actual numbers which was my point. If you havent seen the guy, your only negative or positive feeling is going to be based on stats on a sheet, which is irrelevant. This can't be true. Greg Walker is the hitting coach and he only teaches lift and pull.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 17, 2010 -> 11:09 AM) There's no "baseball related" reason on their roster to release him. The only replacements on their roster as OF's are Justin Maxwell (Kinda young, career .793 minor league OPS), Chris Duncan, Willie Harris (group 4!), Willie Taveras, or moving another player there. The "baseball" related reason is that he wasn't worth the headaches for the "baseball" organization.

I don't know if it was posted elsewhere but Elijah Dukes being released by the Nats was a little surprise. I would have thought they could have gotten a bag of balls for him. Edit: Never mind, I see it in the MLB catch all thread

QUOTE (danman31 @ Mar 16, 2010 -> 03:26 PM) Yes, that does sound like it was on the lower end of the scale in terms of starting rehab. I would like to know why rehab is expected to take 4+ months though. That is actually a fairly short course of rehab for this extensive damage. The reason it takes time is its important function in supporting the arch. There are two factors here. 1) With 5-7 weeks of rest the tendon will become very weak. The strength of the tendon will increase as stress is added and strengthening of the muscle begins. It takes at least 6 weeks to add true strength to the muscle so as its strengthening the tendon will as well. So, its 6 weeks to increase strength and the rest to regain baseball activities. 2) There is also regaining the proprioception which is the body's unconscious awareness of control. When you tear this tendon that is vitally important in foot control he will lose this control. He is going to need to re-learn this control. Balance training will be the focus here. The time table for this part is variable but should fit in this rehab schedule.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 16, 2010 -> 02:01 PM) So if he is starting rehab that quickly, it must mean the tear ended up being the lesser of the two evils, I take it? Most likely. The tear was either off the bone or near the terminal end of the tendon.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Mar 16, 2010 -> 10:13 AM) 1. Total bulls***. AJ has 2-3 years left at least and if the Sox have any sense at all they'll extend him so we don't have to watch some roided-out return of the Mark Johnson/Brook Fordyce/Ben Davis/Josh Paul/Miguel Olivo/etc. Black Hole of Youth swallow this team for another decade or so. 2. You've finally outed yourself as an impostor. The real Hawk Harrelson loves AJ even more than I do. The real Hawk also lives near AJ in Florida and has been a fan ever since he watched AJ play high school baseball. 3. AJ exemplifies the new era of White Sox baseball. AJ deserves to retire as a member of the Sox organization and then he needs to become a coach so he can show all these little f***ers coming up through the minor league system what it means to wear the black and white. 4. Any "Sox fan" who talks s*** about AJ needs to check the hat on his skull because it probably says Cubs or Twins. I would disagree with this if you look at the whole picture. He does not exemplify White Sox baseball. He is a very good player and I like to watch him play, however, you can be a good player without being a complete a** to everyone around you. Your attitude doesn't need to be carried off the field. If you want all of the minor leaguers to treat everyone like sh**, then he's your guy. He will never be a coach because no one will be able to stand the guy.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 15, 2010 -> 08:52 AM) Interesting. So the obvious question would be is this a "better" or "worse" than the Ventura injury in terms of recovery potential? Do you think Mitchell will still have the same overall potential after his recovery? Mitchell's problem is more of an unknown. If the surgery and rehab goes well, he has the potential of having no lingering effects. If it is a difficult surgery and rehab he has the potential of having any number of lingering issues from tendonosis to biomechanical foot pain which could hamper his performance. The navicular bone to which the tendon in question attaches is the keystone of the arch of the foot. If it doesn't do it's job properly the whole foot is effected. Look at Frank Thomas this is the bone which he broke and really couldn't run for the rest of his career. Ventura's injury was certain to cause lingering issues. Whenever you damage a the ankle so severly to dislocate it, there is major damage to many tissues and the joint. The ankle joint rarely regains full range of motion and free movement. This would really decrease the adavantage in the speed game. It Ventura's case this wasn't a big deal but it probably decreased his qucikness and range to the opposite side of the injured ankle. In mitchell's case this injury would have hampered his speed game.

I had to bump this thread. Here is a quote from an his article today: "It's the same basic injury Robin Ventura suffered in a slide at home plate in the spring of 1997. It proved only a minor setback for Ventura, who would play in the World Series with the 2000 Mets, but he wasn't fast before his injury. Mitchell's value is based, in a large part, around his speed. Ventura fractured and dislocated a joint. This is an injury which involves 3 bones and the joint articulation. Mitchell ruptured a tendon and didn't dislocate a joint. Other than both injuries occurring below the knee they have absolutely nothing in common. They aren't even the same anatomic structures. He obviously did no research on the injuries and just threw it out there because they are both severe injuries around the foot.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Mar 13, 2010 -> 11:55 AM) He'll be fine, but you'd think he lost his leg by the overreaction going on around here. He should be with the medical staff the White Sox have but it is far from certainty.

QUOTE (chisoxfan09 @ Mar 13, 2010 -> 11:48 AM) PTATC, could this injury be potentially similar or worse than an Achilles tendon tear? Much worse. Achilles tendon repairs are usually successful and if there is residual pain it's isolated to the tendon. If there is a residual problem with this tendon it not only effects the tendon but many other structures as well. I mention how it supports the arch so foot problems are a worry. Also, this tendon goes through the tarsal tunnel, if you've heard of carpal tunnel syndrome in the wrist/hand, it's a similar structure. If the tendon gets inflamed it can cause numbness/tingling/pain in the bottom of the foot. This will be a very tricky surgery/rehab.

QUOTE (quickman @ Mar 13, 2010 -> 08:15 AM) where is PTAC. He is a doctor and I don't think he has chimed in here. I think when the kid is suppose to play on an MLB team he will. Right now this doesn't effect our ballclub. If the padres want to trade in mid year I am sure he is still valuable, considering he wouldn't play MLB for another or two. This is a potentially very serious injury. One of the primary functions of the posterior tibialis tendon is to support the arch of the foot. If this tendon isn't functioning properly it could lead to chronic foot problems such as plantar fasciitis. This is the main concern. If the tendon avulsed from the bone the re-attachment should be fairly easy. If the tear is in the middle of the tendon it is much more difficult. Repairing the actual tendon is like tying two pieces of spaghetti together. They would probably use a type of metal augmentation device to strengthen it. Hopefully it avulsed off the bone and there is an improved chance that he will have no lingering problems. We will know by how soon they allow him to run on it. Either way it's a 3 to 8 month injury from surgery to rehab to return to play. It will be toward the early end if it came off the bone toward the latter end if it tore mid substance. Just for the record, I'm not a doctor, I'm a physical therapist and athletic trainer by profession.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Mar 2, 2010 -> 01:58 PM) I agree, for the most part, the divisions are logical (regional). If teams move like Detroit, KC, or Tampa move, then i can see some minor adjustments (shifts within the league). For example, if the Rays moved to Vegas, then I could see them moving into the West and leave it as that, or move Texas to the Central and Cleveland to the East. The only way a "radical" realignment happens is if the DH is either abolished by the AL or adopted by the NL. Then you can do some major whole sale changes to create "hyper-regional" match ups (an Idea I love by the way). In a situation like that, you clump teams like the Brewers, Cubs, Sox, Twins, Royals, and Twins in one division. So, for the sake of some fun, here is my "Hyper-Regional" Realignment (it still has some flaws I need to work out)- D1 - Yankees, Boston, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Mets, Washington D2 - Detroit, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Toronto D3 - Minnesota, Sox, Kansas City, St. Louis, Cubs, Milwaukee D4 - Tampa Bay, Florida, Atlanta D5 - Texas, Houston, Arizona, Colorado D6 - Angels, Seattle, Oakland, Dodgers, San Francisco, San Diego Note, i did NOT give the divisions names or leagues. In a massive realignment scenario, there would be a LOT of politics as to what divisions go in what league. One thing to look at is you can't have teams from the same geographic TV market in the same division like Sox/Scrubs, Yankees/Mets/ Giants/A's. The TV audience draws more if they have different teams to play and are viewedas interleague rivals. Football does it as well with the Giants/Jets. It's not realistic to put them in the same "league" or "division" or however you want to describe it.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Mar 9, 2010 -> 11:04 AM) Losing Nathan allows them to shift a guy like Rauch or Guerrier into the closers spot, while letting another one of their 5th starter candidates to make the team. Rauch and Guerrier are by no means Nathan-esque, but they are pitchers who can be inserted into the role and trusted to produce at least league-average results out of the closers role. Their obligation will be to usually pitch one inning a performance, my understanding has always been that one inning shouldn't be too much to ask of any pitcher. Since his shift to the bullpen Nathan has averaged 63.375 innings per year, innings that can be assumed by other members of the pen. It’s unlikely the Twins will get equivalent production, but that’s not fatal. Nathan was a great pitcher, but greatness is not a requirement for the closer’s spot. Losing Nathan might cost them a couple solid performances in the 9th, but as a rule: a closer’s job varies in it’s important on a nightly basis, often with the more important innings falling to the set-up-man. The Twins will take a hit here, but that’s not enough to rule them out of the race. I hope that didn’t’ seem like a lecture, I just needed to put the case out their without leaving anything out. I understand what you are saying and it's true that it doesn't seem like it should be very difficult. But it is. However, the difference is the room for error. The closer will come in when the game is on the line. If the replacement is just a little worse which is probable because Nathan is one of the best, the Twins will lose that game. That inning which shouldn't be difficult lost them a game because the manager put them in that position. So, if the closer has only 5 more bad innings than Nathan that would 5 more loses. The closers positions as you stated pitches comparatively few innings. However, the pitcher placed in that position puts all of the pressure for the game on themselves and it is self generated pressure. The point could be made that if the team scored two more runs earlier in the game the closer's position would be as pressure filled. The fact is that the team didn't and the closer puts pressure on himself to convert 3 outs in a game where there is no room for error and most pitchers cannot deal with it. This is why the numbers of comparatively few innings that you state do not tell the whole story. Look at boston where Papelbon could be a top of the line starter but they keep him as a closer because he can handle it. Or the opposite end like LaTroy Hawkins who continues to put up good numbers as a set up man but folds as a closer. The pressure while self imposed is very real and makes those comparatively few innings very important. This dilemma is also created by the manager putting them in this position but that is a different discussion.

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Mar 9, 2010 -> 10:10 AM) This doesn't change that much. I’m not trying to make this issue a referendum on my opinions of the closer position, but I fail to see how losing a closer accounts for the large gap in offense between the two teams. This is good news for us, just not the biggest news we could have hoped for. Probably because you are only looking at it from one point of view. Offense Most managers put the closer in the 9th innings of close games. It doesn't mattter if the game is 2-1 because of their high powered offense. If Nathan's replacement loses 5 more games, our offense differential doesn't matter because they lost 5 more games. They still lose that many more games. Most closers get about 40 chances in close games. These are more chances to lose games.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 8, 2010 -> 08:27 AM) If he can't throw, there is no way he can hit at 100%. He probably can. That's the unique thing about the ulnar collateral ligament tear (tommy john). It only bothers you when you separate the inside of the elbow during motion. This happens during throwing because the shoulder and humerus are leading the forearm. It doesn't happen during hitting because holding onto the bat stabilizes the elbow and you only get elbow extension. You'll see in rehab protocols that people start hitting very early in the process but can't throw until near the end.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2010 -> 08:03 PM) Can you give me a single example of anyone ever getting HIV from a blood test for steroids? Especially at the professional athlete level? How many olympians, cyclists, etc., have gone through them without that issue? Compared to heavy abuse of HGH, for example? Let me clarify. I meant that it is a possiblitilty and that the union will use it to prevent that type of testing. I know of a few athletes who got infections, more to thier own carelessness after the test, but no one who got HIV. But the union will push that point hard to prevent blood testing since they got embarrased by having to add drug testing without giving much up.

QUOTE (flavum @ Feb 24, 2010 -> 12:51 PM) There are a lot of people against their employer taking their blood for any reason. There's a lot that can be learned by a blood test. Not to mention there are genuine health risks such as infections, HIV...etc.

QUOTE (danman31 @ Feb 24, 2010 -> 04:32 PM) Morel should have a more mature approach at the plate, he's 2 years older. Maturity of chronologic age and approach at the plate don't necessarily go together. However, he is older and should be more advanced and I think he is. (I'm trying to deadpan the dig because it was a good one )

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Feb 23, 2010 -> 04:53 PM) It's still crazy to me that Morel has jumped so much higher than Viciedo on some lists. I just don't see it, Dayan is still a much better prospect than Brent imo. I still like Morel from what I've seen. He has a better more mature approach at the plate than Viciedo and will be a better overall on defense as well. The only thing I think Viciedo does better than Morel is power.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 7, 2010 -> 11:44 AM) ^^^^ "hey kids, let's head to the Hall of Fame to see the greatest people to play baseball!" "But dad most of these guys did drugs, cheated, and a bunch of things you tell me not do??" "I guess that is what baseball and baseball fans are the most proud of . . ." shouldn't that be baseball writers? Aren't they the ones who vote then in?

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Feb 20, 2010 -> 04:33 PM) Yeah, and you can't win a game without a pitcher recording a "win", but that does not mean "wins" is a good stat for determining how good a pitcher is. He is saying RBIs are an overrated individual stat, which I agree with. i love it when this arguement starts each year. It really makes me feel that baseball is here.