Luis Robert right hip flexor injury

[Lip Man 1]

37 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

I don't believe any deal will bring back top prospects. If a team has the next A-Rod sitting at AA, they're going to keep him. And on the odd chance you do get a team to let go, you're buying high. I'd rather see more deals like the Cease deal. Three solid prospects, any of which could top out as a monster, and then 4 years of a very good reliever. 

 

Wilson may be traded as soon as this July. Can't see him staying for the length of his deal. 

[kitekrazy]

On 4/10/2024 at 11:16 AM, Lip Man 1 said:

Only if new ownership arrives there is a massive change over in the front office and millions and millions of dollars are spent on quality players will this happen.

Which means a new owner would have to know what they are doing.  Hiring may be even more difficult than firing.

[Lip Man 1]

2 hours ago, kitekrazy said:

Which means a new owner would have to know what they are doing.  Hiring may be even more difficult than firing.

Pretty hard to think any ownership group (it won't be a single guy probably a corporation) will be as bad. 

[southsider2k5]

27 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Pretty hard to think any ownership group (it won't be a single guy probably a corporation) will be as bad. 

When you look around baseball it isn't that hard to imagine.

[WestEddy]

1 hour ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Pretty hard to think any ownership group (it won't be a single guy probably a corporation) will be as bad. 

 

47 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

When you look around baseball it isn't that hard to imagine.

Did anybody watch the Disney+ Get Back series? This might be off-topic, but one of the things that really struck me was when John & Paul were talking about signing Billy Preston to Apple records so he could play on their records without record company permission. I think that would have also made his appearances cheaper. 

It was just that every young dude who owns his own company starts thinking about ways to cut corners, save money, and any new owner would waltz in thinking he's (she's) going to teach the industry a thing or two. 

[Lip Man 1]

53 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

When you look around baseball it isn't that hard to imagine.

Let's put it this way, speaking just for myself, I'm willing to take that gamble that new ownership won't be as tone-deaf both on and off the field when running the franchise. 

[southsider2k5]

 

[southsider2k5]

 

[T R U]

3 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

 

Why even rush it at this point. Mid may is like 2 weeks away anyways.

[chitownsportsfan]

10 minutes ago, T R U said:

Why even rush it at this point. Mid may is like 2 weeks away anyways.

I'd expect he'll be on a rehab assignment within three weeks and then if everything goes fine back in Chicago by first week of June or so. I figured this was closer to a 6 week thing than 10 so splitting the difference at 8 with early June.

Edited April 30 by chitownsportsfan

[nrockway]

28 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

 

Any MDs here? Is there some actual way to quantify the difference between "running at 80%" and "running at 90%" or is it arbitrary bro-science that gets players injured and re-injured? Bulls just s%*#-canned their "Director of Performance Health", ostensibly for mismanaging Lonzo Ball's injury for the last decade, maybe the Sox should follow suit. 

[TaylorStSox]

15 minutes ago, nrockway said:

Any MDs here? Is there some actual way to quantify the difference between "running at 80%" and "running at 90%" or is it arbitrary bro-science that gets players injured and re-injured? Bulls just s%*#-canned their "Director of Performance Health", ostensibly for mismanaging Lonzo Ball's injury for the last decade, maybe the Sox should follow suit. 

Ball's legs have been mismanaged his entire life by his crazy ass dad. The Bulls have been relatively healthy other than Ball and LaVine, whose injuries have been a problem for way longer than they've been associated with the Bulls. 

[chitownsportsfan]

1 minute ago, TaylorStSox said:

Ball's legs have been mismanaged his entire life by his crazy ass dad. The Bulls have been relatively healthy other than Ball and LaVine, whose injuries have been a problem for way longer than they've been associated with the Bulls. 

Yea Chicago has been relatively healthy. The Ball bros are just made of glass and Zach had an injury history before even getting to Chicago.

19 minutes ago, nrockway said:

Any MDs here? Is there some actual way to quantify the difference between "running at 80%" and "running at 90%" or is it arbitrary bro-science that gets players injured and re-injured? Bulls just s%*#-canned their "Director of Performance Health", ostensibly for mismanaging Lonzo Ball's injury for the last decade, maybe the Sox should follow suit. 

90% I'd think would refer to basically an all out sprint not in a game. So on a treadmill or under supervision on the field. 80% I'd think would basically refer to doing hard on field workouts a tick below all out. It sounds like he's pretty healthy imo and probably just tweaked the areas of the muscle around the previous injury. Yoan's sounds much worse, like Robert's last year with more of the muscle coming off the bone.

[cuban_sammiches]

4 minutes ago, TaylorStSox said:

Ball's legs have been mismanaged his entire life by his crazy ass dad. The Bulls have been relatively healthy other than Ball and LaVine, whose injuries have been a problem for way longer than they've been associated with the Bulls. 

Those Baller brand shoes are defective!

[nrockway]

17 minutes ago, TaylorStSox said:

Ball's legs have been mismanaged his entire life by his crazy ass dad. The Bulls have been relatively healthy other than Ball and LaVine, whose injuries have been a problem for way longer than they've been associated with the Bulls. 

the Bulls actually have a terrible track record with injuries and rushing guys back. This is the guy who managed a department that called Luol Deng soft and a wimp for not playing through a botched spinal tap that put his life in danger. The Ball reference was clearly a joke considering he hasn't even been in the NBA for a decade, but it's not correct to say that the Bulls manage their players' health effectively.

 

17 minutes ago, chitownsportsfan said:

Yea Chicago has been relatively healthy. The Ball bros are just made of glass and Zach had an injury history before even getting to Chicago.

90% I'd think would refer to basically an all out sprint not in a game. So on a treadmill or under supervision on the field. 80% I'd think would basically refer to doing hard on field workouts a tick below all out. It sounds like he's pretty healthy imo and probably just tweaked the areas of the muscle around the previous injury. Yoan's sounds much worse, like Robert's last year with more of the muscle coming off the bone.

sure, but why not 86.5% or 93.6%? The arbitrariness of it makes it seem pseudo, it doesn't exactly inspire confidence that they know when the right time is, it's essentially just a vibe check. I wonder if they ask LuBob to run to first base then show him a pain chart and ask him to point to the frowny face that best captures his mood.

[chitownsportsfan]

6 minutes ago, nrockway said:

sure,but why not 86.5% or 93.6%? The arbitrariness of it makes it seem pseudo, it doesn't exactly inspire confidence that they know when the right time is, it's essentially just a vibe check. I wonder if they ask LuBob to run to first base then show him a pain chart and ask him to point to the frowny face that best captures his mood.

Having been in many PT rooms both as patient and observer, I can tell you yes, this is a lot of the times what happens. Doctors and therapists can do diagnostic tests and run scans, but only the athlete knows what they are feeling and when they are feeling 100%.

There's a lot to rip on with the Sox. Not sure Luis Robert being injury prone (or Moncada and Eloy) is really on the training staff. At a certain point it's down to bad luck, the individual's ability to avoid injury, and not selecting injury prone players in the first place. Easier said than done.

Edited April 30 by chitownsportsfan

[Middle Buffalo]

1 hour ago, nrockway said:

Any MDs here? Is there some actual way to quantify the difference between "running at 80%" and "running at 90%" or is it arbitrary bro-science that gets players injured and re-injured? 

I’m not a doctor, but I live in AZ, so I’m pretty familiar with the Sox rehab process. To gauge running at 80%, they have the injured guy race local hero, Paul Konerko. If it’s close, injured guy is 80%. 

[chitownsportsfan]

2 minutes ago, Middle Buffalo said:

I’m not a doctor, but I live in AZ, so I’m pretty familiar with the Sox rehab process. To gauge running at 80%, they have the injured guy race local hero, Paul Konerko. If it’s close, injured guy is 80%. 

And get this: the race takes place in Paul's guest bathroom. He's got the room Stone Pony.

[ptatc]

2 hours ago, nrockway said:

Any MDs here? Is there some actual way to quantify the difference between "running at 80%" and "running at 90%" or is it arbitrary bro-science that gets players injured and re-injured? Bulls just s%*#-canned their "Director of Performance Health", ostensibly for mismanaging Lonzo Ball's injury for the last decade, maybe the Sox should follow suit. 

Not a doctor but have worked with athletes for 30 some years.

They can do it by watching the time and checking his time to first base when healthy.  This is usually the final step though.

Right now it's probably more the athletes reported level of exertion.

There is only so much that the medical staff can do. As much as we try with research there is a reason they say practice of medicine. Everyone's anatomy and physiology can vary. We can talk about averages and likelihood of injury and healing but the athletes anatomy, genetics and their own effort/work all play a significant part.

[Paulie4Pres]

If you asked me to run 80% I would have absolutely no idea how the f*** to do that. The same goes for 90%. How could you quantify a 10% increase in your "running effort"? This is just fucking nonsense. 

[southsider2k5]

2 hours ago, nrockway said:

 

 

sure, but why not 86.5% or 93.6%? The arbitrariness of it makes it seem pseudo, it doesn't exactly inspire confidence that they know when the right time is, it's essentially just a vibe check. I wonder if they ask LuBob to run to first base then show him a pain chart and ask him to point to the frowny face that best captures his mood.

Because it isn't an exact science and normal humans don't talk that way.

[southsider2k5]

25 minutes ago, Paulie4Pres said:

If you asked me to run 80% I would have absolutely no idea how the f*** to do that. The same goes for 90%. How could you quantify a 10% increase in your "running effort"? This is just fucking nonsense. 

Athletes who work out for a living understand this.

[ptatc]

38 minutes ago, Paulie4Pres said:

If you asked me to run 80% I would have absolutely no idea how the f*** to do that. The same goes for 90%. How could you quantify a 10% increase in your "running effort"? This is just fucking nonsense. 

Athletes are asked to do it all the time for  training. You don't train everyday at 100%. You need to adjust your effort each time to train properly.

Even recreational runners learn their pace and effort to adjust daily workouts.

[TaylorStSox]

1 hour ago, Paulie4Pres said:

If you asked me to run 80% I would have absolutely no idea how the f*** to do that. The same goes for 90%. How could you quantify a 10% increase in your "running effort"? This is just fucking nonsense. 

Rating exertion is something actual athletes are always asked to do. It's the basis for just about every strength training program that's ever been developed. 

[nrockway]

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

Because it isn't an exact science and normal humans don't talk that way.

normal humans don't talk that way but I would hope my doctor uses objective criteria to measure how my treatment is progressing and not use meaningless and arbitrary shorthand analogies for the sake of 'communication'. There's a difference between "your cancer is 90% cured" and "your cancerous tumor has reduced in size by 90%". So I'll ask again, how does one determine the difference between "he's running at 80%" and "he's running at 90%" in order to make the assessment that Robert is ready to resume normal baseball activities? why is 90% the medically-sound cutoff point and not 93.6%? Yeah medicine isn't an exact science but it also isn't an exercise in writing marketing copy. And yes this is the non-MD manager relaying information to the media, but I think there's a pretty strong basis to question whether or not this team's medical staff isn't just practicing quackery.