Phenom's_Revenge wrote:Is Ricky prone to injury, in other words was he likely to sprain his ankle or tear his ACL? Hard to say how likely those things are. I would say its likely Pek has ankle injuries or that he is prone to them. Stephen Curry is prone to ankle injuries.
Either way I can't say that I am expecting Ricky to keep having injuries that keep him out 60 to 80 games and he has no precedence of little nagging issues.
Has missed as many games as Pek over the last four years. And continues to miss games. It's simple as that for me. He has precedence for long sustaining injuries . Is that better than the Lil ones?
Phenom's_Revenge wrote:Is Ricky prone to injury, in other words was he likely to sprain his ankle or tear his ACL? Hard to say how likely those things are. I would say its likely Pek has ankle injuries or that he is prone to them. Stephen Curry is prone to ankle injuries.
Either way I can't say that I am expecting Ricky to keep having injuries that keep him out 60 to 80 games and he has no precedence of little nagging issues.
Has missed as many games as Pek over the last four years. And continues to miss games. It's simple as that for me. He has precedence for long sustaining injuries . Is that better than the Lil ones?
I was just thinking about the definition of prone which is likely for an occurrence. Do you think those injuries he had were likely? Do you think he is likely to keep getting hurt? Are his two injuries indicative of future injuries?
PorkChop wrote:Being prone to injury can only look at history and current conditions. Who can predict the future?
The whole point of calling someone injury prone is to say they are more likely to get injured in the future. It is a future predictive term. If you aren't comfortable saying you think he is likely to keep getting injured in the future then you can't call him injury prone because that is literally the whole point of the phrase. Likely to get injured. Not he's been injured a bunch.
PorkChop wrote:Being prone to injury can only look at history and current conditions. Who can predict the future?
The whole point of calling someone injury prone is to say they are more likely to get injured in the future. It is a future predictive term. If you aren't comfortable saying you think he is likely to keep getting injured in the future then you can't call him injury prone because that is literally the whole point of the phrase. Likely to get injured. Not he's been injured a bunch.
To me there is 2 forms of injury prone guys. Some guys just keep getting hurt there is no specific issue they just get hurt. Kmart is one of those guys. He is skinny so that probably doesn't help but there is no specific issue other than that. You call some guys injury prone just because because they keep getting hurt and it's pretty easy to expect them to keep getting hurt and by the time you put the label on them they aren't getting younger...
Then you have guys with legit chronic issues like Pek with his ankles and AK with his back. For those guys it is and wasn't just those injuries but other things piled up too but really some guys it's pretty easy to say they are going to continue missing games.
Rubio to me is very close to being an injury prone guy in the first catagory. Quite frankly I am not sure when the last time he was totally healthy for an entire year from an injury that hampered him. I hate saying that because I am a huge Rubio fan I love watching him play. I really hope he stays healthy. Also I really hope Durant gets healthy too. I don't want that guy to end up with a hampered career because I like him both on and off the court.
Khans- Saying Ricky probably sprained his ankle because of the minutes he was playing is ludicrous. Sprained ankles are freak injuries. They aren't due to general wear and tear from big minutes or every superstar would miss time every year because they all have stretches of high minute games. General soreness like Pek typically has is a wear and tear injury that could happen due to too many minutes. Why hasn't Wiggins sprained his ankle if big minutes are the typical cause? He only played 96 minutes in the last two games. Ricky has had two freak injuries to two different areas of his body. This isn't a D Rose tearing up the same knee yet again situation. Minutes had nothing to do with his injuries and you can't baby him his whole career or you'll never have him be a player worth keeping long term because you cap the value he can provide to a winning effort on a nightly basis if you cap his minutes.
Maybe I was vague. I meant the second injury, the tanking time he is out now. After he came back, Flip didn't work him back in, he played him over 40 minutes a game, and he tweeked his ankle again. I thought that was stupid. I dont believe minutes led to the original sprain, no.
Ricky's injuries are unrelated. An ACL tear and a high ankle sprain. That's not indicative of him being more "prone" to future injuries than any other player who starts the season healthy.
PEK has bad ankles. He starts no season healthy. Therefore I be surprised if he didn't miss games next year. So why give him 5 years guarenteed at 12 m per year? Flip said that they were not aware of the severity of his ankle issues. Jesus Flip, nice staff. So who got fired for missing that, anyway?
papalrep wrote:Monster--What we do know is now a much more legit worry about him being able to stay on the floor. That's more troubling that his shooting or any other issue he has. The reality is at this point the Wolves have bigger issues (pun intended) to deal with than Rubio's deficiencies. Like I have said a couple times now the Wolves should consider trying to add another young option at PG just in case Rubio can't stay on the floor.
Agree, but Flip owns some of his injuries, playing him as many minutes as he did just after coming back from a severe high ankle sprain.
Explain how the Wolves can't keep a PG healthy from Michael Williams to TB, Hudson, Cassell, Flynn, Rubio. Did I forget anyone? Ita just Wolves Luck. How is it that Derrick Williams missed the 2nd year curse?
The reason is the same reason that the team misdiagnosed Peks ankles. Flip actually said on the radio they thought it was ligaments or some such, turns out it's a joint issue. OOPS. MRI? XRAY? Have they heard of these great new machines? Jesus this team is a bunch a fuck ups. I am grateful Taylor kept the NBA in Minny, and that he wants to keep it here. But it's time to sell. The bad news is, Flip will be the buyer. If ever a team needed an enema and a fresh start like the Vikes got with the Wilfs, the Tpuppies are it.
PorkChop wrote:Being prone to injury can only look at history and current conditions. Who can predict the future?
The whole point of calling someone injury prone is to say they are more likely to get injured in the future. It is a future predictive term. If you aren't comfortable saying you think he is likely to keep getting injured in the future then you can't call him injury prone because that is literally the whole point of the phrase. Likely to get injured. Not he's been injured a bunch.
What sentence do u more often hear?
He will be prone to injury or he's been injury prone. Been, being the key word there .
