Dr. Dan

Members
  • Content count

    8,047
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,745 Excellent

1 Follower

About Dr. Dan

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    South East Wisconsin
  • Interests
    Sports Medicine

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Green Bay Packers

Recent Profile Visitors

4,952 profile views
  1. Diggs is finally off my list. Crowell is off my list Ajayi maybe... but I might be back for more on that one we will see
  2. Not getting into a pissing match. I was explaining I was talking about dynasty when I said 12-15. I stand by that. There are 12 QBs in dynasty I would take over Wilson, yes. What I mean by that is not that I would draft one of them in the same spot as Wilson, but rather I would prefer someone just as much if not more who I could get maybe later, maybe earlier than where Wilson would go. In redraft, no. If that's not a good enough explanation, then oh well. No skin off my back. I mention Goff because "The General" scoffed at me even mentioning him. He said "Sorry. Not even close." When statistics say otherwise. I could certainly make a case for the other QBs I mentioned if you would like me to. I would need more time however because work is busy. Wilson had his time in the top 3, 5 discussion, and that time has passed. I'm sorry if homers can't recognize it. But good luck next season and so on.
  3. Alright, I'll bite. My thought process is this: Wilson is coming off where most QBs achieve their peek in their career/reach their peek. You know what you get with him at this point, and IMO it's not worthy of being discussed in the same breath as Rodgers, Brady, etc. There are a lot of young up and coming QBs in the league that have a brighter future than Wilson. Are they better than him now? No. But, Wilson is likely not going to get astronomically better over the next however many years he wants to play. One example: I was laughed when I mentioned Goff. Goff's statistics this year, his first full season and second year in the league, are pretty close with what Wilson had his second year. So if you were pumped about Wilson following the 2013 season, I don't know how you can scoff at Goff. What makes Wilson a very talented QB is his ability to run. Most successful QBs in the league have decent feet which allow them to keep defenses honest as well as extend plays. He is going to start to lose that ability to some degree (not soon, but sooner rather than later), which will force him to become a more pocket QB. That's not necessarily his biggest strength, although there are much worse QBs who do it. As far as redraft fantasy football, no Wilson isn't my 15th best QB, he's probably more likely near 8-10 for me. However, if I'm in a dynasty league I like a lot of QBs better than Wilson (Goff being one of them), and yes he probably drops down further in dynasty for me. Would I draft Mariota over Wilson? No. But I may pass on Wilson and grab a QB I like equally as good or better later. In real life, yes Wilson is a franchise QB. He's very good. If we don't want to use the term Elite then let's talk tiers. Wilson is not in the top tier: 10th in QB rating (Goff was 5) 9th in passing yards (Goff 10th) 1st in TDs (Goff 5) 16th worst in INTs (Goff 24th) This was in a year where he had to throw the most he ever has. Most "top tier" QBs when asked to do it all, do better and put up better statistics than when they are asked to do some of it and rely on a balanced attack. So he threw a lot of TDs this year... Well I'd expect that given he threw for a career high attempts and had zero OL or running game, and was on a decent team. To call him elite, or top tier, with those statistics... Tom Brady is top 5 in all of those categories. Wentz is as well minus total yards but considering he missed 3.5 games I think we can cut him a break (If he had played a full 16 games and kept up with his averages he'd be flirting with top 5). Even Matthew Stafford had a better statistical year than Wilson. And I like Wilson way more than Stafford... but it's a similar team make up- good defense, bad rushing attack, bad OL, need to pass a lot. I'm not saying he's a Chad Pennington. I'm just saying he's not in the same tier as Rodgers, Brady, Brees. Russell Wilson is more in that second tier with the Matt Ryan's, which is fine- that's not a bad crowd to be in, but he's not in the same breath of some of the greatest of all time. We can agree to disagree I suppose.
  4. I'm talking anatomically healing is done at 2-3 weeks. the physical healing. The rest is rehabilitation. as the healed tissue is not strong. A good example, a rotator cuff repair. Th person is typically immobilized without any active motion (passive only) for 3-4 weeks. After that they can move, but not all on their own, they do active assisted motion, progressing to active motion. Sure, most of the healing is done at 3-4 weeks so they can't really break the repair unless they do something really stupid or lift too much, but are they going back to sport? No. The tissue isn't strong enough yet. This. I really don't think he plays this weekend IMO. He may and just gimp around the field, but there is some significant chance of a complete rupture. He might get like 10 snaps or something ridiculous. I'd be scratching my head if he came back 100% and played close to his normal snaps and was just as effective as he would be healthy. These guys use deer antler spray and other stuff to heal faster, so I am talking about a normal person. It's possible he is helped by the unlimited resources the NFL has to offer.
  5. I appreciate the tag. Been MIA due to family stuff. Every injury is different. It's one of those things where it's difficult to be 100% certain without specifics. Anything significant would require some non weight bearing, boot, etc. Then gradual return to running. healing should be done at about 2-3 weeks and then it's a matter of easing back into activity. Any quick return would mean that he's either on something causing some super-human healing powers or he's just not 100% yet and he's at a risk for some long term injury.
  6. That's not the reason, and the fact that you think it is means there's no reason to continue the discussion. I like Wilson. He's a Badger. He's just not elite. He's great/good. Not elite.
  7. I'd love to play dynasty. Been trying to get my league to convert but they won't. I need to find a league. If your league has any openings please let m eknow
  8. Our league allows only 3 keepers, and you can only keep 1 player on your roster 3 years (so kept twice). Each player is bumped up 1 round from where they were drafted: If you draft Diggs round 5, he's a 4th rounder next year, and a 3rd rounder after that, then he's a FA I find this to be helpful because it repopulates the draft pool. The guy in our league signed DJ as a FA. he was a 14th round pick, then a 13th round pick this year. Next year he's back in the draft pool. If it was longer, or forever, then it wouldn't be fun anymore. That's a massive advantage. What I also find helpful is bumping up 1 draft slot. This is nice because it really helps to change the strategy. I might want to keep a guy as a 6th round pick but as a 5th round pick I'm not so sure so maybe I only keep on my roster 2 years instead of 3. Also, raiding the WW is crazy in our league. Once I showed that the way to win is to keep guys for the 12-14th round, not your 3rd rounder, suddenly everyone is doing it and the WW is insane every year, especially at the end of the season. I tend to try and keep guys who will be my RB2/WR2/even QB for late picks and then go for my studs in the first few rounds.
  9. I never said they should let him go. I said his contract will eat up a lot of cap space and be harmful to their flexibility to surround him with high quality players. 25 million for one guy is a lot. You laughed at that and said his contract wasn't a big deal. Flacco had an insane contract after he one his sole superbowl too. We all see what that did to Baltimore. What Seattle should have done was signed him to a better deal. Unfortunately, they will have less cap flexibility to retain many of their own and may struggle to prvide him with a top notch defense and a capable OL, which is what Wilson needs to win more than 1 superbowl Guess we will have to wiat and see. And no, Wilson is not 3rd in the pecking order in the NFL for QBs. That's insane
  10. Talk about crazy... And yes... Wilson's contract will hurt Seattle. It's very back loaded. He counted 14 million against the cap this year, and the next two seasons will be 23 and 25 million in cap space.... if that doesn't hurt a team I don't know what salary will.
  11. Mariota was a rookie in 2015 on a terrible team. Wilson was a rookie on a pretty good Seattle team. Also, I said this year Mariota has been struggling. He had a pretty catastrophic injury last year. TBH I was surprised he came back week 1. IMO he is still playing catch up. It's not worth arguing at this point, agree to disagree. 12-15, yes, there are 11 or 14 other QBs I'd have in the league. I'm sorry you can't take your homer glasses off... But okay, let's play along and drop Mariota from my list. It's still: Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Carr, Watson, a healthy Luck, Ryan, Goff, Wentz, Dak, Cousins. Either they are better, or have way more potential than Wilson. Wilson is what he is, an average to above average QB. He won't be much better in his career if he hasn't achieved it by now. You say Mariota is regressing... in year three... that's kind of cute. But let's look at Wilson's statistics. Wilson has set back to back records for most INT for his career in back to back years. Also, his QB rating the last 2 years is his two lowest years. Coincidentally, the last two years he has been asked to do more by throwing 500+ attempts a game. So, the more Wilson is given the reigns, the worse he has performed than when he was playing second fiddle to a run-first offense with Lynch, throwing 50-75 less attempts a year. Wilson's peak was in 2015, where he cashed in on an insane deal that will ultimately end up hurting Seattle. Wilson can pretend to be Aaron Rodgers all he wants, and try to be the playmaker on his offense, but in the end he's better when he's just a QB managing a game and there's someone else on offense running the show. That and an amazing defense leading the way so that at the end of the game, 10-14 offensive points has a significant chance of winning
  12. So having a probowl caliber RB, one of the best WRs and TEs in the game, as well as the top defense in the league wasn't enough for Osweiler... I guess we should put him on the AFC probowl team and see if he can do better? Come on... you're better than this Is it though? 2016 95.6 QBR, 3400 passing yards, 26/9 TD/INT ratio 92.6 QBR, 4200 passing yards, 21/11 TD/INT ratio Wilson may have more yards, but he also had 75 more attempts. Sure, this year Mariota looks like he's struggling but IMO he is still catching up from his injury and he has a very bright future. Wilson has been in the league 6 years... what you sse is what you get at this point. Mariota is performing close to Wilson's level and he's just a baby in the NFL
  13. The prosthesis should be the same maybe some differences in brand but it's not like you're buying a cheap 2 door hatchback knee versus a Porsche. I'm unfamiliar with such a discrepancy and it might be more due to demographics than anything else. Around here they're all roughly the same. Some private practice places are a bit cheaper because you don't have a big hospital charge associated with everything. Those patients do just fine. So my advice would be first to look at a private group that does surgery out of their own "hospital." If you're considering going out of state for a procedure research the physician and maybe just ask them straight out what the difference is and why can they be cheaper. Often it's because they don't have the overhead bigger hospital groups have. FWIW... she's at a great age for a knee replacement. Young enough to get a "second go" at living life and being active. And if she needs another one in 15-20 years, she's still doing just fine. The problem is people wait way too long and then their body is so broken down every where else (hips- need those done then!) and they never really get back to being very active... at that point they are just wanting to be functional. Yes, prolotherapy might buy her 5 years and then it's a Medicare thing, so that's always nice. I think you're asking great questions and doing some great research in the best decision.
  14. Thanks for the input. She's 62. Prolo did wonders for my bad knee (or coincidentally the passage of time). The cortisone did not help her, she has not tried the Euflexxa (did not help me). But you are correct, those are covered 80% by insurance. Personally, I'd go for it. Sure beats a 60 grand bill with 6-8 weeks of missed work at a minimum.
  15. Prolotherapy is considered experimental by some insurances and may not be covered. Here's an older study but it shows promise for helping with OA in the knee. Here's a March 2017 review showing Moderate evidence to support it for knee OA Personally, I would do whatever it takes to avoid a replacement unless I was >55 years old, and even then I'd want to try and make it to 60. Has she tried cortisone? Or Euflexxa? Both would be covered by insurance. I would try those before going with prolotherapy, but I think that is a good option too if the other two have not worked. It has favorable evidence. Surgery should be a last resort, always.