Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

***** OFFICIAL Rob Gronkowski - taking his talents to TB *****


Recommended Posts

Those are all good points, and there's really no way to know how it'll work out of course.

But I would like to point out that Rodney Harrison predicting players will replicate the dirty hit that ended Gronk's year is not even a little bit surprising. Or ironic. Just downright predictable. Rodney. Harrison. Come on. Defensive players definitely have an incentive to hit low, but quoting Harrison is just too much, guy was a cheap shot artist.

Edited by ConnSKINS26
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Gronk took a little time off from the summer of Gronk , to send my son who is recovering from a second emergency surgery at pediatric hospital in Maine - a get well soon video. It was awesome,

I'm not worried, he had a 6 disc changer installed last time.  Plus a 100 amp subwoofer.  

A little perspective is due: Career numbers: - 4.6 receptions per game - 70.2 yards per game - 15.2 yards per reception 2018 numbers: - 4.3 receptions per game - 67.5 yards per game

But the thing is we know hes the next Gates/Gonzo. We know his upside is huge! Like record breaking huge!

If he is on the field he is must start so getting a 2nd TE is needed but you will know when to play him.

I don't really buy into the 2nd round though as I like to stabilize my roster with high floor guys.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Adrian Peterson aside, a torn ACL is still and always will be a SERIOUS injury especially for a tall and heavy athlete. Gronk with knee and arm braces in the 2nd round?!! Who is seriously risking their entire draft on this? LOL

He catches the ball. He plows forward in a straight line. Unless he's in the redzone, where he just jumps straight up and manhandles DB's.

That's pretty much the entirely of his game besides blocking. Not a lot of side-to-side movement to worry about.

That's also why he gets lit up more than the New York skyline though.

He will continue to get tattooed playing the way he does. It's an essential part of his nature.

I look him the same way I look at DeMarco Murray. He's very talented, but it's almost a given that he won't make it through a season healthy.

How many injuries has he gotten from getting lit up like the New York skyline? He had the ACL, but the forearm had nothing to do with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Investing in Gronk to return from ACL & MCL surgery in less than 8 months and be at 100% of past production is the exact definition of how you lose your league. :shrug:

Can't lose the league in one pick.

Look at it this way: according to PFR, there were 3680 points of VBD last year. That total is obviously going to vary based on scoring and baseline, but we'll use that figure for illustrative purposes. Let's round it off to an even 3600 and say that, in a 12-team league, the average team will have 300 points of VBD. To be an above-average team, you need more than 300 VBD. Say a good team will have 400 VBD, and an elite team will have 450.

Now, being an elite team is simply a matter of getting that VBD. If you drafted Jamaal Charles in the 1st round, he would have gotten you 180 points to your goal. If you'd added Peyton Manning in the 4th, that would have been another 150 VBD. Pair them with Josh Gordon in the 8th and a bunch of replacement players through the rest of your draft, and that's 440 VBD- you've already met your goal. You have an elite team. Does it matter that you got 0 VBD from your 2nd round pick? Did blowing your 3rd rounder cost you your league? No, because the point is simply to get VBD, and the "where" or "how" of it is irrelevant. That's why I say that one pick can't lose your league- even the best teams are going to be getting 0 VBD from 2/3s of their picks.

Rob Gronkowski has the ability to get you 1/3rd of the way to that required VBD goal all by himself. He can't possibly single-handedly win your league for you, but he can get you a lot closer. Picking him and having him hit will do a lot more to help you win your league than picking him and having him miss will do to help you lose it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your point very clearly but this becomes a question of risk aversion. When the chips are in the middle and you are on the clock, can you pull the trigger with absolute certainty, on a player returning from serious injury in which there are more questions than answers? Avoiding these early decisions and landmines has brought me to the playoffs more than any wildly swinging for the fences picks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really depends on who's left, but after the top 2-3 RBs, top 5-6 WRs and Graham are gone -- i.e. at the turn -- I'd probably pull the trigger on Gronk before some of the other choices. Might play it a little safer at 3/4 if I did, but with the early return to practice and the progression to date I'd rather take a shot at a proven stud.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Absolute certainty is not required. As Adam mentioned, and it's something that I've been harping on for years now, the biggest fallacy in fantasy football is the saying that you can't win your league with an early round pick, but you sure can lose it. That breeds the inaccurate belief that league champions are teams that are made up on players that didn't miss on any picks in the early rounds, which generally is wildly untrue.


Heck, in 2012 I went 10-3 and won my league with a draft that started with:


1.06) Darren McFadden

2.07) Maurice Jones-Drew

3.06) Hakeem Nicks

4.07) Aaron Hernandez


All 4 of them were colossal busts that year. I also ended up with busts in the 7th (Ingram), 8th (Britt), and 9th (Meachem) rounds. But a few big hits (Spiller, Bryant, Ryan, Morris) carried my team and the rest of the pieces fell into place to support them enough. Gronk has the ability to be one of those guys that can carry your team and comes at a reduced cost to his potential production, even if that cost is still high. The funny thing about the "always play it safe" crew is they refuse to really examine how unsafe the history of drafting safe players is. Last year's list of "safe" early rounders included guys like Ray Rice, Arian Foster, Larry Fitzgerald, Stevan Ridley, MJD, and so on. You improve your odds of getting someone useful a little bit, but every safe pick is still a risk and you cap your upside on top of that.


I'm not saying only draft high upside/high floor guys. But someone being high upside/high floor shouldn't deter you from picking them early. Every round, including the early ones, is filled with landmines anyway and you're going to step on some. I'm not scared of going after guys that are going to be true difference makers when those landmines are dodged.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think he's worth drafting at 1-11 as I saw in a recent FBGFPC draft?

If he is healthy at the end of the year, he will be well worth that. If you are looking to win it all and think you can make the overall playoffs while Gronk is working himself back into playing form - I don't see anything wrong with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your point very clearly but this becomes a question of risk aversion. When the chips are in the middle and you are on the clock, can you pull the trigger with absolute certainty, on a player returning from serious injury in which there are more questions than answers? Avoiding these early decisions and landmines has brought me to the playoffs more than any wildly swinging for the fences picks.

You can never have "absolutely certainty", not for any player, at any position, in any league. Period. There is no such thing as absolute certainty. If you believe there is you have already failed.

And I notice you said bringing you to the playoffs...you didn't say winning championships. Hitting on a player link Gronk is what can put you over the top.

As as been pointed out, hitting on a big time player does a lot more (positive) for your team than missing does (negative).

I think a lot of people get hung up on the guys who utterly "Fail" due to injuries or outright terrible performance, but don't fault somebody who played at a replacement-level nearly as hard. What's the difference though? So you took a guy who was essentially equal to a waiver wire or free agent fill in instead of a guy who was just absolutely dreadful or got hurt...the rend result is the same. Sooo if the guy with a higher risk of giving you 0 ROI (injury) has a greater chance of giving you awesome dominance...you may want to take that chance.

Edited by Leonidas
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen him take several brutal hits that easily could've ended in injury if the defender had arrived a split second sooner or at a slightly different angle. He walked away from this one, this one, and this one, but if you put yourself in enough of those situations then sooner or later someone is going to catch you just right and you're going to get an "unlucky" injury.

I question the process of reviewing footage to find instances when it looks like a player 'could have' sustained injury. Do you do this with every player?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen him take several brutal hits that easily could've ended in injury if the defender had arrived a split second sooner or at a slightly different angle. He walked away from this one, this one, and this one, but if you put yourself in enough of those situations then sooner or later someone is going to catch you just right and you're going to get an "unlucky" injury.

I question the process of reviewing footage to find instances when it looks like a player 'could have' sustained injury. Do you do this with every player?

Right, you go looking for it and you're going to find it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotoworld:

Rob Gronkowski - TE - Patriots

The Boston Globe's Shalise Manza Young believes it would be a "surprise" if Rob Gronkowski (knee) played in any preseason games.

If Gronk does make it onto the field for exhibition action, it won't be for more than a few snaps just to get his feet wet. He's been participating in some 7-on-7 and 11-on-11 work at training camp, but most of Gronkowski's work is done off to the side. He's experienced no setbacks, and should be ready for the opener.

Source: Boston Globe

Jul 30 - 9:41 AM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotoworld:

Rob Gronkowski - TE - Patriots

Rob Gronkowski (knee) has been doing 1-on-1 red-zone drills vs. Darrelle Revis over the last two days.

Gronkowski, Tom Brady and Revis have been gathering at one end of the field to do battle while Bill Belichick watches "closely." During this time, the rest of the team is doing special teams work. It's an excellent test for Gronk, who continues to make progress off his knee reconstruction. It certainly looks like he'll be ready for Week 1.

Source: ESPN Boston

Jul 30 - 9:35 PM

Edited by Faust
Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the Boston Globe, Rob Gronkowski "doesn't look like someone coming off a torn ACL/MCL."

Gronk is reportedly "firing off the line, planting hard, cutting and catching passes from [Tom] Brady." It's still mostly in 1-on-1 work, but it seems like he's close to getting into more 7-on-7 and full-team drills. The Patriots open the season five weeks from Sunday.
Jul 31 - 11:33 AM
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the Boston Globe, Rob Gronkowski "doesn't look like someone coming off a torn ACL/MCL."

Gronk is reportedly "firing off the line, planting hard, cutting and catching passes from [Tom] Brady." It's still mostly in 1-on-1 work, but it seems like he's close to getting into more 7-on-7 and full-team drills. The Patriots open the season five weeks from Sunday.
Jul 31 - 11:33 AM

This is good to hear. I'd much rather have Gronkowski playing at 100% of his previous capabilities for 75% of the season than Gronkowski playing at 75% of his previous capabilities for 100% of the season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotoworld:

Rob Gronkowski (ACL, MCL surgery) says there's still no timetable for his return to contact drills.

The fact that the Patriots didn't place Gronk on active/PUP to start camp is a strong indication he is on track to play in Week 1, but he hasn't been green-lighted for contact yet. Gronkowski did say he's "feeling stronger every day," and is setback free. He's a value pick at his current third-round ADP.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotoworld:

ESPN's Adam Schefter says there's still "optimism" on Rob Gronkowski's status for Week 1.

Schefter confirms that Gronkowski still hasn't been cleared for contact and it would be surprising to see him play in a preseason game. Given the secretive nature of the Patriots, more information than this is going to be hard to come by. All we know is that Gronk hasn't had any setbacks since sustaining an ACL and MCL tear eight months ago, and he's graduated to 7-on-7 work while wearing a red non-contact jersey.

Source: Adam Schefter on Twitter

Aug 13 - 9:46 AM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are all good points, and there's really no way to know how it'll work out of course.

But I would like to point out that Rodney Harrison predicting players will replicate the dirty hit that ended Gronk's year is not even a little bit surprising. Or ironic. Just downright predictable. Rodney. Harrison. Come on. Defensive players definitely have an incentive to hit low, but quoting Harrison is just too much, guy was a cheap shot artist.

So if someone else said it it would be valid, but because a cheap shot artist said it, it's not? Wouldn't a criminal be the best authority to comment on whether additional criminal activity is going to take place?

Link to post
Share on other sites

he has had something like 8 surgeries over the past 3-4 years..he wont change his style of play. I think a lot of people are viewing things through rosey-colored glasses.We ARE still talking about a 265lb TE with a bum knee, bad ankles, bad elbow, right? he is to TEs what Foster is to RBs - oft-injured guy who produces when/if he plays..as with Foster, Id rather let someone else take the chance, take the injuries, and the wasted high draft pick ...too much risk to even consider the high reward..

Edited by Tanner9919
Link to post
Share on other sites

he has had something like 8 surgeries over the past 3-4 years..he wont change his style of play. I think a lot of people are viewing things through rosey-colored glasses.We ARE still talking about a 265lb TE with a bum knee, bad ankles, bad elbow, right? he is to TEs what Foster is to RBs - oft-injured guy who produces when/if he plays..as with Foster, Id rather let someone else take the chance, take the injuries, and the wasted high draft pick ...too much risk to even consider the high reward..

How many of those surgeries were to clean out a surgical infection? Does his style of play leave him at a greater risk for surgical infections going forward? If not, why is "total surgeries" a better predictor than, say, "total injuries"?

Edit: "Total surgeries" is a big, splashy, attention-grabbing number. Rob Gronkowski wound up having 4 or 5 surgeries to deal with his broken arm. That really ran that surgery count up. But in terms of Gronk's injury history, it's still just one broken arm, regardless of the number of surgeries needed to fix it. And, I might add, it's a now-healed broken arm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are all good points, and there's really no way to know how it'll work out of course.

But I would like to point out that Rodney Harrison predicting players will replicate the dirty hit that ended Gronk's year is not even a little bit surprising. Or ironic. Just downright predictable. Rodney. Harrison. Come on. Defensive players definitely have an incentive to hit low, but quoting Harrison is just too much, guy was a cheap shot artist.

So if someone else said it it would be valid, but because a cheap shot artist said it, it's not? Wouldn't a criminal be the best authority to comment on whether additional criminal activity is going to take place?

Not at all, really. In your example, I'd expect a career criminal to see more potential or opportunity for crime in any situation he was in.

Just as I'd expect Rodney Harrison to see what he'd do in any given situation. He's looking for opportunities for dirty hits now because it's what he'd find natural to do as a player.

Link to post
Share on other sites

he has had something like 8 surgeries over the past 3-4 years..he wont change his style of play. I think a lot of people are viewing things through rosey-colored glasses.We ARE still talking about a 265lb TE with a bum knee, bad ankles, bad elbow, right? he is to TEs what Foster is to RBs - oft-injured guy who produces when/if he plays..as with Foster, Id rather let someone else take the chance, take the injuries, and the wasted high draft pick ...too much risk to even consider the high reward..

-His back surgery was an inpatient procedure that boasts a 95% success rate and doesn't come with risk of structural damage.

-His arm is healed and no longer an issue.

-His ACL damage came from a freak hit that would have done the same to anyone.

What risk are you seeing--another back surgury, broken arm, infection or torn ACL? What about his playing style caused any of his surgeries? Lastly, how does a repaired ACL--in 2014!--constitute a "bum knee"?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hes the most fun and dominating player I have ever owned. I own him in 2 keeper leagues. Even if I have him for only ten games, I can back him up and get a few good games with TE waiver pick ups. So I get 10 weeks of a mismatch in my favor and 6 weeks who knows?. Ill take that because I am confident that Ill be able to find a competitive TE for when he is out. Playable TEs grow on trees, dominating TEs are not as plentiful. He wont be like Roddy White and play decoy, if he plays he is huge value.

Link to post
Share on other sites

he has had something like 8 surgeries over the past 3-4 years..he wont change his style of play. I think a lot of people are viewing things through rosey-colored glasses.We ARE still talking about a 265lb TE with a bum knee, bad ankles, bad elbow, right? he is to TEs what Foster is to RBs - oft-injured guy who produces when/if he plays..as with Foster, Id rather let someone else take the chance, take the injuries, and the wasted high draft pick ...too much risk to even consider the high reward..

-His back surgery was an inpatient procedure that boasts a 95% success rate and doesn't come with risk of structural damage.

-His arm is healed and no longer an issue.

-His ACL damage came from a freak hit that would have done the same to anyone.

What risk are you seeing--another back surgury, broken arm, infection or torn ACL? What about his playing style caused any of his surgeries? Lastly, how does a repaired ACL--in 2014!--constitute a "bum knee"?

You have to admit, Gronk has had a lot of surgeries in a pretty short timeframe. He also had the same back surgery in college as he did as a pro. And he also had ankle surgery after the Pats lost to the Giants in the Super Bowl. One would like to think that someone that young and an elite athlete should be able to return to form, but I have openly wondered if all the injuries and surgeries (along with his style of play) may yield a shorter than normal NFL career. I certainly hope to be wrong, however.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotoworld:

ESPN's Adam Schefter says there's still "optimism" on Rob Gronkowski's status for Week 1.

Schefter confirms that Gronkowski still hasn't been cleared for contact and it would be surprising to see him play in a preseason game. Given the secretive nature of the Patriots, more information than this is going to be hard to come by. All we know is that Gronk hasn't had any setbacks since sustaining an ACL and MCL tear eight months ago, and he's graduated to 7-on-7 work while wearing a red non-contact jersey.

Source: Adam Schefter on Twitter

Aug 13 - 9:46 AM

It seems this tune is changing. The last thing I saw (FBG update?) was calling it 50-50 he would play week 1.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rotoworld:

ESPN's Adam Schefter says there's still "optimism" on Rob Gronkowski's status for Week 1.

Schefter confirms that Gronkowski still hasn't been cleared for contact and it would be surprising to see him play in a preseason game. Given the secretive nature of the Patriots, more information than this is going to be hard to come by. All we know is that Gronk hasn't had any setbacks since sustaining an ACL and MCL tear eight months ago, and he's graduated to 7-on-7 work while wearing a red non-contact jersey.

Source: Adam Schefter on Twitter

Aug 13 - 9:46 AM

It seems this tune is changing. The last thing I saw (FBG update?) was calling it 50-50 he would play week 1.

the "optimism" and "50-50" statements are meaningless conjecture. its well known that the pats do not divulge the true state of such situations. all that matters is that he is practicing and increasing his involvement and workload. playing 7v7 is a very good sign obv.

last yr around this time he was attending practices in street clothes or working on the sideline in strength and conditioning drills.

Edited by cvnpoka
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm buying no matter what, so any news that comes out to drive down the price the better.

Yeah I agree. But how far will he really fall? Last year, people were still taking him in the 4th/5th in most of my drafts.

Maybe I'm a glutton for punishment, but last year I took him 5.02 in my main league (12 team standard/typical) and this year I am very seriously considering taking him at 2.10. The guy with the first overall pick that obviously has back to back picks at the 2/3 turn is, IMO, a prime candidate to swoop up a potential difference maker at that point...and I'd rather he be on my roster.

But I also plan to open with Calvin at 1.03, and then take as safe of a pick as I can with 3.03, so that I hopefully don't bomb on multiple high picks.

I thought I had it made last year too. I had #1 seed going into the playoffs, the Gronk-up-my-sleeve was healthy and playing, it looked great...then Gronk/Welker got hurt the same week and Stafford sucked it up.

Freaking magic football man.

Edited by Leonidas
Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to admit, Gronk has had a lot of surgeries in a pretty short timeframe. He also had the same back surgery in college as he did as a pro. And he also had ankle surgery after the Pats lost to the Giants in the Super Bowl. One would like to think that someone that young and an elite athlete should be able to return to form, but I have openly wondered if all the injuries and surgeries (along with his style of play) may yield a shorter than normal NFL career. I certainly hope to be wrong, however.

Back to Adam's question--why are we counting the number of surgeries? Counting the infection checks and rod insertion as individual surgeries is no more sound than counting root canals or ingrown toenail removal--both surgical procedures.

To your larger point--yes, he has been injured a good deal. But there are at least two ways we can use this information. We can view it as a blanket indicator of future injuries, or we can mine each individual occurrence for potential outcomes. When you break it down, it reads a lot more like bad luck than a players body breaking down or proving unfit for NFL play.

If we can conclude that his arm and knee where fluke happenings--what value do they have as indicators of future injury?

Once we remove those, we're left with his ankle and back--two unrelated injuries. The ankle hasn't been an issue since. The back--well, I'd suggest people due a quick Google search on it, rather than invest solely in the term "back surgery"--which is obviously scary.

I just don't see anything we can soundly use to suggest he's injury prone, moving forward. Sometimes you flip heads 4 times in a row--you still have 50/50 odds with each subsequent flip, despite the marginally coincidental occurrence.

Edited by Concept Coop
Link to post
Share on other sites

And I don't get the "style of play" argument. It's had nothing to do with any of his injuries. If Wes Welker can make a living going over the middle, I think Gronk will be just fine.

You really don't see the difference? Gronk tends to seek out contact and run over/through guys while Welker tries to avoid them. Not a huge deal, but I think there is something to the "style of play" argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And I don't get the "style of play" argument. It's had nothing to do with any of his injuries. If Wes Welker can make a living going over the middle, I think Gronk will be just fine.

You really don't see the difference? Gronk tends to seek out contact and run over/through guys while Welker tries to avoid them. Not a huge deal, but I think there is something to the "style of play" argument.

Welker has a pretty clear history of seeking contact, for someone with his frame he plays roughly. Also, Gronks injuries might compile as you say from how roughly he plays, but his injuries have either been freak occurrences or straight up dirty hits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to admit, Gronk has had a lot of surgeries in a pretty short timeframe. He also had the same back surgery in college as he did as a pro. And he also had ankle surgery after the Pats lost to the Giants in the Super Bowl. One would like to think that someone that young and an elite athlete should be able to return to form, but I have openly wondered if all the injuries and surgeries (along with his style of play) may yield a shorter than normal NFL career. I certainly hope to be wrong, however.

Back to Adam's question--why are we counting the number of surgeries? Counting the infection checks and rod insertion as individual surgeries is no more sound than counting root canals or ingrown toenail removal--both surgical procedures.

To your larger point--yes, he has been injured a good deal. But there are at least two ways we can use this information. We can view it as a blanket indicator of future injuries, or we can mine each individual occurrence for potential outcomes. When you break it down, it reads a lot more like bad luck than a players body breaking down or proving unfit for NFL play.

If we can conclude that his arm and knee where fluke happenings--what value do they have as indicators of future injury?

Once we remove those, we're left with his ankle and back--two unrelated injuries. The ankle hasn't been an issue since. The back--well, I'd suggest people due a quick Google search on it, rather than invest solely in the term "back surgery"--which is obviously scary.

I just don't see anything we can soundly use to suggest he's injury prone, moving forward. Sometimes you flip heads 4 times in a row--you still have 50/50 odds with each subsequent flip, despite the marginally coincidental occurrence.

Which player would one think would have a longer career or retain their skills and athleticism? The one that had 0 surgeries or the one that had 1,000 surgeries. Clearly that is an exaggeration, but I would argue that the one with multiple surgeries will break down sooner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And I don't get the "style of play" argument. It's had nothing to do with any of his injuries. If Wes Welker can make a living going over the middle, I think Gronk will be just fine.

You really don't see the difference? Gronk tends to seek out contact and run over/through guys while Welker tries to avoid them. Not a huge deal, but I think there is something to the "style of play" argument.

I don't see Gronk seek out contact--it's not a functional football move, even.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which player would one think would have a longer career or retain their skills and athleticism? The one that had 0 surgeries or the one that had 1,000 surgeries. Clearly that is an exaggeration, but I would argue that the one with multiple surgeries will break down sooner.

I don't see value in this exercise. We don't need to resort to such extreme hypotheticals. Each of his injuris have a documented history and outlook that is readily available to us.

His injury history is either coincidental, or there is something about Gronk's body and actions that led to--and tie together(!)--his injuries. That's the variable we're solving for: the universal and physical trait that made him more susceptible to each of his injuries. I'm not a doctor, but I feel pretty confident in my suggestion that nothing about his back led to his ankle, led to his arm, led to infection, led to his ACL tear. Torn ligament, broken bone, infection, sprain, elongated vertebrate...I'm not seeing a common denominator.

I find it much more likely that we're looking at a coincidental string than a mystery tie between such vastly differing injuries, occured in vastly different situations.

Again, a force caused break in bone, a hereditary shaping of vertebrates, a force caused tear, a pesky infection, and a contort caused sprain. No need for us to play Dr. House, here. Sometimes things just happen without being an indication that they will continue to. Sometimes a coin lands on heads 7 times in a row--it still was, is, and will continue to be a 50/50 proposition.

Edited by Concept Coop
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Which player would one think would have a longer career or retain their skills and athleticism? The one that had 0 surgeries or the one that had 1,000 surgeries. Clearly that is an exaggeration, but I would argue that the one with multiple surgeries will break down sooner.

Ideally you'd take the guy with less surgeries imo, all else being equal.

All else is never equal though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which player would one think would have a longer career or retain their skills and athleticism? The one that had 0 surgeries or the one that had 1,000 surgeries. Clearly that is an exaggeration, but I would argue that the one with multiple surgeries will break down sooner.

I don't see value in this exercise. We don't need to resort to such extreme hypotheticals. Each of his injuris have a documented history and outlook that is readily available to us.

His injury history is either coincidental, or there is something about Gronk's body and actions that led to--and tie(!)--his injuries together. That's the variable we're solving for: the universal and physical trait that made him more susceptible to each of his injuries. I'm not a doctor, but I feel pretty confident in my suggestion that nothing about his back led to his ankle, led to his arm, led to infection, led to his ACL tear. Torn ligament, broken bone, infection, sprain, elongated vertebrate...I'm not seeing a common denominator.

I find it much more likely that we're looking at a coincidental string than a mystery tie between such vastly differing injuries, occured in vastly different situations.

Again, a force caused break in bone, a hereditary shaping of vertebrates, a force caused tear, a pesky infection, and a contort caused sprain. No need for us to play Dr. House, here. Sometimes things just happen without being an indication that they will continue to. Sometimes a coin lands on heads 7 times in a row--it's still a 50/50 proposition.

My point was not that Gronk has a greater chance of re-injury, that he somehow is injury prone, or that he will get hurt again. It was that he has already had multiple surgeries, no matter how or why he needed them (fluky or otherwise). That could take its toll and he may never be 100% again in terms of skills, speed, strength, mobility, etc. I am certainly not a doctor, so I cannot say with any certainty that he is now 94.28% of what he used to be, nor can I say that his "aging" in terms of football will be more accelerated than a typical player. But IMO, it's certainly something to consider.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   1 member


×
×
  • Create New...