187 replies to this topic

[Savin Hillbilly]

I meant that taking the chance that he blows out the elbow and needs TJS is not worth the risk. In my opinion, which is not based on MRI's or any personal medical knowledge, is that his treatment should be with his long term health/ability to contribute in mind. I fear that is not the case.

I'm getting the impression from DRS and others (DRS, feel free to correct me) that the risk is not necessarily changed whether he plays right now or not. I.e., the elbow may already be effectively blown out, in the sense that there is significant damage that will require surgery to repair, and the question is just, can the athlete perform effectively with the joint in its current state, or not? If so, then maybe it's worth going on for a while--worst case scenario is that at some point he has to shut it down.

Put another way, it doesn't make much sense to say, "OMG! We have to shut him down and do the surgery NOW, or he might end up needing SURGERY!"--unless putting the surgery off worsens the recovery time or the long-term prognosis in some way.

[lexrageorge]

Since some folks are bringing up the Schilling situation, I feel a history lesson is in order:

After it was discovered that Schilling's shoulder was shredded shortly after he agreed to a $8M contract, the Sox options at the time were to either (a) allow Schilling to undergo surgery that was 95% likely to end his career right then and there, or (b) take the 5% chance that a rehab stint would allow the team to at least get a partial season out of Curt before he undergoes the same surgery with the same odds, the Sox wisely chose option b. The only ones criticizing the team for their decision were Schilling's agent and a bunch of idiots who couldn't pass high school math.

The Crawford situation is very different, as Crawford's surgery is hardly career threatening, and the he'll be under control for quite some time. We're trying to parse some inprecise words from a guy who's not exactly a good interview in Crawford, as well as taking his word that surgery is the best option. The Sox have a different opinion, but that doesn't mean their opinion is necessarily wrong. Playing Crawford for a few weeks is not likely to make a difference in his eventual return date; to be honest, I really don't care if he's ready to return March 1st or March 31st or even April 30th, which is the likely difference based on the examples that were presented upthread. The worst case for a return date is if the surgery happens in late November due to the Sox season being extended by a few weeks. I'm not sure we'll be upset if that happens.

[Plympton91]

If you scroll down this article it has a reminder that Takashi Saito pitched effectively for 3 years after tearing his UCL and treating it with PRP injection. If a pitcher can avoid surgery and be effective, it hardly seems beyond the realm of the imagination that Crawford is way overstating his likelihood of needing surgery anytime in the near future.

http://sports.espn.g...0bravesinjuries

But it indicates that the procedure works better on acute injuries treated promptly. It does not seem that Crawford's elbow injury was new this spring.

[joe dokes]

The Crawford situation is very different, as Crawford's surgery is hardly career threatening, and the he'll be under control for quite some time. We're trying to parse some inprecise words from a guy who's not exactly a good interview in Crawford, as well as taking his word that surgery is the best option.

Bingo.
Schilling was quite articulate, but, IMO far less intelligent. (Kind of a reverse Larry Bird). I have no idea about Crawford's intelligence level, but he just isn't terribly articulate. Based on his comments, his elbow is somewhere between Scott Williamson as Schilling was ripping him and me (I broke my elbow 10 years ago and will *probably* have *some* arthritis 25 years from now). There have been so many, maybes, probablys, eventuallys, and somedays from CC, while the GM says "surgery isn't necessarily the way to go with these things" that I dont have any confidence that we have any idea where things stand.

The most salient point here is that the "worst case" is that CC can play, plays reasonably well for the rest of the year & helps the team succeed, but needs surgery and as a result of playing well, staying in the lineup and helping the team succeed, next year is delayed. If any of those things doesn't happen -- the team sucks, he can't play with the injury, the UCL tears -- he gets the surgery comparatively early and is ready to go next season. Faced with those two timelines, with the team currently offically "in contention," "play and lets see how it/we go" seems to be the only rational course. In fact, it seems like a no-brainer.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

If you scroll down this article it has a reminder that Takashi Saito pitched effectively for 3 years after tearing his UCL and treating it with PRP injection. If a pitcher can avoid surgery and be effective, it hardly seems beyond the realm of the imagination that Crawford is way overstating his likelihood of needing surgery anytime in the near future.

http://sports.espn.g...0bravesinjuries

But it indicates that the procedure works better on acute injuries treated promptly. It does not seem that Crawford's elbow injury was new this spring.

Didn't Crawford already have the platelet injection and didn't get an improvement from it?

[RedOctober3829]

Didn't Crawford already have the platelet injection and didn't get an improvement from it?

He had the injection back in the spring.

[glennhoffmania]

Regardless of all of that, if the guy is scared to play and doesn't want to play, he shouldn't play. Get the surgery and see you in 2013. If that's the case, it's more than fair to question Carl's decision or toughness or whatever. But I don't see the benefit of sending a guy out there who hasn't played a game in 9 months and is scared shitless of throwing a baseball.

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

"Probably because I feel the pressure of everybody wanting me to be out there," he answered. "I want to be out there, fans want me to be out there, management, everybody, kind of a mixture of all that."

I'm not sure I've ever seen a quote from a player like that. It's crazy. Why are you coming back Monday? Because everybody wants me to. He says he wants to be out there, but it's pretty clear that he wants no part of playing for the Red Sox right now. If that were really the case, he'd say, "Because I'm feeling good and excited to help the team and be the player I know I can be." He says he's going to be playing, "whether I'm read or not."

But why?

He's hitting and fielding in actual games right now and has been for a while. He says right there the elbow isn't giving him any trouble. What does that mean? Is he in pain? If not - and that would imply that he's not - is it possible that he could be playing without pain and still be one throw away from disaster? That makes no sense to me, but I guess it's possible. But, if so, and he is playing in pain right now, why would they force him to do that? Does ownership/Cherington really think it's vital that he be on the field right now, so much so they'd make a player play in pain? That makes no sense either.

This whole situation is Twilight Zone stuff.

[lexrageorge]

Regardless of all of that, if the guy is scared to play and doesn't want to play, he shouldn't play. Get the surgery and see you in 2013. If that's the case, it's more than fair to question Carl's decision or toughness or whatever. But I don't see the benefit of sending a guy out there who hasn't played a game in 9 months and is scared shitless of throwing a baseball.

Crawford's being paid $20M to play baseball. The team has authority on deciding how to handle medical issues. Maybe he has concerns, but he doesn't need to be bringing them up to the press; he needs to shut up and play.

[glennhoffmania]

I agree. That's why I said it's fair to question him. But if he's too scared to play I don't want to see him out there. Let Nava/Sweeney/Ross keep playing.

[trekfan55]

There's something about Crawford in Boston that does not seem to click. I remember reading an article about him hitting a Rays player against the wall because he wasn't husking enough, yet he seems timid and shy when talking about playing in Boston. Why is that? I have no idea.

The fact is he has played in the field in the minors. As recently as yesterday as was reported by several of the Sox beat reporters.

If he feels pain, or cannot make throws, or feels anything else that would make him not be able to physically play then yes, he should approach the FO (Or BobbyV I guess) and explain that he cannot play and then they can evaluate how to proceed.

All the rest seems to be part of the shy personality he has suddenly acquired. I somehow remember hating his aggressiveness when he played against the Sox.

[Harry Hooper]

Bradford at WEEI.com:

This we know: Crawford was told by Dr. James Andrews in late April that there was a strong possibility he would need Tommy John surgery on the ulnar collateral ligament in his left elbow. It was determined that a platelet rich plasma (PRP) injection could help the 30-year-old get through the 2011 season.

The elbow continues to bother Crawford, as was most recently evidenced by the wincing that could be seen on the outfielder's face after making a throw home in the seventh inning on Curtis Granderson's fly out to shallow left field.

If surgery is needed, the recovery time figures to be close to the 9-12-month timetable afforded pitchers, not the five- or six-month period Crawford surmised might be the case.

That, however, is not what Crawford is currently thinking about.

"To be honest, it's a tough position," he said. "There's no easy way around it. You know you need surgery and you want to help the team out. You just have to do what you think is best. Right now they want me on the field, so I'm trying to do what I can to help the team out."

Perhaps the best comparison to Crawford's plight is what John Lackey experienced in 2011.

Lackey entered into his five-year, $82.5 million contract with the Red Sox understanding the ligament in his right elbow wasn't right. It was why the Sox incorporated a clause in the pitcher's deal with a vesting option at the major league minimum for 2015 if Lackey missed significant time due to his pre-existing elbow ailment.

Lackey would venture into the '11 season knowing -- like Crawford -- playing was going to mean managing an elbow that would ultimately need to be fixed via surgery. The motivation was -- also like Crawford -- to help the team that had allocated a significant amount of its payroll to the player.

"I knew something was wrong all year last year," Lackey said. "It was a situation where you want to try and perform for your team, and be there for the guys. It's a tough spot. Sometimes you hurt yourself trying to help out. It's kind of a delicate balance, I guess.

"I knew probably two years ago that I had some things going on. My contract is what it is for a reason. Then I had the MRI during the season last year that wasn't good."

But Lackey pitched, making 28 starts, all the way until his final start, Sept. 25 in Yankee Stadium. A few weeks later, he was in the office of Dr. Lewis Yocum undergoing Tommy John surgery.

The comparisons to Crawford's current plight are easy to come by.

[JimBoSox9]

Why get 75% value on my $15 million investment next year when I can get 25% value on it this year????

I just don't get it. It's that simple. This is a fucking mental game. If Carl doesn't trust his elbow, the chances he produces at the level that he can goes down.

I have no value to add. It's fucking frustrating. Again and again and again they seem to mismanage injuries. There are a lot of things I don't know about the inner runnings of the club, I just want this perception to go away because I'm sick and fucking tired of it. No value to add here.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Let me get this straight...he could end up missing ALL of next year if he gets the surgery? Jesus effing christ. They may end up wasting nearly all of this year, and then he just misses all of next year anyways?

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 31 July 2012 - 04:03 PM.

[Red(s)HawksFan]

What is Bradford's source/evidence for claiming that TJS recovery for Crawford would take 9-12 months? Did he speak to a doctor? Evidence has already been brought up somewhere here on the board that position players in the past have recovered within a 6-9 month window. That recovery period would not put the entirety of 2013 in jeopardy at all, and possibly would not jeopardize any of the 2013 regular season depending on how soon Crawford had the procedure.

[Cellar-Door]

What is Bradford's source/evidence for claiming that TJS recovery for Crawford would take 9-12 months? Did he speak to a doctor? Evidence has already been brought up somewhere here on the board that position players in the past have recovered within a 6-9 month window. That recovery period would not put the entirety of 2013 in jeopardy at all, and possibly would not jeopardize any of the 2013 regular season depending on how soon Crawford had the procedure.

The same source as most of Bradford's statements, he reached deep and pulled it out of his colon.

[Harry Hooper]

It's presumably from Dr. Andrews via Crawford. It's possible there was some noise in the signal along the way, however.

[BCsMightyJoeYoung]

It's presumably from Dr. Andrews via Crawford. It's possible there was some noise in the signal along the way, however.

But from that Bradford Article: "If surgery is needed, the recovery time figures to be close to the 9-12-month timetable afforded pitchers, not the five- or six-month period Crawford surmised might be the case"

So Crawford thinks it's 5 or 6 months ..so it wouldn't be from Andrews via Crawford.

[Red(s)HawksFan]

It's presumably from Dr. Andrews via Crawford. It's possible there was some noise in the signal along the way, however.

If it's from Andrews, why not say that? He just baldly states that the assertion, made by Crawford, that recovery would be 5-6 months was erroneous. No qualification, no attribution, just says Crawford had it wrong. Just shaky reporting, IMO.

[Cellar-Door]

Let's be honest Bradford googled "Tommy John recovery timetable" and came back with 9-12 months and decided that Carl was clearly stupid since he couldn't even google it.

[DaveRoberts'Shoes]

I still think it's going to take him about nine months. Despite the examples cited upthread, five to six months is pretty aggressive and assumes no bumps at all during rehab. A nine month estimate is more reasonable.

Good stuff.

[Koufax]

Well then he should get the surgery now. This season is probably a loss, and even if it isn't, CC's performance is not so inspiring that he would be sorely missed.

[EddieYost]

Get. Surgery. Now.

With Ross likely gone next year it's more important for Crawford to be ready in 2013 than it is to try to win a couple more games this year.

[someoneanywhere]

You guys busting on him -- do you honestly believe CC can win this situation? Really?

We're talking about a town that booed and vilified Keith Foulke out on a rail -- the same Foulke who five months earlier basically left his his career on the field pitching the Sox to a championship.

[Rasputin]

You guys busting on him -- do you honestly believe CC can win this situation? Really?

We're talking about a town that booed and vilified Keith Foulke out on a rail -- the same Foulke who five months earlier basically left his his career on the field pitching the Sox to a championship.

The only way Carl Crawford is ever going to win over any significant segment of the fanbase is to be on the field playing at a high level.

If his performance this year is going to be hampered by uncertainty about his elbow he really needs to get the surgery and get back as soon as humanly possible. It's best for him. It's best for the team.

[JimM]

I googled Tommy John surgery recovery time and for position players baseball-reference.com has it at 6 months. So I am going with Carl being smarter than Bradford.

Personally, I'd rather see him get it done now and be ready for next year. If this team is going to make the playoffs, it's going to be on Beckett and Lester turning it around more than Crawford carrying them for two months.

http://www.baseball-...my_John_surgery

[Drek717]

You guys busting on him -- do you honestly believe CC can win this situation? Really?

We're talking about a town that booed and vilified Keith Foulke out on a rail -- the same Foulke who five months earlier basically left his his career on the field pitching the Sox to a championship.

At this point can we really even put the blame on CC at all?

I mean, he's clearly unsure about his elbow and could obviously be swayed either way. So the real culprit in this whole mess is the FO being too damn short sighted. They're too focused on winning the short term media cycle with the pink hat club to do the right long term thing for the organization.

This seems like a GREAT time (with Sweeney now hitting the DL) to field a five man OF of Ellsbury, Ross, Nava, Kalish, and Linares with flexible platoons in both the corner OF spots.

Edited by Drek717, 31 July 2012 - 06:35 PM.

[SoxScout]

LOL, this is awesome

Cherington is "disappointed" in Ryan Sweeney breaking his left hand punching a door. ... He said that Carl Crawford is no longer on a "four-day program" and would get days off as needed.

http://www.boston.co...ngton_feel.html

[yecul]

The four-day program lasted, what, zero days?

Crawford is blameless here. The Red Sox are more incompetent top to bottom than the Mets ever were. I've insulted the Mets by comparing them.

Winning the short term media cycle is a good comment, but I'm not even sure they know what they are trying to win or even hoping to accomplish. Either they're geniuses working on a completely different level from all of us where we can't comprehend their awesomeness and master plan, but I'm going to err on the side of reality and say they fucking suck balls.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

One vote for "fucking suck balls" right here.

If the Sox were holding Crawford on a 4-day program for health reasons, a dumb-shit move like Sweeney's should have absolutely no bearing on its implementation.

[DaveRoberts'Shoes]

I googled Tommy John surgery recovery time and for position players baseball-reference.com has it at 6 months. So I am going with Carl being smarter than Bradford.

Personally, I'd rather see him get it done now and be ready for next year. If this team is going to make the playoffs, it's going to be on Beckett and Lester turning it around more than Crawford carrying them for two months.

http://www.baseball-...my_John_surgery

You mean I didn't have to do an orthopedic residency and a sports fellowship, I could have just logged on to B-Ref? Could have saved me six years.

Snark aside, I'm sticking with nine months.

[SoxFanPJ]

Double post

Edited by SoxFanPJ, 31 July 2012 - 07:56 PM.

[SoxFanPJ]

If we are talking 9 months, then as Crawford mentioned he would be making a decision in the next week to 10 days, let's assume August 15th surgery. He would be on track to be back May 15th. If he waits till October then you are talking a July return.

Get the surgery now. Ells, Ross, Nava and Kalish got this.

[86spike]

One vote for "fucking suck balls" right here.

If the Sox were holding Crawford on a 4-day program for health reasons, a dumb-shit move like Sweeney's should have absolutely no bearing on its implementation.

Or trainer Rheinhold has been put in his place.

[Harry Hooper]

Or trainer Rheinhold has been put in his place.

He's entombed in cement at a construction site in Stamford, CT.


Sounds like the surgery date is rapidly approaching, hence no need to worry about off days and such for CC.

Edited by Harry Hooper, 31 July 2012 - 08:14 PM.

[joe dokes]

The idea that the team is playing Crawford "to win the media cycle/keep the pink hats/attendance streak" is really about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Isn't it far, far, far more likely that they think they are still in contention this year (certainly not an unreasonable view) AND that Crawford, even in his diminished state is simply better than Nava?

[Drek717]

The idea that the team is playing Crawford "to win the media cycle/keep the pink hats/attendance streak" is really about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Isn't it far, far, far more likely that they think they are still in contention this year (certainly not an unreasonable view) AND that Crawford, even in his diminished state is simply better than Nava?

I'm sure they still think they have a real shot this year. Last year's Cards team has driven that into the head of any team within basically single digits of the wild card.

But its hard to see how a hesitant Carl Crawford unable to make throws from LF without pain for a few months is more valuable than a healthy Carl Crawford for all of 2013.

The insistence that they're still in it is itself a product of the media narrative they're trying to sell to keep moving tickets. They simply refuse to consider the reality of their situation (being behind five teams and barely above a sixth for the chance to get in a one game playoff) because its not the narrative they want to sell.

Crawford is playing right now either because the FO really thinks its all about to fall into place or because they think they need to keep telling the average fan that its all about to fall into place. The first is delusion and the second is deception.

[smastroyin]

I started off thinking Crawford should play.

Since then, he's shown that he's tentative and doesn't really look like he's ready to contribute.

Basically, I'm not sure how much he helps them this year without a bunch of improvement, and all the talk flying around indicates that the chance of his improvement is fairly low until he feels confident.

So, shut him down.