2017 Gronk: Mojo Gronk

Shelterdog

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
dcmissle said:
Alright, Jimmy Graham then.

Still laughing buddy?

Edit. The point is that he'll be completing his 7th season. And anyone who thinks he'll sustain prior level of production thru age 34 the way he plays -- is very optimistic, maybe ridiculously so. So the comment that people are shooting arrows at seems quite reasonable.
Click to expand...
Still laughing. If you want to make the point that durablity matters, you should try and pick a player who gets hurts less than Gronk.

But yeah, yeah way to fucking tell it to that person who thinks Gronk is going to sustain his level of play for seven more years! I'm not sure that anyone over the age of 12 thinks that, but you told that person off.
 
dcmissle

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Shelterdog said:
Still laughing. If you want to make the point that durablity matters, you should try and pick a player who gets hurts less than Gronk.

But yeah, yeah way to fucking tell it to that person who thinks Gronk is going to sustain his level of play for seven more years! I'm not sure that anyone over the age of 12 thinks that, but you told that person off.
Click to expand...
Here is the "debate" that sparked umbrage, to which I responded --

Has the Hot Take Zone shifted on Gronk to 'he can't stay on the field, so he sucks' yet?
Pretty spot on, actually - ESPN NFL Live is currently debating "We have seen the best of Rob Gronkowski/Has Gronk Peaked?"

Any update on the back injury from yesterday?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
timelysarcasm

timelysarcasm

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2010
1,427
Los Angeles by way of Roxbury
Spelunker said:
Well, to be frank, isn't that likely true? I mean, not in the hot-take way that they're saying it, but what are the odds that he'll get *better*?
Click to expand...
I wasn't giving an opinion one way or the other. No, I don't think he'll get better. He's 27 and has sustained a number of injuries and hits, etc. I do think he can produce at/near his current level for a few more years if healthy.

His 2014 & 2015 seasons kind of put that "injury prone" talk to rest, but now we're hearing it again because he's been unable to stay on the field this year. I think the "bubble wrap him until the playoffs" talk is dumb and ignores the way football actually works, but he is the Patriots best weapon bar none. I don't know how he can be called fragile after that Earl Thomas hit, but his back is definitely a concern.
 
Stitch01

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
dcmissle said:
Here is the "debate" that sparked umbrage, to which I responded --
Click to expand...
The point was fine. Using Jordan Reed as and Jimmy Graham as examples of players GM would prefer to Gronk because of less wear and tear didnt make a lot of sense given concussion history and age.

This is all academic until the offseason of 2017 when a 29 year old Gronk has an $11MM cap figure.
 
Stitch01

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Well that certainly sucks. This offense is more well positioned to withstand the hit than the offenses of the last few seasons given Bennett and relativel health elsewhere, but big blow to the Super Bowl chances.
 
doc

doc

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,495
RedOctober3829 said:
One question would be is how did Patriots doctors miss a ruptured disk in his back when they were doing various tests after the Seattle game?
Click to expand...
Because unless you have an MRI and a time machine on the field the physical exam for a disc that doesn't need surgery and one that does is exactly the same, the difference is one gets better with conservative treatment and one doesn't.
 
RedOctober3829

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,504
deep inside Guido territory
Since they already used their IR-DTR spot on Brissett, he'll have to be carried on the 53 man roster and be inactive until he can make a return. How effective can he really be even if he comes back in that timeframe? Makes the Bennett trade even bigger today.
 
Stitch01

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Im not that worried about the 53 man spot. They're healthy enough to carry Gronk with the 53rd spot if they think he can come back, they might be able to just not activate Brissett to offset the loss of the roster spot if they really need to. If 8 weeks is accurate Gronk's a bit player at best in the AFCCG and Super Bowl anyways. If you need to be out for 8 weeks to be activated from the IR-DTR that's only the Super Bowl if Im counting right.

Sucks that this is the loss as its been a pretty simple formula in recent years: Pats go to the Super Bowl with a healthy Gronk, dont with an injured Gronk. But they're still pretty healthy overall and there's plenty of talent on offense.
 
J

jablo1312

New Member
Sep 20, 2005
985
50-50 shot he plays in Houston if they get there (completely making shit up caveat applies here). It's not like his rehabs have been fast tracked in the past.

Wish the team hadn't D-IR'd Brissette yesterday...and that they extended Bennett before this happened.
 
Valek123

Valek123

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
985
Upper Valley
DaveRoberts'Shoes said:
Especially when it's your THIRD
Click to expand...
He's done for the year, 100%. IR him and hope that by mid-season next year he's back to 95%, sign Bennett NOW. His best days are behind him, but even 85% of Gronk is a crazy redzone target, hopefully the emergence of Mitchell helps cushion this enormous blow.
 
DeadlySplitter

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,653
well fuck. this had to have been an existing problem?

EDIT: So it was that hit that caused the punctured lung?
 
Stitch01

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
I just cant see how he does much. They typically ease Gronk back in from major injury and Gronk is a little bit tentative coming back from injuries, dont see how they roll him out for a potential Super Bowl appearance in any sort of of major role given the time frame mentioned.

Wonder if the Chancellor hit did anything to cause/excaerbate this.

Will also reiterate: I dont think this is the season killer it would have been the last three seasons. Better (not good, but better) OL, better running game, better secondary weapons, better health. Obviously sucks hardcore, but I expect the offense will be fine.
 
alydar

alydar

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2006
922
Jamaica Plain
Relative to other years when Gronk has been out, this seems like the deepest offensive unit. Certainly helps that Hogan + Mitchell provide something on the outside, so all areas of the field still need to be covered.
 
J

jablo1312

New Member
Sep 20, 2005
985
Considering the state of the roster (and accepting that more inuries will undoubtedly occur) I think the potential reward of having him back for the Super Bowl is probably worth keeping him on the roster, for now. If things go south in a hurry in the trenches, you can always throw him on IR.
 
DeadlySplitter

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,653
if I remember right Brady made a poor throw that left Gronk out to dry on that Chancellor hit.

No one to blame really, that's football. But fuck.
 
J

jablo1312

New Member
Sep 20, 2005
985
And yea to echo what everyone else is saying Edelman, Dola, Mitchell, Hogan, Bennett, White, Lewis is a lot better than Edelman, Dola, Thompkins, Dobson, Hooman, Vereen
 
Bongorific

Bongorific

Thinks he’s clever
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,457
Balboa Towers
Stitch01 said:
I just cant see how he does much. They typically ease Gronk back in from major injury and Gronk is a little bit tentative coming back from injuries, dont see how they roll him out for a potential Super Bowl appearance in any sort of of major role given the time frame mentioned.

Wonder if the Chancellor hit did anything to cause/excaerbate this.
Click to expand...
Wasn't it Earl Thomas?

He was only listed as chest on the SF game injury report. But the mechanics of the fall in the Jets game doesn't scream herniated disc.
 
Stitch01

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
jablo1312 said:
Considering the state of the roster (and accepting that more inuries will undoubtedly occur) I think the potential reward of having him back for the Super Bowl is probably worth keeping him on the roster, for now. If things go south in a hurry in the trenches, you can always throw him on IR.
Click to expand...
They planned on activating Brissett so he could practice with the team for the rest of the season, but I think they could just choose not to activate him after his practice window expires and just sacrifice some of his practice time if they hit a roster crunch.
 
Ed Hillel

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
44,223
Here
DeadlySplitter said:
if I remember right Brady made a poor throw that left Gronk out to dry on that Chancellor hit.

No one to blame really, that's football. But fuck.
Click to expand...
It was Earl Thomas, wasn't it? If so, he made an incredible close to make that play. There are stills of the play out there where Gronk appears to be streaking wide open for a TD and next thing you know, Thomas is there crushing him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom