Gronk's knee injury: surgery set in January

[Al Zarilla]

There was speculation on PatsFans from several posters that maybe it wouldn't be so bad because on the hit, Gronk's cleats on the injured knee side weren't caught in the turf, and that the injured right leg was driven into his left leg, which absorbed some of the impact. They felt the damage because of all this might not be so bad, maybe just a bruise. This video has some (not so very) slomo. Even with that, you can't see what they were talking about. Unfortunately, they were wrong. 
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQ4om0gw-LE

 

[Stitch01]

 
One possible solution is to sit him out all of next year until the 1st playoff game. Put him on revocable IR until the playoffs. Kind of a 2010 Celtics type of thing where they sacrificed record/seeding for a healthy playoff squad.
 
Of course, the problem with that idea is it assumes you will win the division without playing Gronk all year. Given the state of the AFC East, that seems like a reasonable assumption.
It also assumes you can add Gronk for the first playoff game, and not experience any timing/chemistry glitches from what they've been practicing all year. Plus, if Gronk gets knocked out in the playoffs, it doesn't help you a ton to hold the roster spot all year long. It's definitely not good roster management, which Belichick desires given other injury needs that crop up during the year.
 
It might not be the best idea, but it seems worth exploring. I just don't see how Gronk survives the 16 game war of attrition going forward. 

 
Its not a realistic solution.  Just have to play him and hope for the best.  Can maybe reduce his workload some through the season and maybe you dont build an offense around Gronk's strengths as much, but basically have to roll the dice and what happens happens.

 

[lexrageorge]

There have been players that have had similar injuries (Welker, for one) that have returned in time for the start of the following season.  It's more likely that Gronk starts the season on the PUP, which, if he's not ready to play, makes the most sense as the Pats then get to use the roster spot.  Beyond that, predicting the exact date of a return is a futile exercise at this point in time.  
 
Also, Gronk plays football, and playing football equates to an unpredictable and somewhat random injury risk.  Shutting him down for 15 or 16 games next season is ridiculous if he's ready to play before then.  While it's certainly possible he ends up missing the 2014 season, it's far too early to make that a definitive statement; again, see Wes Welker.  
 
His injuries have mostly been the result of pretty bad luck; it happens; finding an alternate explanation is a waste of time.

 

[TheoShmeo]

This is such a massive kick in the balls. 
 
I remember not so long ago thinking that Gronk and Hernandez would go down as the greatest two man TE draft class in history.

 

[rodderick]

Gronk isn't made of fucking glass, people. His injuries have all been freakish, he's not Danny Amendola. If anything, the guy is the unluckiest player in the NFL, if you want to sit him out because you think he can't go through an entire season in one piece, you're forgetting that the dude never even seemed hampered by anything until january 2011 when a guy twisted his ankle. The plays that led to his injuries would've sidelined 95% of NFL players. 

 

[johnmd20]

Gronk isn't made of fucking glass, people. His injuries have all been freakish, he's not Danny Amendola. If anything, the guy is the unluckiest player in the NFL, if you want to sit him out because you think he can't go through an entire season in one piece, you're forgetting that the dude never even seemed hampered by anything until january 2011 when a guy twisted his ankle. The plays that led to his injuries would've sidelined 95% of NFL players. 

 
Well. . . .he's not made a glass, except for the fact that he's missed time in the past three seasons with injuries.(in 2011 it was the playoffs) At some point you have to wonder if he is injury prone for whatever reason. (he plays hard, he runs hard, he's a focus of the defense, so they are hitting him hard, he parties too hard, he doesn't take the best care of himself, it could be a lot of things)
 
Some guys get hurt a lot and they usually just end up out of the league with a whimper. Gronk is one of the best players at his position in the history of the game, so the spotlight is much bigger on him. But I am not sure how you can say it's just bad luck at this point. He has had a lot of physical disasters. Is he literally the unluckiest person in sports or is he just prone to hurting his bones and ligaments because of the way he plays and takes care of himself?
 
It is not baseless to say he gets hurt pretty easily.

 

[lexrageorge]

 
Well. . . .he's not made a glass, except for the fact that he's missed time in the past three seasons with injuries.(in 2011 it was the playoffs) At some point you have to wonder if he is injury prone for whatever reason. (he plays hard, he runs hard, he's a focus of the defense, so they are hitting him hard, he parties too hard, he doesn't take the best care of himself, it could be a lot of things)
 
Some guys get hurt a lot and they usually just end up out of the league with a whimper. Gronk is one of the best players at his position in the history of the game, so the spotlight is much bigger on him. But I am not sure how you can say it's just bad luck at this point. He has had a lot of physical disasters. Is he literally the unluckiest person in sports or is he just prone to hurting his bones and ligaments because of the way he plays and takes care of himself?
 
It is not baseless to say he gets hurt pretty easily.

In the case of the 2011 ankle injury, and this latest knee injury, any NFL player would have been hurt in the same manner.  They are called freak injuries, because they are totally random and unpredictable in nature; noone can predict when a guy will land on your knee or ankle.  These injuries are not predictive of being "injury prone" in any way, shape or form.  Of course, in the case of the knee, there may be long term repurcussions.  
 
The one injury that stands out, of course, was the arm injury.  I don't believe there was ever any film that showed the break happening.  Of course, he then returns goes out and lands exactly the wrong way on his cast, reinjuring the same break; again, the new break would have happened to just about any player in those same circumstances. 
 
Then there's the back issue, which supports your underlying thesis to some degree that he's "injury prone".  However, saying something is random or by chance doesn't need solid evidence; you need solid evidence to prove otherwise.  

 

[DaveRoberts'Shoes]

What about the part of the injury that worried you(Jake Ballard Effect)?

 
We still don't know about that part - if we hear that he has a significant cartilage injury or that he had a microfracture, that changes the calculus in terms of the speed of his recovery and eventual prognosis.

 

[Bone Chips]

Has there been any further clarification on what they mean by "MCL damage"?   My guess is a partial tear that can be sewn up without a graft replacement, which would seem to shorten the recovery time, no?  With the only complete tear being the ACL is it completely unrelaistic to project a return date in time for game 1 or 2 next season?  AP did it last year.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

Can we get Gronk some of the Ravens' deer antler spray?
 
That actually raises an interesting ethical question.  Do fans actually care if players use "questionable" means to rehab from injuries (as opposed to PEDs to enhance on-the-field performance, if such a distinction makes sense)?
 
What if Gronk could get hooked up with the Ravens deer antler guy or take some of Rodney Harrison's HGH or whatever, and could be ready and at full strength for Week 1, but as a result has a 50% chance of getting suspended for violating the league's banned substances policy.  Would Pats fans want him to do that? 

 

[DaveRoberts'Shoes]

Has there been any further clarification on what they mean by "MCL damage"?   My guess is a partial tear that can be sewn up without a graft replacement, which would seem to shorten the recovery time, no?  With the only complete tear being the ACL is it completely unrelaistic to project a return date in time for game 1 or 2 of 2015?  AP did it last year.

 
They haven't stated what grade of MCL injury he has, but it's either a grade 2 (partial) or a grade 3 (complete), either of which would likely be able to heal without any formal surgical treatment.  Regardless, he could potentially be back for game one, but I think it's very likely they will PUP him - keep in mind, regardless of the state of his knee recovery, this is a guy who will have now had SIX surgeries in a year.  He can use whatever time he can get to recover his strength, etc.  
 
And for future reference, it's probably useful to stop comparing every ACL injury to AP or Welker or whatever- they are great examples of how great things CAN go after an ACL, but they represent the upper portion of the bell curve - just look at Ballard, Derrick Rose, etc, to know that forecasting a Week 1 return for Gronk is kind of a futile exercise.  It's possible, sure, but not definite, and I'd say highly unlikely.

 

[Reverend]

There have been players that have had similar injuries (Welker, for one) that have returned in time for the start of the following season.  It's more likely that Gronk starts the season on the PUP, which, if he's not ready to play, makes the most sense as the Pats then get to use the roster spot.  Beyond that, predicting the exact date of a return is a futile exercise at this point in time.  
 
Also, Gronk plays football, and playing football equates to an unpredictable and somewhat random injury risk.  Shutting him down for 15 or 16 games next season is ridiculous if he's ready to play before then.  While it's certainly possible he ends up missing the 2014 season, it's far too early to make that a definitive statement; again, see Wes Welker.  
 
His injuries have mostly been the result of pretty bad luck; it happens; finding an alternate explanation is a waste of time.

 
 
It's not that similar to Welker's injury because the MCL is damaged as well--here's DRS's post on the subject and the MCL injury has since been confirmed.
 

Sorry, just got back from the game a while ago, so I haven't been able to clarify - obviously he tore his ACL, per the reports (and my early analysis, duh...), and I find it hard to believe he didn't at least tear his MCL to some degree as well, given how he got hit and how his knee buckled.  A couple things to consider here - 
 
1.  If he also tore his meniscus, not a huge deal in the big scheme of things.  If he screwed up his articular cartilage (like Ballard did in the Super Bowl) and needs some sort of cartilage repair, his recovery is going to be much less predictable.  Some guys do fine with it, some (Ballard, for instance)... not so much.  It's certainly in play given how violent that injury was.
 
2.  Even if it's "just" his ACL and MCL, I'd be SHOCKED if he's not on the PUP list to start the season.  He probably won't have surgery for at least a few weeks to do some "pre-hab" and let his MCL heal. That puts his surgery in January, and he won't be back to "full" activities until at least July.  Why rush things, given that he will have had SIX sugeries in the last 12 months...
 
3.  If he actually did go to a hospital for observation, as Belichik said, I'm concerned about something else-  he dislocated his knee and they're worried about a vascular injury or compartment syndrome developing or something else.  
 
It sucks and it stinks and it sucks.  I REALLY hope his articular cartilage is OK.

 

[johnmd20]

In the case of the 2011 ankle injury, and this latest knee injury, any NFL player would have been hurt in the same manner.  They are called freak injuries, because they are totally random and unpredictable in nature; noone can predict when a guy will land on your knee or ankle.  These injuries are not predictive of being "injury prone" in any way, shape or form.  Of course, in the case of the knee, there may be long term repurcussions.  
 
The one injury that stands out, of course, was the arm injury.  I don't believe there was ever any film that showed the break happening.  Of course, he then returns goes out and lands exactly the wrong way on his cast, reinjuring the same break; again, the new break would have happened to just about any player in those same circumstances. 
 
Then there's the back issue, which supports your underlying thesis to some degree that he's "injury prone".  However, saying something is random or by chance doesn't need solid evidence; you need solid evidence to prove otherwise.  

 
I'm just speculating about his proneness, I am certainly not stating it definitively. I am not sure how prone he is or not but I just wanted to comment when someone noted that Gronk isn't injury prone, he's just unlucky. At some point you have to question just how unlucky he's been, when it's been one injury after another since he hurt his ankle in 2011.
 
Tony Gonzalez has played for a 100 years but he's always in there. He's never had a significant injury. If he tore his ACL this weekend, maybe you could call it freak. Gronk had arm surgery and it took 6 months to heal b/c of infections. While this is going on, his back goes out. And then he's back and he gets another significant injury in his 7th game. Something is up and it's not just bad luck.

 

[Shelterdog]

Tony Gonzalez has played for a 100 years but he's always in there. He's never had a significant injury. If he tore his ACL this weekend, maybe you could call it freak. Gronk had arm surgery and it took 6 months to heal b/c of infections. While this is going on, his back goes out. And then he's back and he gets another significant injury in his 7th game. Something is up and it's not just bad luck.

 
There aren't a lot of Tony Gonzalezs out there.  I'm not sure where missing 16 games (plus whatever playoff games we have this year) over four years puts someone on the injury prone scale for a non QB (or say 26 games over five years) .  It clearly seems like a lot to us because he's so awesome and because it's been a soap opera, but does that put him in the 10% most injured category? 25%? 5% because only stud players who get hurt keep getting chances?  I don't know.

 

[NortheasternPJ]

 
I'm just speculating about his proneness, I am certainly not stating it definitively. I am not sure how prone he is or not but I just wanted to comment when someone noted that Gronk isn't injury prone, he's just unlucky. At some point you have to question just how unlucky he's been, when it's been one injury after another since he hurt his ankle in 2011.
 

 
To me, it's some combination of both. He has some issues like his back, that make him injury prone and why his draft stock fell.
 
I just don't put the hit yesterday and the resulting injury in that category. I'm not sure if any player could have withstood that hit to the knee and not done some major damage. 
 
The only thing I'm surprised about is that it doesn't happen more. DB's are hitting guys in the legs all the time (although not at that level) and usually they get up. Then again, there's more guys on IR this year than ever so who knows. 

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

 
There aren't a lot of Tony Gonzalezs out there.  I'm not sure where missing 16 games (plus whatever playoff games we have this year) over four years puts someone on the injury prone scale for a non QB (or say 26 games over five years) .  It clearly seems like a lot to us because he's so awesome and because it's been a soap opera, but does that put him in the 10% most injured category? 25%? 5% because only stud players who get hurt keep getting chances?  I don't know.

 
Well, in addition to the 16 missed games, he was severely limited in one or two playoff games even where he played, right?  Also, he missed his last year of college entirely with a back injury.  
 
It has been repeated, multiple injuries to different parts of his body.  It could be bad luck.  It could be the way he plays.  It could be something else, but he's the definition of injury prone.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

One of my biggest pet peeves is that people can't accept randomness and make all these narratives to explain it. He got a vicious knee shot. That he had a broken arm last year has nothing to do with him getting blasted low. He plays a high contact position in a high contact sport. Shit happens. This isn't a hamstring. Now maybe none of you have the balls to say what you're hinting at but I seriously hope we can bury the injury prone label for Gronk. He's as injury prone as any other big physical TE. If your argument is that big physical receiving TEs are more prone to injuries than the average player I can see that. I don't know if it is true but I could why that is.

 
Maybe this is semantics over the word "prone," but it seems to me there is way more evidence for the proposition that he is more prone to injury than average than there is for random bad luck.  
 
I'm not sure what the "balls" issue is -- I'm sure I'm missing something.  I'm not calling him a whimp or anything.  
 
Back.  Ankle.  Leg.  Arm.  Going on his sixth or seventh surgery.  But it feels less and less likely with every one of these.  Maybe he doesn't get enough calcium.  Maybe he has poor flexibility or doesn't stretch well.  Maybe it's his body's dimensions and the physics of his gait.  Maybe it's a combination.  
 
Or maybe it is all bad luck.  But if the point is to try to build a team that can win, or to manage expectations as fans, I think at the point one has to conclude that even when he gets back, there is absolutely nothing in his history to suggest that the team shouldn't give serious thought to building a team that can win without him.  Maybe he stays on the field in 2015 or even the back half of 2014. It's certainly something to hope for, but to expect is seems like wishful thinking.

 

[Dogman]

 
To me, it's some combination of both. He has some issues like his back, that make him injury prone and why his draft stock fell.
 
I just don't put the hit yesterday and the resulting injury in that category. I'm not sure if any player could have withstood that hit to the knee and not done some major damage. 
 
The only thing I'm surprised about is that it doesn't happen more. DB's are hitting guys in the legs all the time (although not at that level) and usually they get up. Then again, there's more guys on IR this year than ever so who knows. 

 
Can you point to where the back issues have led to Gronk missing any games as a pro?
 
I mean, I know he had a back injury in college that forced him to miss a year and I know he had surgery last April or May to repair something but Gronk missed the first part of this season because of the infections and surgeries on his forearm and not his back.  What I'm saying is simple, you are using a narrative that isn't true to support theory based on that nonfactual narrative. Like SMU said, this needs to stop.

 

[RedOctober3829]

Doug Kyed ‏@DougKyedNESN 1m
Per @ProFootballTalk, Rob Gronkowski also suffered a concussion while tearing his ACL and MCL.
 

 

[johnmd20]

One of my biggest pet peeves is that people can't accept randomness and make all these narratives to explain it. He got a vicious knee shot. That he had a broken arm last year has nothing to do with him getting blasted low. He plays a high contact position in a high contact sport. Shit happens.

 
Shit does happen. But it happens to some more than others. Gronk has now had multiple injuries(some massive) in the past 5 years. His back. His ankle. His forearm. And his back again. And now his knee.
 
Since 2009 he has had one full season of injury free play, which was in 2010. At some point, you have to wonder if he is the unluckiest guy on the football field or he is somehow prone to getting hurt. Is it not an unreasonable question.

 

[SMU_Sox]

I'd say that regarding his back he is injury prone. That's a chronic condition.
 
His other injuries are of the freak variety. Sprained ankle, broken arm blocking an extra point, reinjuring said broken arm (that arm is now injury prone perhaps), and now this - an ACL/MCL on a catch. If you want to say his physical style and the nature of his position put him in harms way more that sounds reasonable enough to explore. His ankle injury is definitely due to his physical style of play - that and you-know-who (speaking his name gives him power). The broken arm saga and ACL/MCL are just random severe injuries.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Doug Kyed ‏@DougKyedNESN 1m
Per @ProFootballTalk, Rob Gronkowski also suffered a concussion while tearing his ACL and MCL.



Obviously his huge brain makes him more injury prone.

 

[E5 Yaz]

He gets hurt a lot

 

[DaughtersofDougMirabelli]

There is literally nothing about this injury that should lead any narrative that he is injury prone. Every player in the NFL would have torn everything in their knee from a hit like that. 
 
He couldn't have stretched more or drunken less beer to prevent this one. 

 

[Dogman]

I'd say that regarding his back he is injury prone. That's a chronic condition.
 
His other injuries are of the freak variety. Sprained ankle, broken arm blocking an extra point, reinjuring said broken arm (that arm is now injury prone perhaps), and now this - an ACL/MCL on a catch. If you want to say his physical style and the nature of his position put him in harms way more that sounds reasonable enough to explore. His ankle injury is definitely due to his physical style of play - that and you-know-who (speaking his name gives him power). The broken arm saga and ACL/MCL are just random severe injuries.

 
 
Do you have any evidence that supports the idea that his back is injury prone?  Has he missed time as a result?

 

[SMU_Sox]

No, that's the ironic thing - as far as we know he hasn't missed time because of it. But doesn't he have a chronic back condition? If he does that would make his back injury prone. Again though it is one thing to have a body part be injury prone and another to actually get it injured. Was it ever confirmed that he had spinal stenosis? 
 
We know he had back surgery when he played in college. We also know he had it in June this summer. So he is more prone to back problems, right (that's a legit question)?. But unless we can say conclusively otherwise it would appear the most he has missed due to his back injuries in the pros is... 0 games. 

 

[Shelterdog]

 
Maybe this is semantics over the word "prone," but it seems to me there is way more evidence for the proposition that he is more prone to injury than average than there is for random bad luck.  
 

 
If we really wanted to know if he was injury prone or just a victim of random bad luck --the Peter Lynch of injuries so to speak, the one guy who gets consistent results out of a big set of players--what we'd want to do is judge the frequency of injuries and then try to figure out how likely it is that someone would randomly have X surgeries/injuries over Y years. 

 

[smastroyin]

 
I hear you. And I'd argue this applies to a lot more than just sports injuries.
 
Just remember: good things happen to good people!

 
At the same time, whether a hit ends up at the knee or the thigh is also a random event.  

If you make knee hits illegal, then what?  You can't target lower than the waist?  Because any attempt to tackle lower than about the mid-thigh is going to present a chance to hit the knee.
 
If TJ Ward is a great enough player to time his leap perfectly to hit the knee in stride right at the full extension point and plant then, well, damn.  He probably shot JFK too.

 

[E5 Yaz]

If TJ Ward is a great enough player to time his leap perfectly to hit the knee in stride right at the full extension point and plant then, well, damn.  He probably shot JFK too.

 
Who didn't?

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

Obviously his huge brain makes him more injury prone.

 
Players target the knees to stop injuries to the brain.
 
Gronk tears an ACL/MCL and suffers a concussion on the hit.
 
Fucking figures.

 

[johnmd20]

 
Who didn't?

 
Gronk didn't. He was rehabbing an injury in Florida at the time of the murder.

 

[geoduck no quahog]

It's to the point in the NFL where the first thing you look at on Monday are the scores and then you look at who's newly out for the season. 
 
It's getting to be like a lottery.

 

[DaveRoberts'Shoes]

It's to the point in the NFL where the first thing you look at on Monday are the scores and then you look at who's newly out for the season. 
 
It's getting to be like a lottery.

 
Honestly, aside from coaching and QB, the most important thing in the league is probably injuries.  And it's for the most part completely random and uncontrollable.  It's the nature of the sport, but as a fan it's incredibly frustrating.
 
Oh, well.

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

[Note: broke out the talk re: penalizing hits below the knee here: http://sonsofsamhorn.net/topic/80948-how-low-can-you-go-penalizing-hits-below-the-knee/]

 

[DJnVa]

, you're forgetting that the dude never even seemed hampered by anything until january 2011 when a guy twisted his ankle.

 
You're forgetting that he missed 3 games as a sophomore in college, then his entire junior year with an injury.

 

[Dogman]

 
You're forgetting that he missed 3 games as a sophomore in college, then his entire junior year with an injury.

 
 
And you are ignoring the fact that those injuries have not caused him to miss any time as a pro.

 

[DJnVa]

 
 
And you are ignoring the fact that those injuries have not caused him to miss any time as a pro.

 
No. The post I was responding to was about sitting him out for a season and said he'd never been hampered by anything until 2011. If I missed a disclaimer that the post I quoted was talking only about his professional career, my bad.
 
If you're talking about a player that seems to get injured a lot, it's not really crazy to bring up the fact that he missed his final season in college for an injury.

 

[Dogman]

 
No. The post I was responding to was about sitting him out for a season and said he'd never been hampered by anything until 2011. If I missed a disclaimer that the post I quoted was talking only about his professional career, my bad.
 
If you're talking about a player that seems to get injured a lot, it's not really crazy to bring up the fact that he missed his final season in college for an injury.

 
It was? 
 
Actually, it is crazy because the injuries in college have not prohibited him from playing as a pro.
 
I get it.  Gronk has been hurt quite a bit as a pro so that means there must be an underlying issue regarding his body.
 
But, the injuries he has sustained as a pro would have injured any player in the NFL. If that's the case, how is Gronk more prone?

 

[DJnVa]

 
But, the injuries he has sustained as a pro would have injured any player in the NFL. If that's the case, how is Gronk more prone?

 
I think we're having different conversations.
 
I was simply responding to the person that mentioned he wasn't hampered by anything until 2011. I was not speaking as to whether or not that made him injury prone.

 

[Shelterdog]

 
It was? 
 
Actually, it is crazy because the injuries in college have not prohibited him from playing as a pro.
 
I get it.  Gronk has been hurt quite a bit as a pro so that means there must be an underlying issue regarding his body.
 
But, the injuries he has sustained as a pro would have injured any player in the NFL. If that's the case, how is Gronk more prone?

 
I think there's an interesting theoretical question as to whether Gronk is injury prone (or that he's fargile or  made of glass, because saying NFL players are pussies apparently makes some internet tough guys feel macho) or just unlucky but it kind of doesn't matter.  From everything we're hearing (especially from DRS) he's going to have a tough time playing at 100% next season--he may miss games, his off-season training will be fucked up, and we see athletes who rehab from ACL injuries often not getting back to full speed until their second year after the surgery.  
 
Unlucky or injury prone, he's not likely to be a 16 game all pro caliber player in 2014.

 

[Tony C]

On what planet do you not take into account a player's injury history in determining whether or not he's injury prone? He's had tons of injuries -- both in college and in the pros, so not quite sure why you'd whitewash that. The question of random bad luck vs being prone will always be a small sample size question with any player. It's probably some combination, but who knows. The bottom-line is what Shelterdog says: he's once again unlikely to be a full season all-pro player next year. That sucks, but if he's healthy down the stretch and in the playoffs -- where his injuries have really killed the Pats -- that's what is most important. The other important thing is to what degree both this specific injury and the incredible run of surgeries (6?) are going to take a toll. Those will remain open questions.

 

[Shelterdog]

On what planet do you not take into account a player's injury history in determining whether or not he's injury prone? He's had tons of injuries -- both in college and in the pros, so not quite sure why you'd whitewash that. The question of random bad luck vs being prone will always be a small sample size question with any player. It's probably some combination, but who knows. The bottom-line is what Shelterdog says: he's once again unlikely to be a full season all-pro player next year. That sucks, but if he's healthy down the stretch and in the playoffs -- where his injuries have really killed the Pats -- that's what is most important. The other important thing is to what degree both this specific injury and the incredible run of surgeries (6?) are going to take a toll. Those will remain open questions.

 
I'm not sure how much to read into the run of surgeries--tons of NFL players get surgeries that we never learn about (Matt Light was in the hosptial for a month with Crohn's disease after post-surgery complications? WTF). 
 
That said doesn't he have surgery number seven as well this off-season when they take the plate out of his arm?

 

[ragnarok725]

 
Honestly, aside from coaching and QB, the most important thing in the league is probably injuries.  And it's for the most part completely random and uncontrollable.  It's the nature of the sport, but as a fan it's incredibly frustrating.
 
Oh, well.

 
How true is that, though? Do injuries really force good teams to take big dives in the rankings?
 
Quickly comparing a shitty metric, let's look at the ESPN power ranking top 10 because it hopefully captures the perception of team strength based on current injury composition better than historically facing advanced metrics.
 
Most teams are +/- 5 spots or so from where they started. For the ones that aren't, only a couple have had significant injuries play a part in that. Aaron Rodgers is the obvious big one. Julio Jones hurt the Falcons, but they were sucking before that. The Texans lost Foster but were way off the rails before that happened. The other big slides have just been due to teams sucking - Redskins, Ravens, Vikings, and Giants have all just been disappointing but haven't necessarily had significant injuries causing that (or at least not more significant than other teams). The Patriots are actually 2 spots UP from their preseason ranking spot, despite losing their best offensive skill player, one of their best OL and maybe their best two defenders (although I'd make a case for McCourty these days), Kelly, Talib for a while, etc. we all know the story. They've had maybe the most disastrous set of injuries outside losing a QB like the Packers, but they're still right up there. All the teams at the top have lost people for the most part.
 
The only other story might be in the teams making big leaps. The Saints, Panthers, Eagles, and Chiefs have had pretty good injury luck. The Eagles actually probably benefited from Vick getting hurt. Maybe these teams don't make the leap in the rankings if some of the other teams around them stay healthier. Tough to say.
 
But overall, it's interesting just how static the landscape has remained. A few really shitty teams, a few surprises, but despite the huge rash of injuries league-wide, not a lot of teams are nosediving because of it.
 

 

[DJnVa]

Do injuries really force good teams to take big dives in the rankings?
 

 

but despite the huge rash of injuries league-wide, not a lot of teams are nosediving because of it.
 

 
I get what you're saying, but you can quite clearly see that teams like NE and GB are pretty clearly worse off due to injuries--no matter where ESPN ranked them 4 months ago or ranks them now. Yes, other factors come into play, and sure, other teams nosedived without major injuries and other teams fought through them, but what is your basic theory?
 
I think DRS is differentiating between teams sucking (like the Giants) due to Eli looking like Mark Sanchez, which, ostensibly, is in his control, and teams like the Packers that lose Cobb and Rogers to seemingly random injuries.

 

[bakahump]

I can understand the back lash to the "injury prone" tag.   It indicates that something is wrong with Gronk.
 
That said he is and has been "Frequently injured".  Some of you are saying this is simply bad luck.  Rather I think its a result of what makes Gronk Great. Being as big as he is, players have learned not to hit him high.  This will not change post injury. And leg injuries will only be exacerbated by this. Also the routes he runs and his ability to drag single tacklers leads him to being "gang tackled". This too wont change post injury, Finally he is subjecting his body to this abuse 80-90 ( Catches on a per rate basis/ season) times a year.  That comes out to 5.3 Catches a game....and who knows how many targets per game at least a couple of missed catches...but still absorbing tackles. None of these things indicate that Gronks body will be in a better situation "injury wise" once he does return from injury.
 
For comparison
Mark Bavaro was on the order of 50 times a year. or 3.5 rec/g during his 22-25yo season.
Kieth Jackson was 4 receptions per game his 23-26yo season.  Additionally that stat was inflated by a 1st year of 80 catches followed by 5 years of declining receptions.
Jimmy Graham has averaged 4.9 receptions per game so far through his first 4 season. He has been very durable thus far but did suffer a lower body injury this year,
Jason Witten averaged 4 receptions per game his first 4 years. Although He did have a 4 year stretch  where he averaged 5.7.  Again very durable...showing that It CAN be done...but its not common.
 
We could look for other players (Gonzalez, V Davis, A. Gates) but all comparisons just illustrate how unique Gronk is, in that he is a "power guy" Catching alot of balls as opposed to "finesse guys" (like Witten) who catch alot or Power guys who catch a few. Plus while there are certainly exceptions.....long term productive careers from the TE position seems to be a rare phenomenon rather then the norm.
 
While I love Gronk, AND I feel he has (had??) the ability to be a THE definitive Hall Of Fame TE....I am now of the opinion that building an offense around him is as dangerous as building an offense around a potential HOF RB.
 
Take Peterson for an example.  Immeasurable talent.....but as we have discussed in every FA RB discussion for the past 6 years....RBs take poundings that lead to short Careers.  I feel Gronk is on the same Career path. An incredible talent whose unique usefulness puts him in situations where injury is more common.
 
Can a team afford to allocate a significant portion of resources to a position that is more consistently in harms way?  Would you feel the same about a RB?
 
It sucks and it stinks and it sucks.....but I hope that the offseason begins a shift from the "Gronk-fense" to a more balanced attack. We simply cant depend on him. (THROUGH NO FAULT of his).....he simply absorbs too much punishment. I truly hope he is able to come back and flash the talent that is so incredible, but basing our offense on it in 2015 (or even late 2014) on ward seems like a suckers bet.

 

[ragnarok725]

 
 
I get what you're saying, but you can quite clearly see that teams like NE and GB are pretty clearly worse off due to injuries--no matter where ESPN ranked them 4 months ago or ranks them now. Yes, other factors come into play, and sure, other teams nosedived without major injuries and other teams fought through them, but what is your basic theory?
 
I think DRS is differentiating between teams sucking (like the Giants) due to Eli looking like Mark Sanchez, which, ostensibly, is in his control, and teams like the Packers that lose Cobb and Rogers to seemingly random injuries.

 
The fact that there's not a lot of movement that you can directly tie to injuries means I think it's probably not the 3rd most determinant factor of success, which was the original premise. You see teams bouncing up and down in the rankings that have stability and consistency in all three of the areas deemed "most important" - coaching, QB, injuries. That leads me to believe there are some other factors that may be a good deal larger at play. Injuries, QBs, and coaches get the spotlight because they're stars and easy deltas to focus on. But organizational depth, practice methodology, training regimens, play-to-play luck, etc. - things less visible to us - may have a lot more to do with the big swings we're seeing from some of those teams that appear to just be "playing better" or "playing worse".

 

[DJnVa]

 
That leads me to believe there are some other factors that may be a good deal larger at play. Injuries, QBs, and coaches get the spotlight because they're stars and easy deltas to focus on. But organizational depth, practice methodology, training regimens, play-to-play luck, etc. - things less visible to us - may have a lot more to do with the big swings we're seeing from some of those teams that appear to just be "playing better" or "playing worse".

 
I would submit things like practice methodology are a subset of coaching though.
 
And again, injuries are a random (well, somewhat) occurance, that are pretty much our of the control of the person getting injured.

 

[bakahump]

 
And again, injuries are a random (well, somewhat) occurance, that are pretty much our of the control of the person getting injured.

 
...Depending on what you are doing.
 
Its like Deaths at work are Random.  But that Randomness happens to fishermen a lot more then Librarians.
 
Gronk is a Fisherman...

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

 
...Depending on what you are doing.
 
Its like Deaths at work are Random.  But that Randomness happens to fishermen a lot more then Librarians.
 
Gronk is a Fisherman...

 
Pish tosh. Many a librarian has been felled by a fatal paper cut.

 

[mulluysavage]

Gronk's jersey sales on Dick's Sporting Goods have gone from #10 to #5 overall, bumping Brady to #6.