A Bone to Pick
Time for a little rant.
In this era of internet fast - rapid dissemination of information, we've expected our hard-hitting beat reporters to keep asking the tough questions. Yesterday, the reporting on Reed Johnson's foot injury disappointed me. The news was lightning fast. I got a twitter text message from David Kaplan regarding Johnson's X-Rays showing a fracture in his foot. Then before blinking an eye there were links to articles from all of the major beat writers...Tribune's Paul Sullivan, Gordon Wittenmeyer/Sun-Times and Bruce Miles/Herald.
Unfortunately they forgot to ask a followup question. Something like...could you tell us what bone is broken? C'mon guys, this is no longer the era of "the toe bone is connected to the foot bone". In these times when medical information is being questioned for more
specific information, you would think they could ask what bone was
broken. It leads to less unnecessary speculation (or at least more
specific speculation). I had hoped they learned this lesson. I recall when Gordon Wittenmeyer got his dander up, when the news on Rich Harden's MRI showed a small rotator cuff tear but they didn't get that information after the test in October but only found out that information in January at the Cubs convention. I was proud of GW back then for raising a fuss.
Although it might not make much difference in estimating the time to recover (they all reported up front it would be 4 weeks, meaning he's out until September), it really bugs me that the baseball reporters didn't ask what bone was broken in Reed Johnson's foot. Group think often leads to complacency. They just might be missing something important here. After reading all 3 biggies (Sullivan, Wittenmeyer and Miles), none of them wrote anything more than this:
Sullivan: "Johnson continued to play and flied out in the second inning. He was removed in the top of the fourth and sent to Northwestern Memorial Hospital for X-rays, which revealed a non-displaced fracture on the top of the foot."
Wittenmeyer: "The platoon lead-off man suffered a non-displaced fracture when he fouled a pitch off his foot in the first inning Wednesday. He later singled and scored the first run and batted once more before leaving as the pain got worse."
Miles: "The Cubs originally announced Johnson had a bruise, but X-rays revealed a non-displaced fracture..."
There are 11 bones in the foot not counting toes (phalanges). If it's a metatarsal fracture (there are 5 metatarsals) it probably doesn't make much difference in terms of time to heal but if he broke a bone called the navicular it could be longer than 4 weeks...much longer. Dempster broke a phalanx (big toe) and it took 2 weeks so I assume it's not that...they would have said he broke a toe, not his foot if that were the case.
A navicular fracture was what Frank Thomas as well as Michael Jordan had early in his career and currently has led to big problems with Yao Ming.
I found this link with some info on why Navicular fractures are different but it does mention one thing in common with what they said about Reed Johnson's injury...it's located at the top of the foot:
As early as 2002, the American Academy of Family Physicians reported a rise in tarsal navicular bone fractures in active people. It is most common in athletes who indulge in running sports, and is very difficult to spot, which causes further complications as the condition worsens. The bone is located at the top of the foot.
The first symptom is usually pain in the midfoot area, gradually spreading throughout the rest of the foot. Regular x-rays don’t usually pick up the damage right away, so doctors are often led in another direction in trying to diagnose the source of the trouble. Slight injuries are often treated with six to eight weeks of immobilization in a cast. Worse cases like Yao’s often necessitate surgery.
Navicular fractures can be difficult to diagnose and often don't show up on initial X-Rays because they can happen initially as a stress fracture. That's a subtle hairline crack that is like a crack in a car winshield. It can extend or propagate if it gets continued activity and RJ did play after he was hit in the foot during the 1st inning at bat, in fact he singled and subsequently scored on DLee's sac fly...then continued in the outfield for another inning and even batted again until he couldn't handle the pain.
I'm not saying RJ's got a navicular fracture.
We don't know what bone is injured when they say a fracture in the foot even if they have said the X-Ray's showed a non-displaced fracture. So I'm just sayin' that reporting a non-displaced fracture in the foot isn't enough these days. Especially when it's two day's before the trade deadline and any DL stint longer than 4 weeks could be a significant issue.
bless your heart. *pinches cheeks*
real shame I missed this week's episode of The Crunch Reporter.
It's highly unusual.
It does matter a little.
It matters much less than you think.
four winds field is awesome. it's crazy how minor league parks have "grown up" since the 80s/90s and that park was one of the late-80s models that showed a low-capacity ballpark could look like you're at something other than a highschool baseball game.
On another topic....I returned to South Bend last night for the 2nd time this season (still haven't tried either the deep-fried mac & cheese sandwich nor "The Porknado", as the drive home is over an hour and that could get ugly), and was pleasantly surprised to find D. Underwood pitching in a rehab start. He looked good -- although, to be fair, these are low-A hitters -- fastball consistently at 94-95 (if the SB scoreboard is to be believed -- several pitches were clocked in the 30s...) and with good location.
he gains nothing, no advantage, no saving of resources, nothing...there is not a cost/benefit tradeoff...him letting the running game go on around him for others to control isn't gaining him an advantage elsewhere. it's putting him at a disadvantage even if it's not cashed in with a run.
And out of respect for the rest of TCR, I'm done on this. I'm sure I'm not the only one in the other camp, but time to let it go. (Until the next Lester start. I kid.)
He is putting himself at a disadvanage. But how much of one relative to the rest of his game? He's not Justin Germano -- he's inarguably one of the best SPs in baseball, issue or not. It would be more of thing to discuss ad nauseum if it constantly caused him to give up runs and lose games. But it doesn't.
shouting down my points about lester with "well, it didn't hurt" is like saying it doesn't matter if a guy starts out walking 3 guys every inning as long it's followed by a K and a double play.
it's like elevating ERA and wins to a high level while ignoring what it took to get there.
I'm asking how much it has hurt Lester and the Cubs this year. Do you have that answer?
I legitimately don't recall you answering that quesion, apart from the condescending silliness you just posted. So if you did answer specifically about the impact of Lester's issue, I'd like to re-read it. Thanks.
if runner = on base and pitcher = j.lester then lead = large
if lead = large then probability of extra base on following hit > average of mean
okay, enough of that silliness...
...you can read more on the thread i copy/pasted this from the last time you decided you needed to talk to me about me.
Thank you for your answer.
bless your heart.
I don't recall you answering my question about quantifying how it has hurt Lester and the Cubs this season, apart from one guy scoring on a sac fly. Can you direct me to your answer? Thanks.
Lester's personal catcher has an .809 OPS.
we already has this asinine discussion. you didn't like the answer. there's already an answer above you can apply about how a guy goes from 1st base to home on a sac fly that included him stealing 3rd while lester watched from the mound. the fact that the cubs bats, 100% independent of that situation, scored some runs invalidates it as an issue to you. i find that stupid. we will not get anywhere with this. you know we will not get anywhere with this...because we already had this asinine discussion.
it's not about SB...it never was.
jake arrieta being slow to the plate isn't comparable to jon lester not throwing to any base. how the runners read off arrieta isn't anything similar to what a runner is reading off lester.
maybe arrieta could use a personal catcher solely to control his running game...but i doubt it's that important.