RealGM

We're going to talk about the team whether they release any information or not. They know this.

Personally, I couldn't care less. In the end, a transparent organization isn't generating any positives. There isn't anything to gain by releasing this information.

Un-sticky this and let your crusade die. It makes the RealGm crowd here look like a bunch of lunatics. Maybe we are, but I'd like to give off the appearance that we're relatively well-balanced.

paulpressey25 wrote:

DrugBust wrote:The difference here is there was legit news. They didn't know the extent of the injury.

Not all injuries are created equal.

Again, I'm not expecting all this news yesterday, today or even tomorrow. A straw man on that is being set-up in that regard.

I'm simply asking for a story, like the one the AP writer did with Phil Jackson, would come out by the end of this week once Bogut has completed all his tests, scans and surgery.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/bucks/89960182.html
At this point, it almost seems like beating a dead horse. They did initial report and how the team will adapt without him. They gave the expected recovery time. You could do a story on what type of rehab Bogut has to do for a full-recovery, but that is more feature writing instead of beat writing.

I really don't think we will or should get more information beyond that unless a set-back happens. I doubt they will say what exactly broke or anything like that. Obviously, the reporters should be keeping tab on it but I don't feel like too many more stories are required on the injury.

MartyConlonOnTheRun wrote:Is this really much different than what skiles said about drew?

I think it is a different story. In the Bynum story they give the results of the MRI and say "no tears" which is info we haven't gotten yet. Jackson then goes on to talk about how the injury might or might not affect Bynum in gameplay.

I know the way these guys operate in that front office. I can guarantee that Skiles knows exactly what was done in the way of surgery on that hand. Again, just disclose the information and let us decide. There is zero competitive advantage in not disclosing it. This is not like 1963 and Red Auerbach is going to be able to pull off a sneak trade where he send a guy with a blown ACL off for Oscar Robertson because the Royals don't have a team doctor smart enough to find the injury.

It really goes back to the quality of the organization and whether they want to cultivate a modern fan-base. And it also goes to the quality of the reporters covering the team and whether they hold the team accountable. Now of course the LA Times doesn't derive half their sports section advertising revenue from the Lakers nor provide a free gratis courtside seat to every game to the sports editor.

There is some credence to PP's point, but IMO his argument is over the top following Bogut's story. We have gotten burned in the past but now it looks like a paranoid mom after finding pot in her daughters room.

DrugBust wrote:Personally, I couldn't care less..

Right, and you've attended how many Bucks games at the BC in your lifetime?

I know the answer. And that's why you could care less. You aren't a lunatic fan. You're here primarily for the academic debating that takes place.

And frankly that's why I'm surprised you wouldn't be on board with this. I really don't want to have to moderate the lunatic fan base, including myself for the next six-months as to whether Michael Redd can walk again or Andrew Bogut simply broke a small bone or had a Mayor Barrett reconstructive hand surgery. All these things can be answered with a little disclosure.

paulpressey25 wrote:

MartyConlonOnTheRun wrote:Is this really much different than what skiles said about drew?

I think it is a different story. In the Bynum story they give the results of the MRI and say "no tears" which is info we haven't gotten yet. Jackson then goes on to talk about how the injury might or might not affect Bynum in gameplay.
.

Honestly, I forgot about the elbow. I assumed it was fine and no tear since everyone from Bogut to the Bucks to the reporters seem to care about the hand. I think Woelfel initially reported that it was a clean dislocation, but that was early and before knowledge of the hand came out.

LUKE23 wrote:Note to Charles Gardner-when it is Monday, and you say Bogut is going to get surgery on Monday without classifying whether that is today or a week from today, you are a clown. Well, you're a clown anyway, but this only further adds to it.

So true. Charlie Gardner is a clown in the turest sense of the word.

I think not having transparency only makes me believe the worst about everything, and that certainly doesn't help the franchise. If there is good news, a players injury turns out to be not as serious or he's coming back early, they generally release that information. But not saying anything about other injury scenarios does not make it go away, and does not confuse me into buying next years season tickets either. If anything it makes me less likely to spend money.

I would think even a non-specific article about the type of injury and general timetable for typical recoveries from different degrees of severities would be helpful and informational. I honestly can't remeber what was actually done for Redd at the time of injury but I do know it hasn't been updated. And when you can see a stark differance between the Packers, the Brewers, and then the Bucks in that regard I think there is something wrong with that.

I am however not sure that the Bucks are hiding the information as much as no one seems to want to write about it.

The injury coverage, at least in the last five years, reflect poorly on both the Bucks organization and the media. When injuries like Simmons, TJ and Bogut are reported as maladies falling within a return time of a couple weeks and they miss far more extended portions, my own perception is that both the Bucks medical staff and the beat reporters have failed. Granted, not all injuries are the same, but when similar situations repeat themselves over and over in both coverage and recovery I can't help but think the Bucks are a 2nd class organization worth the crap reportage the local paper deigns to give them. A writer who does more than simply regurgitate press releases might think to question the Bucks on injury reports. That same writer might want to consults sports doctors not affiliated with the Bucks. It would be nothing to place a call to Green Bay or the UW to get a different take. As much as I wanted news on Bogut NOW, I get that a diagnosis takes time. What's the excuse with Max?

It's really a shame. The Bucks have a small but diehard fanbase. More people, especially stateside, are welcome to jump on board, but the casual fans who might become dedicated fans - not to mention ticketholders - are only going to get the JS's abysmal trio of Hunt, Howard and Gardner. I live in Madison and there isn't a fartling of coverage here. Here, it's pretty much whatever UW sports are active seasonally, Packers, Brewers, g*d*****d local professional golfers, and then maybe Bucks. Bogut's injury story was drawn from wire sources, so the WI State Journal didn't even use a local columnist to frame the story. If the media isn't going to care, how are the casual fans going to?

Man, this is really a scattershot post and I'm sure there's quite a few things in it that could be taken out of context and made me to look foolish. I guess this is me being mad that the Kelly Dwyers and Chris Sheridans of the world have been spreading the gospel on a national scale, while the scribes at home appear apathetic.

I go back and forth on this because I feel as a fan it would be nice to get an update, at the same time if the player/Bucks don't want to provide it I don't necessarily think they are obligated to. I think it is still the right thing to do.

I am happy with how they have been handling the Bogut news and updates.

I think it is absurd that we haven't heard a single word about Redd's surgery, in fact maybe I'll call up the pro hoops show on Thursday if Hammond is on and ask.

I just wonder if they are not saying anything about Redd because as an organization they have already made the decision that he is never playing for the Bucks again and they are trying to distance themselves from him. That is the only thing I can come up with for why we haven't heard anything.

paulpressey25 wrote:By way of example, our highest paid player, Michael Redd, had follow up surgery over a month ago, yet there has been no report of what the procedure entailed and how things went. Does anyone here think that Aaron Rodgers could blow out his knee a second time and we'd get no stories on what the surgeons actually did? No stories on the recovery prognosis?

Wait redd has had two surgies since his injury in PHX?? So how do you know that he's had two surgies??

WiscoKing13 wrote:Wait redd has had two surgies since his injury in PHX?? So how do you know that he's had two surgies??

I probably worded that incorrectly. I used the term "follow-up" along the lines of an ACL Revision surgery, the procedure when you go to fix the ACL graft from the first surgery (March 2009) that tore.

Where my curiousity in this thing lies is that there is a fair amount of good medical information on the internet that implies having to repair the "repair" can in some instances be a two-step surgical process that requires a first surgery to clean out the torn grafts, then a second surgery six-months later to put in new ligament grafts.

If Redd had the old graft removed and new graft put in during the same procedure, it is plausible we hear about him trying to get back on the court next fall. If he needs two procedures, we can pretty much rule out him trying a comeback next season.

There also is significant talk on the net about how when an ACL graft fails as Redd's did, the resulting second graft generally won't allow you to resume a career as a world class athlete. The implication being that a guy like Redd who plays NBA shooting guard would never be able to return to the court. He might be able to lead a normal life and shoot in the driveway with his children, but not play NBA ball.

paulpressey25 wrote:I probably worded that incorrectly. I used the term "follow-up" along the lines of an ACL Revision surgery, the procedure when you go to fix the ACL graft from the first surgery (March 2009) that tore.

Where my curiousity in this thing lies is that there is a fair amount of good medical information on the internet that implies having to repair the "repair" can in some instances be a two-step surgical process that requires a first surgery to clean out the torn grafts, then a second surgery six-months later to put in new ligament grafts.

If Redd had the old graft removed and new graft put in during the same procedure, it is plausible we hear about him trying to get back on the court next fall. If he needs two procedures, we can pretty much rule out him trying a comeback next season.

There also is significant talk on the net about how when an ACL graft fails as Redd's did, the resulting second graft generally won't allow you to resume a career as a world class athlete. The implication being that a guy like Redd who plays NBA shooting guard would never be able to return to the court. He might be able to lead a normal life and shoot in the driveway with his children, but not play NBA ball.

Well this is absolutely huge news, and beat writers should be all over this. As far as the Bucks needing to disclose this, I don't agree they need to. But yes, our local media should really be reporting this.

Same as the Bogut injury. There should be updates almost daily by the media (even if it doesn't come from th ebucks) until we know his official prognosis.

paulpressey25 wrote:

WiscoKing13 wrote:Wait redd has had two surgies since his injury in PHX?? So how do you know that he's had two surgies??

I probably worded that incorrectly. I used the term "follow-up" along the lines of an ACL Revision surgery, the procedure when you go to fix the ACL graft from the first surgery (March 2009) that tore.

Where my curiousity in this thing lies is that there is a fair amount of good medical information on the internet that implies having to repair the "repair" can in some instances be a two-step surgical process that requires a first surgery to clean out the torn grafts, then a second surgery six-months later to put in new ligament grafts.

If Redd had the old graft removed and new graft put in during the same procedure, it is plausible we hear about him trying to get back on the court next fall. If he needs two procedures, we can pretty much rule out him trying a comeback next season.

There also is significant talk on the net about how when an ACL graft fails as Redd's did, the resulting second graft generally won't allow you to resume a career as a world class athlete. The implication being that a guy like Redd who plays NBA shooting guard would never be able to return to the court. He might be able to lead a normal life and shoot in the driveway with his children, but not play NBA ball.

Yeah i've heard you talk about this before thats why it spiked my curiousity when I thought you said he already two surgies after the injury in Jan.

I also think its complete crap that we don't have one so called journalist covering the bucks that has even uttered the word insurance money. Giving them the benefit of the doubt that the team is with holding information on specific injuries/recovery time, why not inform the fan base of what could happen with redd.