The thing is, Sam didn't really answer the guy's question. Is there a correlation between starter's minutes and injury? I suspect there isn't. But bernstein only likes the numbers when they confirm the point he is trying to make.

Of course there's some type of correlation. The question is if it is a big enough risk to make the extra minutes worth it. And it probably is worth it in almost every scenario.

I'm not sure there's any correlation at all. Some guys get hurt tripping over their gym bags. I hardly think playing a few extra minutes per game is going to cause the biggest blackest studliest best athletes in the world to break down. If you mean a guy is more likely to get hurt in the game than on the bench, I agree. But as you seem to be pointing out with your statement regarding worth, the likelihood that they will get hurt within those "extra" minutes is remote and outweighed by the value of playing them. bernstein seems to take the position that the minutes are cumulative and that a player has a limit to how much he can play before becoming injured- or at least less effective. Basketball players play basketball. Radio hosts flap their gums.

All im saying is the bolded statements contradict eachother. There's obviously a mor inherent risk of injury to playing a guy more minutes. So that part is obviously true on its own merits. Then as you said its a idea of risk/reward and I think that is dependent on the player. I don't think it's a good idea to play Noah over 38 mpg when he's never played even 33 in a season before and is a seven foot guy with a history of foot problems and no true backup on the team. I don't have as much of an issue with Deng playing 38 minutes if he is completely healthy. I don't think it's nearly as physically demanding on him.

:roll:

It's hard to believe that someone who is paid to write stories about the Bulls, who is also paid by the Bulls, would not have a problem with how the team is operated. Sam Smith is basically Jerry's PR guy.

They don't really contradict each other although they might seem to. Of course, it's a lot harder to get injured on the bench, although I'm sure we can find instances of guys who have. But it isn't the extra minutes themselves causing the breakdown or injury.

What I'm saying is that in baseball, for example, you can look at a giant sample of pitchers and pitches per game and you see evidence of decline across the board at certain benchmarks. That's real evidence. Real numbers. It doesn't mean there isn't some guy who can't throw 130 pitchers per game with no ill effects. It's just that he isn't the norm.

I'd be interested to see if players averaging more minutes per game spend more time on injured lists. I really doubt that to be the case. Anyway, I think that's what the guy was asking Sam Smith and it went unanswered.

Plantar fasciitis is an injury caused by overuse/excessive minutes. Gibson has suffered from it in the past and it's been a problem for Noah in multiple seasons. There is also a body of scientific literature that links traumatic injuries--such as ACL tears--to fatigue.

Maybe so, it just would be nice to have the answer to the question. For example, do those averaging 39 minutes in each game they play miss more time than those averaging 33 minutes.

Since different coaches demand different effort levels from their players, I don't think minutes alone have great predictive power with regards to injury. A high-effort/high-minutes guy like Thibodeau strikes me as the kind of coach who is likely to have difficulty keeping his best players healthy over the long term. Of course, Thibodeau seems to understand the toll his philosophy takes on players and thus developed a great second team in past seasons.

Well, that seems to be bernstein's take on the matter as well. You both may be right. And I'm not going to argue with your belief. We all have our beliefs; sometimes they are right and sometimes we are wrong and we are surprised by the reality.

However, I cannot accept such a position based on nothing more than a feeling from dan bernstein. This is a guy who constantly derides the intangible, who takes unfettered joy in ridiculing those who express similar unsupported belief in concepts like "momentum" and "getting up for games".

It's one thing to point out a larger occurrence of injury or an increase in ERA after x amount of pitches. That is a fact and it is difficult to argue with facts. Were I to call today's show with the belief that today's pitchers are pussies and need to pitch more rather than less to avoid injury, I would be assaulted with the irrefutable evidence and then quite likely mocked in a faux Chicago accent: "Deez guize today are a buncha wusses. Dat Bob Gibson yousta tro tree hunnert innins an' he never got hurt."

I would only ask of bernstein the same rigors he demands of his callers. Fair enough?

I haven't been listening to B&B lately and wasn't aware that this is his current view. At the beginning of last season, he was arguing that there is no correlation between minutes and the propensity for injury. There is a thread about that somewhere in this section. At the time I pointed out the absurdity of this view given the number of fatigue-related injuries the Bulls had suffered under Thibodeau. Since then, I've learned that there is a strong connection between fatigue and traumatic injury.

In any event, it seems like you're adopting a position just because you revel in identifying yourself as a Bernstein contrarian. I know that's become all the rage on the board, but I'm not sure there's an intrinsic value in it.

That isn't the case. I just don't believe a 23 year old elite athlete in top physical condition is affected in any significant way by playing an extra four minutes per game. Whether it's under Thibodeau or Vinny Del Negro. If there is evidence to show I am incorrect I'd be interested to see it.

It's easy to blame the coach for Rose's injury. Why was he in a game that was all but over anyway? But the truth is that could just as easily have occurred in the first minute of a game. That doesn't mean Rose shouldn't start.

And it can't really be that Thibodeau is this great coach who gets every ounce from his players on the one hand, yet he is an ignorant boob who drives them too hard on the other. I think the hard-driving and the maximizing of talent are linked. Again, no evidence to support that, but it's my feeling. And I would suggest that it's a reasonable conclusion.