Rumor: Polanco Not Ready for Season Start?

[Vanimal46]

Concur with Nick’s tweet. Hopefully it’s not a lingering concern all season for Polanco. 

[Nine of twelve]

51 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

Concur with Nick’s tweet. Hopefully it’s not a lingering concern all season for Polanco. 

I feel torn about how much information regarding players' health should be revealed. On one hand, we as fans want to know as much information as possible. On the other hand, HIPPA allows a patient to keep all medical information confidential if desired. (I don't know if there's anything in the CBA requiring players to waive this right, or even if it would be legal to institute such a requirement.) And on the third hand it's not to a team's advantage for another team to know the full extent of an injury to a player. For example, NHL teams are vague about injuries, often not being any more forthcoming than to say upper body or lower body. And on the fourth hand, the league needs to know some details about health to prevent teams from abusing the injured lists.

In cases where there's a medical issue the player will play when he's ready whether the public knows everything or the public knows nothing. So I just don't think it's a big deal.

[Mike Sixel]

23 minutes ago, Nine of twelve said:

I feel torn about how much information regarding players' health should be revealed. On one hand, we as fans want to know as much information as possible. On the other hand, HIPPA allows a patient to keep all medical information confidential if desired. (I don't know if there's anything in the CBA requiring players to waive this right, or even if it would be legal to institute such a requirement.) And on the third hand it's not to a team's advantage for another team to know the full extent of an injury to a player. For example, NHL teams are vague about injuries, often not being any more forthcoming than to say upper body or lower body. And on the fourth hand, the league needs to know some details about health to prevent teams from abusing the injured lists.

In cases where there's a medical issue the player will play when he's ready whether the public knows everything or the public knows nothing. So I just don't think it's a big deal.

Teams owe fans nothing about how healthy their players are, imo. Nothing.

[stringer bell]

30 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Teams owe fans nothing about how healthy their players are, imo. Nothing.

I do think they owe us honesty. Reporting that Polanco was on track for Opening Day and now hearing otherwise when he hasn't suffered a setback tells me they aren't being totally honest. 

[Mike Sixel]

4 minutes ago, stringer bell said:

I do think they owe us honesty. Reporting that Polanco was on track for Opening Day and now hearing otherwise when he hasn't suffered a setback tells me they aren't being totally honest. 

Fair, which is why i'd say nothing if I was them. 

[stringer bell]

1 hour ago, Nine of twelve said:

I feel torn about how much information regarding players' health should be revealed. On one hand, we as fans want to know as much information as possible. On the other hand, HIPPA allows a patient to keep all medical information confidential if desired. (I don't know if there's anything in the CBA requiring players to waive this right, or even if it would be legal to institute such a requirement.) And on the third hand it's not to a team's advantage for another team to know the full extent of an injury to a player. For example, NHL teams are vague about injuries, often not being any more forthcoming than to say upper body or lower body. And on the fourth hand, the league needs to know some details about health to prevent teams from abusing the injured lists.

In cases where there's a medical issue the player will play when he's ready whether the public knows everything or the public knows nothing. So I just don't think it's a big deal.

That's a nice "evenhanded" view on reporting injuries. We fans do want to be in the know about our team, but the players do have rights and the team isn't going to give opponents an advantage by oversharing. My hope is that Polanco is healthy sometime next month and that the knee problem is behind him. 

[Squirrel]

1 hour ago, stringer bell said:

I do think they owe us honesty. Reporting that Polanco was on track for Opening Day and now hearing otherwise when he hasn't suffered a setback tells me they aren't being totally honest. 

I'm not sure I'd call it dishonest, at least not without knowing all the answers. Mike is right, best to say nothing. But fans wouldn't like that, either. For all we know, they did think he was on track, but then maybe they needed to re-evaluate when the tracking was no longer moving forward. It doesn't have to be a setback, but for whatever the issue is, it's not progressing as they thought and hoped it would. Again, they have way more info than we do. So ... while it appears dishonest, I'm not ready to call the FO liars.

[Nine of twelve]

3 hours ago, stringer bell said:

I do think they owe us honesty. Reporting that Polanco was on track for Opening Day and now hearing otherwise when he hasn't suffered a setback tells me they aren't being totally honest. 

They do not owe the fans anything in this regard, any more than they "owe" the fans the privilege of seeing all the top players at every home game. The team needs to do what is best for the team and its players, and if that means keeping private medical matters private then that's what must be done.

[Riverbrian]

15 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

Fair, which is why i'd say nothing if I was them. 

 

15 hours ago, stringer bell said:

I do think they owe us honesty. Reporting that Polanco was on track for Opening Day and now hearing otherwise when he hasn't suffered a setback tells me they aren't being totally honest. 

If this tells you that they aren't being totally honest. 

Mike is absolutely right. They shouldn't be speaking at all. 

[NotAboutWinning]

Seems like he did not come into camp at 100%. If months of rest and rehab didn't get him back to good, how is more time going to make a difference?

[ashbury]

18 hours ago, Squirrel said:

When I was down there Gordon was doing a lot of work at 2nd, before games even started, so I think they’ve been counting on using him in the infield more than the outfield. 

Concur.  I think the team sees Gordon as the answer to any specific need in the outfield or in the infield except 1B (and I'd never completely rule that out if they think his bat has become legit). 

[stringer bell]

2 hours ago, ashbury said:

Concur.  I think the team sees Gordon as the answer to any specific need in the outfield or in the infield except 1B (and I'd never completely rule that out if they think his bat has become legit). 

Nit pick here. I don't think Gordon is the primary backup at third or short. Outfield and second base, yes, at least against right handed pitching.

[Nine of twelve]

2 hours ago, NotAboutWinning said:

Seems like he did not come into camp at 100%. If months of rest and rehab didn't get him back to good, how is more time going to make a difference?

Every injury is different. Every surgery is different. Every patient is different. It is not possible to accurately predict how things will go in every case. Sometimes recovery is quick, sometimes recovery is not.

[Vanimal46]

3 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

 

If this tells you that they aren't being totally honest. 

Mike is absolutely right. They shouldn't be speaking at all. 

Isn’t lack of transparency what caused the last trainer to get fired? This is a business in the entertainment industry seeking money from consumers. There’s got to be a middle ground met between saying nothing at all (creating distrust) and going to a press conference with someone’s X-Ray result and presenting it on a projector. 

[Craig Arko]

Hmmm… so if you make a statement which is later found out to be mistaken does this make you a liar? I’m sure I’ve done this many times. I’m so vain I must think the liar paradox is about me.

[stringer bell]

This is really a sidebar in the talk about injuries. Last year, several Twins were injured and the original word was that they would be back in short order--Alcala, Larnach, Jeffers, Polanco--and not a lot of information was shared about the Buxton injury (IMHO). It's not a lie if there is a misdiagnosis (Jeffers'  thumb was broken, Larnach's and Alcala's injuries were more severe). As I'm finding out personally, diagnosing and treating ailments isn't exact and precise. Sometimes there are complications and the recovery schedule isn't the same for everyone.

 

[Vanimal46]

11 minutes ago, Craig Arko said:

Hmmm… so if you make a statement which is later found out to be mistaken does this make you a liar? I’m sure I’ve done this many times. I’m so vain I must think the liar paradox is about me.

I likely wouldn’t trust a medical professional if they say I’m fine and it turns out I need surgery. 

[Mike Sixel]

11 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

I likely wouldn’t trust a medical professional if they say I’m fine and it turns out I need surgery. 

You probably don't want to know how often doctors are wrong......plus, surgery is a last resort. Fans seem to think (not you) that it's just a routine thing to cut open a body and do stuff to it. It isn't. No matter how routine it is, it isn't.

[Riverbrian]

42 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

Isn’t lack of transparency what caused the last trainer to get fired? This is a business in the entertainment industry seeking money from consumers. There’s got to be a middle ground met between saying nothing at all (creating distrust) and going to a press conference with someone’s X-Ray result and presenting it on a projector. 

I have no idea what caused the last trainer to get fired. Was it lack of transparency? Was it assessment inaccuracy? Was it something else? Was it a combination of things? 

They are not going to hang that information out to the public so we can hang the trainer especially when they are easily hanged by us? 

Here's a simple exercise. 

For 30 Seconds - Give Derek Falvey the benefit of the doubt. For 30 seconds assume that Derek was asked a question about the opening day readiness of Buxton, Polanco and Kirilloff and for 30 seconds assume that he answered the question based upon the information that he had at the time.

During that 30 seconds of giving him the benefit of the doubt re-read what stringer bell typed 

  19 hours ago, stringer bell said:

I do think they owe us honesty. Reporting that Polanco was on track for Opening Day and now hearing otherwise when he hasn't suffered a setback tells me they aren't being totally honest. 

After giving him the benefit of the doubt and reading what stringer typed for 30 seconds- Ask yourself if giving an honest answer to a question did him any good? A question that he was asked and he has to respond. 

After 30 seconds... if you conclude that: Yes... You agree with stringer that he was lying for some personal gain. You are contributing to the reason why we (the public) are fed cliche after cliche and the reason why PR departments exist in the first place. 

After 30 seconds... if you conclude that: No... being honest did him no good. Think about the countless number of times that we (the social public) have reacted to potentially honest comments over the years and ask yourself if our reactions are the reasons the message is managed.      

We are not asking for honesty. We are using honesty as an excuse to justify our demands for perfection under all circumstances when there are too many uncontrollable factors that make perfection in this case impossible. We demand what we want to hear, we will kill anything that we don't want to hear.  

As long as we keep doing this... And we will... We are asking to be handled. We are asking to be manipulated because we don't reward truth, we only reward hearing what we want to hear. We are asking to be kept in the dark because we don't deal with the light very well. Politicians will get 10% of the vote if they are honest about what they have to do and can do.  

As for the middle ground. Yeah, there is middle ground.

Reaching that middle ground depends on us trying to get there collectively. That isn't going to happen, we (the public) have no interest in getting to the middle ground. We are too busy making sure that all of the public relation graduates out of the universities across the country have a job when they graduate just to make sure that the message is managed. 

30 Seconds... Just do that for 30 seconds.   

 

[Craig Arko]

32 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

I have no idea what caused the last trainer to get fired. Was it lack of transparency? Was it assessment inaccuracy? Was it something else? Was it a combination of things? 

They are not going to hang that information out to the public so we can hang the trainer especially when they are easily hanged by us? 

Here's a simple exercise. 

For 30 Seconds - Give Derek Falvey the benefit of the doubt. For 30 seconds assume that Derek was asked a question about the opening day readiness of Buxton, Polanco and Kirilloff and for 30 seconds assume that he answered the question based upon the information that he had at the time.

During that 30 seconds of giving him the benefit of the doubt re-read what stringer bell typed 

  19 hours ago, stringer bell said:

I do think they owe us honesty. Reporting that Polanco was on track for Opening Day and now hearing otherwise when he hasn't suffered a setback tells me they aren't being totally honest. 

After giving him the benefit of the doubt and reading what stringer typed for 30 seconds- Ask yourself if giving an honest answer to a question did him any good? A question that he was asked and he has to respond. 

After 30 seconds... if you conclude that: Yes... You agree with stringer that he was lying for some personal gain. You are contributing to the reason why we (the public) are fed cliche after cliche and the reason why PR departments exist in the first place. 

After 30 seconds... if you conclude that: No... being honest did him no good. Think about the countless number of times that we (the social public) have reacted to potentially honest comments over the years and ask yourself if our reactions are the reasons the message is managed.      

We are not asking for honesty. We are using honesty as an excuse to justify our demands for perfection under all circumstances when there are too many uncontrollable factors that make perfection in this case impossible. We demand what we want to hear, we will kill anything that we don't want to hear.  

As long as we keep doing this... And we will... We are asking to be handled. We are asking to be manipulated because we don't reward truth, we only reward hearing what we want to hear. We are asking to be kept in the dark because we don't deal with the light very well. Politicians will get 10% of the vote if they are honest about what they have to do and can do.  

As for the middle ground. Yeah, there is middle ground.

Reaching that middle ground depends on us trying to get there collectively. That isn't going to happen, we (the public) have no interest in getting to the middle ground. We are too busy making sure that all of the public relation graduates out of the universities across the country have a job when they graduate just to make sure that the message is managed. 

30 Seconds... Just do that for 30 seconds.   

 

I’ll see your 30 seconds, and raise you another 30 seconds.

[howeda7]

23 hours ago, Nine of twelve said:

I feel torn about how much information regarding players' health should be revealed. On one hand, we as fans want to know as much information as possible. On the other hand, HIPPA allows a patient to keep all medical information confidential if desired. (I don't know if there's anything in the CBA requiring players to waive this right, or even if it would be legal to institute such a requirement.) And on the third hand it's not to a team's advantage for another team to know the full extent of an injury to a player. For example, NHL teams are vague about injuries, often not being any more forthcoming than to say upper body or lower body. And on the fourth hand, the league needs to know some details about health to prevent teams from abusing the injured lists.

In cases where there's a medical issue the player will play when he's ready whether the public knows everything or the public knows nothing. So I just don't think it's a big deal.

HIPAA has nothing to do with this.

[Jeff K]

On 3/19/2023 at 6:37 AM, Squirrel said:

No, probably not. If he were a choice to go north, he wouldn’t have been optioned already. It means that either Larnach or Wallner make the team if Polanco is truly not ready. 

I think Larnach looks like a pretty good bet to make the team especially since we're going to see Gallo at First and Kirilloff likely starting on the dl.

[Squirrel]

26 minutes ago, Jeff K said:

I think Larnach looks like a pretty good bet to make the team especially since we're going to see Gallo at First and Kirilloff likely starting on the dl.

For sure. Definitely Larnach. And especially the way he’s playing. And with Polanco out, wonder who will get his spot