Basking in Buxton’s Season

10 minutes ago, Nine of twelve said:

lso, I did not state that every injury Buxton suffered was purely due to luck. I only specifically cited three injuries. And I certainly never stated that "injuries are purely luck". Please refrain from twisting my previous statements into something I did not say.

Isn't reading this as an emphasis on only bad luck a fair interpretation?

That leads me (and most people) to conclude that his injuries are a statistical anomaly. In other words, bad luck.

i don't think I'm twisting anything with a statement like that.  Now, maybe this is the lack of clarity issue, but that was the statement I went off of. So...in the interest of you clarifying...if not luck....why has Buxton missed 2/3rds of the possible games the last four years?

Do I think Buxton has just had some bad luck? Absolutely. Do I also think his body, from a purely physiological standpoint may be more prone to injury? Absolutely that could be a possibility. And these two ideas aren't necessarily, potentially, mutually exclusive. It could be a portion of both. We just don't know and there is no statistic or measurement that can give us a definitive answer. Might as well ask a Magic 8 Ball for an answer.

IMO, part of the discussion here is past reality vs hope. And that's fine. I have tremendous hope that Buxton WILL be healthier and have better luck going forward. And I'm 100% on board with an extension! And I repeat it's tweaking/changing the incentives and not the up front money that is the issue. And again, if the team has to pay him for an successful and incentive laden season they would be ecstatic to do so. 

But I DO want to make a statement that was brought up about other athletes and injury situations. To his credit, Buck has worked hard to gain good weight and muscle for his bat and his endurance. He has made changes in his defensive approach to help avoid physical abuse on "hard" contact plays and it seems to have helped. And I am NOT necessarily speaking about Buxton when I say this, but while speed MAY diminish somewhat, a large number of athletes truly hit their physical prime in regard to strength, explosiveness and endurance between the ages of 27-32. Again, I'm not speaking of Buck specifically, I'm just saying it happens a lot. And maybe, just maybe, it could offer a little glimmer of hope for him along with his hard work, experience, changes, and maybe even, yes, a little better luck.

He should get 6 or 7yrs at around $15M with incentives that aren't unreasonable or hard to reach if he's just healthy and should "add up" to around $25-30M ish. And if you want to add an extra $5-10M for an MVP trophy, wouldn't the Twins be fine with that as well if it happened?

4 hours ago, Nine of twelve said:

Again, I apologize for inaccurately expressing my thoughts.

I think Buxton's past incaution in certain situations, such as running into fences, increased his risk of injury. During the last three seasons he appears to have learned from his past and to have become more aware of putting himself at higher risk, and I don't think that any of his injuries during the last two seasons were the result of incaution. Nor do I believe future injuries he may suffer are likely to be due to this. He has also taken steps to improve his physical conditioning.

I have seen no data to suggest that Buxton is physiologically injury prone. If you believe that to be the case, the burden is on you to produce data to support that hypothesis. Again, keep in mind that it is invalid to use population-based statistics to prove or disprove an hypothesis about an individual. If you are unable to produce this data you should refrain from making such an assertion.

Due to the absence of data to suggest that Buxton is physiologically injury prone and due to his having taken steps to reduce his injury risk, it appears to me that bad luck is the biggest factor in his missing as many games as he has in recent seasons.

 

 

Yes, I think some of his early injuries were a lack of caution or bad technique, but as I noted I think he has made changes.  However, the injuries he has had are more extensive than just "reckless or bad luck".  They are significantly diversified both in terms of how he is hurt and what parts of his body he injures.

Meaning, you can't dismiss the risk that comes with that history merely by chalking it up to bad luck and recklessness.  His rib cage injury, wrist injuries, and hip injury all don't fall in either category.  Among others.  Which means extensive amounts of time missed can't be dismissed so easily as you have tried.  Now...what explains that?  I don't know.  My point was that some athletes ARE more injury prone.  They can get hurt more often regardless of luck or recklessness because their muscles/bones are predisposed to injury.  Is Buxton necessarily in that camp?  No.  I can't prove that.  Likewise, you can't dismiss the possibility he is either.  Neither of us have the necessary information for a conclusion.  We are talking about the future so we are dealing in possibilities and probabilities.  I have never dismissed the fact that he might be suddenly healthy.  (Go ahead and check.  I said that's why I gamble on the extension)  You, however, did dismiss the alternative: that this is a case of an athlete who won't see this go away.  We know this can and does happen.  (The idea that "injury prone" isn't real, again, I demonstrably proved false) 

Take his current manager, such a diagnosis may come after years of injuries.  To claim, as you did, that past injury history has no bearing on future ones is plainly false in MANY cases.  Now, it isn't necessarily an indicator either, but that's where risk comes in.  And our conversation was about risks and 7 year contracts into the future.  It's plainly, scientifically true that he MAY have such risk and there is evidence it MAY be true of him considering the wide swath of injuries he has endured and his difficulties coming back from them.  It is plainly false to dismiss the connection between past injuries and future ones because athletes CAN be predisposed to injury regardless of whether they seem connected at the time.  Again, I proved this with scientific citation as well as the fact that it just makes sense from the "common sense" perspective.

I don't think this is controversial. Could these half a thousand games he missed since his draft day be a series of crazy bad luck?  Sure.  Could it also be that for all Buxton's genetic gifts that got him here, he had some unfortunate genetics for durability and endurance?  Sure.  Time will tell, but when predicting the future we only have the past and what we know about age/human bodies/etc. to inform us.  The Twins should recognize the risk and invest accordingly - give him a comfortable base, pay the man if he plays, but protect yourself in case this problem isn't going away - because it very well might not.

3 hours ago, Dennesey55347 said:

Ahhh. OK. 6 RBI in 220+ at bats makes sense now..

Ok, lets see, 7 spot (usually Rooker or Cave or Sano), 8 spot Jeffers or other catcher outside of Garver, 9 spot Simmons.  Question did any of these players have an OBP greater than .300?  Unlikey Buxton saw many players on base.