Don't flip out too much over injuries

#1PackerBacker wrote:I hear ya, Duckles! As a fellow Packer Backer, I hate seeing any of our players hurt! Of course who cares if other teams lose their players! Who cares if our players deliberately injure other players, am I right!? It's all about the Pack!  

duck wrote:

#1PackerBacker wrote:I hear ya, Duckles! As a fellow Packer Backer, I hate seeing any of our players hurt! Of course who cares if other teams lose their players! Who cares if our players deliberately injure other players, am I right!? It's all about the Pack!  

To cut to the chase, get over it.  

Matthews is not in any way a dirty player.

A message has been sent all over the league that if QBs start running the way Kaepernick did last year with the ambiguity of the read offense, there will be consequences.  If Matthews didn't hammer him, someone else would have.

The NFL has rendered its verdict on the issue.  Kaepernick doesn't run so much anymore.  If he does, he's going to get killed.  He mostly stays in the pocket as he should and now he's just slightly better than mediocre.

Tough break, Niner fans.  

duck wrote:Look, I hate the Packer injuries as much as anyone.  I'd love to see our starting units go 16 games without anyone getting hurt.  However, that's simply not the nature of the game.  We're going to lose more players, as will other teams.

Injuries to marquee players such as Rodgers and Matthews are particularly costly, not because of the financial investment involved, but because the differential between their capabilities and those who might replace them are significant.

However, injuries to players much lower on the pecking order are really not that big of a deal at all.  If you were to assign a numeric value to each player you'd see that the drop off between Rodgers and Seneca is quite dramatic.  However, the drop off between quality receivers like Jones and Cobb and guys like Boykin and the new guys coming in... is not nearly as great!  At an even lower end, if we lose a back up and bring up a guy from the practice squad, the curve flattens out.  Not much difference between, let's say, a hypothetical 5.3 and 5.1.

In fact the differential in talent between the low guys on the roster and the guys on the practice squad... and the available unsigned talent just waiting for phone calls... is almost indistinguishable. Project a bell shape curve on to the overall pool of talent and you see that as you approach the middle of the talent curve, the abundancy of good players increases.

My point?  It's not like we drop off from our #3 and #4 players to total scrubs.  The lower tier could be just as good and maybe even hungrier than them.  There's a huge reservoir of talent out there... and injuries to most players will not significantly affect a stable team with a good system.

The injury bug is not just about us.  ALL teams are getting hammered with injuries.  I just think we'll deal with it better than most.

MB20 wrote:

duck wrote:Look, I hate the Packer injuries as much as anyone.  I'd love to see our starting units go 16 games without anyone getting hurt.  However, that's simply not the nature of the game.  We're going to lose more players, as will other teams.

Injuries to marquee players such as Rodgers and Matthews are particularly costly, not because of the financial investment involved, but because the differential between their capabilities and those who might replace them are significant.

However, injuries to players much lower on the pecking order are really not that big of a deal at all.  If you were to assign a numeric value to each player you'd see that the drop off between Rodgers and Seneca is quite dramatic.  However, the drop off between quality receivers like Jones and Cobb and guys like Boykin and the new guys coming in... is not nearly as great!  At an even lower end, if we lose a back up and bring up a guy from the practice squad, the curve flattens out.  Not much difference between, let's say, a hypothetical 5.3 and 5.1.

In fact the differential in talent between the low guys on the roster and the guys on the practice squad... and the available unsigned talent just waiting for phone calls... is almost indistinguishable. Project a bell shape curve on to the overall pool of talent and you see that as you approach the middle of the talent curve, the abundancy of good players increases.

My point?  It's not like we drop off from our #3 and #4 players to total scrubs.  The lower tier could be just as good and maybe even hungrier than them.  There's a huge reservoir of talent out there... and injuries to most players will not significantly affect a stable team with a good system.

The injury bug is not just about us.  ALL teams are getting hammered with injuries.  I just think we'll deal with it better than most.

It shouldn't be the end of the world, no. Even without Cobb, the offense can hurt you with Nelson, Jones, Lacy, and even Finley. That's two more weapons than a lot of other teams have. It's plenty with which to win games.

The defense is like a whole other unit with Jolly worked into the mix and Hawk finally able to run like a real NFL linebacker. The injuries to the OLBs are what worries me. Perry breaking his foot was one rotten fucking break. I don't like seeing one position get so worn thin like this.

duck wrote:Funny stuff, Jhn.  What is your thing with ducks anyway?  Please tell me your zipper stays shut.  

JnC4GB wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

JnC4GB wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

duck wrote::: deep voice::  Why is everybody always pickin' on me?

duck wrote::: deep voice::  Why is everybody always pickin' on me?

duck wrote:Look, I hate the Packer injuries as much as anyone.  I'd love to see our starting units go 16 games without anyone getting hurt.  However, that's simply not the nature of the game.  We're going to lose more players, as will other teams.

Injuries to marquee players such as Rodgers and Matthews are particularly costly, not because of the financial investment involved, but because the differential between their capabilities and those who might replace them are significant.

However, injuries to players much lower on the pecking order are really not that big of a deal at all.  If you were to assign a numeric value to each player you'd see that the drop off between Rodgers and Seneca is quite dramatic.  However, the drop off between quality receivers like Jones and Cobb and guys like Boykin and the new guys coming in... is not nearly as great!  At an even lower end, if we lose a back up and bring up a guy from the practice squad, the curve flattens out.  Not much difference between, let's say, a hypothetical 5.3 and 5.1.

In fact the differential in talent between the low guys on the roster and the guys on the practice squad... and the available unsigned talent just waiting for phone calls... is almost indistinguishable. Project a bell shape curve on to the overall pool of talent and you see that as you approach the middle of the talent curve, the abundancy of good players increases.

My point?  It's not like we drop off from our #3 and #4 players to total scrubs.  The lower tier could be just as good and maybe even hungrier than them.  There's a huge reservoir of talent out there... and injuries to most players will not significantly affect a stable team with a good system.

The injury bug is not just about us.  ALL teams are getting hammered with injuries.  I just think we'll deal with it better than most.

RingoCStarrQB wrote:

duck wrote:Look, I hate the Packer injuries as much as anyone.  I'd love to see our starting units go 16 games without anyone getting hurt.  However, that's simply not the nature of the game.  We're going to lose more players, as will other teams.

Injuries to marquee players such as Rodgers and Matthews are particularly costly, not because of the financial investment involved, but because the differential between their capabilities and those who might replace them are significant.

However, injuries to players much lower on the pecking order are really not that big of a deal at all.  If you were to assign a numeric value to each player you'd see that the drop off between Rodgers and Seneca is quite dramatic.  However, the drop off between quality receivers like Jones and Cobb and guys like Boykin and the new guys coming in... is not nearly as great!  At an even lower end, if we lose a back up and bring up a guy from the practice squad, the curve flattens out.  Not much difference between, let's say, a hypothetical 5.3 and 5.1.

In fact the differential in talent between the low guys on the roster and the guys on the practice squad... and the available unsigned talent just waiting for phone calls... is almost indistinguishable. Project a bell shape curve on to the overall pool of talent and you see that as you approach the middle of the talent curve, the abundancy of good players increases.

My point?  It's not like we drop off from our #3 and #4 players to total scrubs.  The lower tier could be just as good and maybe even hungrier than them.  There's a huge reservoir of talent out there... and injuries to most players will not significantly affect a stable team with a good system.

The injury bug is not just about us.  ALL teams are getting hammered with injuries.  I just think we'll deal with it better than most.

What the duck has gotten in to you?   We barely beat a .500 Ravens team with no offensive line and very mediocre defense last Sunday, with a QB that would not take off with 25 yards of green in front of him on a key play.   Here is the store to get your t-shirt..........http://www.iloveduluthstore.com/adult-humor/shut-the-duck-up-t-shirt for about $15.