PDA

View Full Version : Vlad- Experiencing Tightness In His Legs


SEALgep
02-16-2004, 06:01 PM
Vlad experiencing tightness in his legs? It so appears, but they swear his back is holding up fine. It doesn't mention this, but I wonder if this is a result of poor circulation in his legs due to his back? I'm not saying he isn't going to be healthy enough to play, but that can be a concern, especially in the first year of a five year deal.

http://www.rotoworld.com/

rahulsekhar
02-16-2004, 06:11 PM
I thought it was common for one to lead to the other as the body compensates for weakness in one location by adjusting it's "style" of motion, leading to excess stress on another.

If so, couldn't this be an indication of continuing leg/back problems for Vlady? Not a good sign for the Angels.

Anyone know if they have any injury language in the contract ala Pudge (I don't believe so)? Also - any more medical people than me(meaning just about anyone) care to weigh in?

beckett21
02-16-2004, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
I thought it was common for one to lead to the other as the body compensates for weakness in one location by adjusting it's "style" of motion, leading to excess stress on another.

If so, couldn't this be an indication of continuing leg/back problems for Vlady? Not a good sign for the Angels.

Anyone know if they have any injury language in the contract ala Pudge (I don't believe so)? Also - any more medical people than me(meaning just about anyone) care to weigh in?

It could be secondary to compensation, but more likely I would say that this is strictly a conditioning issue. He probably has taken it easy to be cautious with his back and that has led to him being a little out of playing shape. I doubt that it is circulatory or directly related to the back. Tightness indicates muscular issues, and if it were due to the back this would be more neurological in nature, pain instead of tightness. He's just out of shape (for him... which would be in shape for 99.9% of the rest of the population). My guess is that unless he pulls a muscle he will be fine after a few weeks of training.

I have no idea what kind of verbage is in his contract related to injury, but I'll bet there's a hefty disability insurance policy included in some way shape or fashion.

rahulsekhar
02-16-2004, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by beckett21
It could be secondary to compensation, but more likely I would say that this is strictly a conditioning issue. He probably has taken it easy to be cautious with his back and that has led to him being a little out of playing shape. I doubt that it is circulatory or directly related to the back. Tightness indicates muscular issues, and if it were due to the back this would be more neurological in nature, pain instead of tightness. He's just out of shape (for him... which would be in shape for 99.9% of the rest of the population). My guess is that unless he pulls a muscle he will be fine after a few weeks of training.

I have no idea what kind of verbage is in his contract related to injury, but I'll bet there's a hefty disability insurance policy included in some way shape or fashion.

I thought insurer's had stopped handling the big contracts and especially for any pre-existing injury? If so, the Angels take on the entire risk of injury.

SEALgep
02-16-2004, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by beckett21
It could be secondary to compensation, but more likely I would say that this is strictly a conditioning issue. He probably has taken it easy to be cautious with his back and that has led to him being a little out of playing shape. I doubt that it is circulatory or directly related to the back. Tightness indicates muscular issues, and if it were due to the back this would be more neurological in nature, pain instead of tightness. He's just out of shape (for him... which would be in shape for 99.9% of the rest of the population). My guess is that unless he pulls a muscle he will be fine after a few weeks of training.

I have no idea what kind of verbage is in his contract related to injury, but I'll bet there's a hefty disability insurance policy included in some way shape or fashion. The tightness is due to muscular issues, but that doesn't mean it isn't back related. With a bad back, you can suffer with poor circulation, most notably the legs. With poor circulation you can in turn have muscle degeneration, increasing the likelihood to a leg injury and/or back injury knowing your legs support your back. Whether he is out of shape, as you note as a possibility- and I agree, because he was worried about his back and trained extra careful, or if it were for the reason I laid out as a possibility, it doesn't look particular good. Remember, despite it being supposedly an infringement on Vlad's rights or something, the Mets doctors gave the advice to the Mets to be careful in the kind of offer to Vlad after giving him a physical.

beckett21
02-16-2004, 07:11 PM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
I thought insurer's had stopped handling the big contracts and especially for any pre-existing injury? If so, the Angels take on the entire risk of injury.

That's a good point...I hadn't thought about pre-existing conditions. You may be right there, I really don't know for sure. Don't have any insight there I'm afraid.

beckett21
02-16-2004, 07:16 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
The tightness is due to muscular issues, but that doesn't mean it isn't back related. With a bad back, you can suffer with poor circulation, most notably the legs. With poor circulation you can in turn have muscle degeneration, increasing the likelihood to a leg injury and/or back injury knowing your legs support your back. Whether he is out of shape, as you note as a possibility- and I agree, because he was worried about his back and trained extra careful, or if it were for the reason I laid out as a possibility, it doesn't look particular good. Remember, despite it being supposedly an infringement on Vlad's rights or something, the Mets doctors gave the advice to the Mets to be careful in the kind of offer to Vlad after giving him a physical.

Possible but I would still point to conditioning. It may still have sonething to do with the back, the question is it primarily due to the back, or secondary. My guess would be secondary to lack of use/conditioning. Circulatory to me would be more likely pre-surgical; the surgery should have relieved any pressure on the nerves/vessels.

Daver
02-16-2004, 07:21 PM
Perhaps he has spent his offseason drinking beer and eating Dorito's?


Lioyd's of London will issue a policy for anything,you are going to pay dearly for it though.

SEALgep
02-16-2004, 07:23 PM
Originally posted by beckett21
Possible but I would still point to conditioning. It may still have sonething to do with the back, the question is it primarily due to the back, or secondary. My guess would be secondary to lack of use/conditioning. Circulatory to me would be more likely pre-surgical; the surgery should have relieved any pressure on the nerves/vessels. I have a buddy who had scoliosis, and he had a disc removed. He suffers from the problem I stated, a problem with circulation of the legs and muscle degeneration as a result. Surgery did not change that fact. Vlad may not suffer from it, but it is a legitimate concern.

beckett21
02-16-2004, 07:36 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
I have a buddy who had scoliosis, and he had a disc removed. He suffers from the problem I stated, a problem with circulation of the legs and muscle degeneration as a result. Surgery did not change that fact. Vlad may not suffer from it, but it is a legitimate concern.

No doubt. Once you have had back surgery you are never the same. It depends on how long you have suffered from the condition. Your friend had a chronic congenital condition that had been causing damage his whole life, whether or not he knew that or felt it all the time. An acute injury is a different situation than a chronic one. The long-term damage is not there. But you are correct that his back will always be a concern from here on out. It could have caused irreversible circulatory damage, but hard to say. I don't know, I'm not a back specialist. That would be more likely if it had to do with something chronic, like from birth, IMO. I don't know how Vlad hurt his back specifically or how long he has had problems. That does make a difference. If it were more acute/recent, then relieving pressure off the spinal cord/nerve roots would be more effective than say for your buddy who was born with an abnormal curvature of his spine. The longer something is a problem, the more damage it causes and the less reversible the condition. So I don't dispute your friend's condition but the mechanism of injury/damage may be different here.

But you are right; Vlad's back will always be an issue. Look at Juan Gonzalez.

SEALgep
02-16-2004, 07:44 PM
Originally posted by beckett21
No doubt. Once you have had back surgery you are never the same. It depends on how long you have suffered from the condition. Your friend had a chronic congenital condition that had been causing damage his whole life, whether or not he knew that or felt it all the time. An acute injury is a different situation than a chronic one. The long-term damage is not there. But you are correct that his back will always be a concern from here on out. It could have caused irreversible circulatory damage, but hard to say. I don't know, I'm not a back specialist. That would be more likely if it had to do with something chronic, like from birth, IMO. I don't know how Vlad hurt his back specifically or how long he has had problems. That does make a difference. If it were more acute/recent, then relieving pressure off the spinal cord/nerve roots would be more effective than say for your buddy who was born with an abnormal curvature of his spine. The longer something is a problem, the more damage it causes and the less reversible the condition. So I don't dispute your friend's condition but the mechanism of injury/damage may be different here.

But you are right; Vlad's back will always be an issue. Look at Juan Gonzalez. My buddy didn't have a chronic back problem. He was fine throughout all of highschool until late in his junior year. He was then diagnosed with it, and needed surgery by the time he was 18. Vlad has had surgery, and whether or not his was chronic really doesn't make a difference. Once you have surgery on your back, or even having a problem where surgery is needed, it doesn't really matter how long you have a problem. Vlad has a turned disc, and whether he has had it all his life, or it just turned- which doesn't happen, the results are still going to be the same. The concerns about Vlad are a very real concern, regardless how long he has had this problem.

beckett21
02-16-2004, 07:52 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
My buddy didn't have a chronic back problem. He was fine throughout all of highschool until late in his junior year. He was then diagnosed with it, and needed surgery by the time he was 18. Vlad has had surgery, and whether or not his was chronic really doesn't make a difference. Once you have surgery on your back, or even having a problem where surgery is needed, it doesn't really matter how long you have a problem. Vlad has a turned disc, and whether he has had it all his life, or it just turned- which doesn't happen, the results are still going to be the same. The concerns about Vlad are a very real concern, regardless how long he has had this problem.

Scoliosis is something you are born with. It may not have been SYMPTOMATIC until your friend was in HS. Once it is symptomatic the damage is done.

Trust me on this one...how long you have had a problem DOES make a difference.

And yes...Vlad will ALWAYS have a back problem. But I am not convinced it has ANYTHING to do with TIGHTNESS.

SEALgep
02-16-2004, 07:59 PM
Originally posted by beckett21
Scoliosis is something you are born with. It may not have been SYMPTOMATIC until your friend was in HS. Once it is symptomatic the damage is done.

I do surgery for a living (believe it or not...obviously I am not as busy these days as I would like to be seeing as to how much time I have to screw around on this board lately. Kind of embarassed to admit it actually :D: ) Not on backs, but trust me on this one...how long you have had a problem DOES make a difference.

Sorry...didn't want to have to play my trump card on ya

And yes...Vlad will ALWAYS have a back problem. But I am not convinced it has ANYTHING to do with TIGHTNESS. But Vlad's turned disc is the definition of scoliosis, so essentially that means Vlad has had it his entire life as well. And that being the case, he in turn can certainly have the same symptoms and/or effects.

beckett21
02-16-2004, 08:06 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
But Vlad's turned disc is the definition of scoliosis, so essentially that means Vlad has had it his entire life as well. And that being the case, he in turn can certainly have the same symptoms and/or effects.

I don't know what you mean by a "turned" disc...I think you mean a "herniated" disc, which can happen from repetive trauma, like wrenching his back when he swings, lifting weights, something like that.

Scoliosis is an abnormal curvature of the spinal column. You can have a herniated disc and not have scoliosis. It's not the same thing.

I know nothing about Vlad and what he had or did not have, what the etiology of it was, etc. But I can agree with you that his back will always be a concern; once you--anyone--has ever had back surgery they are never the same. But Vlad could have herniated a disc lifting weights or something...it doesn't mean he has had it his whole life. There is a difference.

SEALgep
02-16-2004, 08:16 PM
Originally posted by beckett21
I don't know what you mean by a "turned" disc...I think you mean a "herniated" disc, which can happen from repetive trauma, like wrenching his back when he swings, lifting weights, something like that.

Scoliosis is an abnormal curvature of the spinal column. You can have a herniated disc and not have scoliosis. It's not the same thing.

I know nothing about Vlad and what he had or did not have, what the etiology of it was, etc. But I can agree with you that his back will always be a concern; once you--anyone--has ever had back surgery they are never the same. But Vlad could have herniated a disc lifting weights or something...it doesn't mean he has had it his whole life. There is a difference. You're right, and I called my friend. He had a herniated disc, not scoliosis. He too lifted a lot of weights, which he believe was the cause. He had to have the disc removed, so it's possible that Vlad's condition isn't as serious as that, but again he could still be suffering from a similar problem. I'm sure there are different levels of severity, and maybe Vlad's is relatively mild, but things have a higher probability of getting worse than getting better. It's also possible that he will have no change in condition. However, this leg tightness to me is a sign that may not be the case. Remember you are talking a five year contract, and even though they have specialist helping him along, baseball can be a rough sport with someone who has a serious back condition. Maybe you're right, but I haven't changed my view, it sounds to me like this may become an issue. We'll just have to see. The Mets doctors didn't red flag him for nothing.

beckett21
02-16-2004, 08:27 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
You're right, and I called my friend. He had a herniated disc, not scoliosis. He too lifted a lot of weights, which he believe was the cause. He had to have the disc removed, so it's possible that Vlad's condition isn't as serious as that, but again he could still be suffering from a similar problem. I'm sure there are different levels of severity, and maybe Vlad's is relatively mild, but things have a higher probability of getting worse than getting better. It's also possible that he will have no change in condition. However, this leg tightness to me is a sign that may not be the case. Remember you are talking a five year contract, and even though they have specialist helping him along, baseball can be a rough sport with someone who has a serious back condition. Maybe you're right, but I haven't changed my view, it sounds to me like this may become an issue. We'll just have to see.

Hey,don't get me wrong; I think Vlad's back will be a MAJOR issue. The guy will never be the same; he is damaged goods, no doubt. All I am referring to is the tightness in his legs which I think at this point is probably due to him being out of shape. You could read more into it, but without more information you and I are both speculating. Back problems, herniated discs and the like all are bad news. No dispute there.

And I agree his condition will only deteriorate over time; that is absolutely correct. For every action there is a reaction. Back surgery is bad news no matter who you are. He will have back problems his whole life. He will have difficulty ever regaining the skill level he once had. Over the next 5 years I would be willing to bet he goes on the DL at least 3 times, not to mention how many shots he will probably get in his back. The surgery will alleviate the problem for awhile, but when you remove a disc from a back, that has it's own problems. Back problems are about the worst thing a pro athlete can have because there is no definitive cure; it is just a question of getting things to a tolerable level, something you can live/play with. Ten years from now he will be lucky if he can still bend over to tie his shoes.

Bottom line is...he can't go down this year because I have him in my fantasy league! :D:

SEALgep
02-16-2004, 08:34 PM
Originally posted by beckett21


Bottom line is...he can't go down this year because I have him in my fantasy league! :D: I understand, everything I said was wrong, Vlad will be super human this year. You will win the fantasy league and Vlad will be your MVP. :)

beckett21
02-16-2004, 08:37 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
I understand, everything I said was wrong, Vlad will be super human this year. You will win the fantasy league and Vlad will be your MVP. :)

Thank you sir...you see, that's the only reason I care at all! If it wasn't for that, screw him! :)

SEALgep
02-16-2004, 08:44 PM
Originally posted by beckett21
Thank you sir...you see, that's the only reason I care at all! If it wasn't for that, screw him! :) All that time debating, lol. It's all good, it is relevant information. :)

beckett21
02-16-2004, 08:59 PM
Originally posted by SEALgep
All that time debating, lol. It's all good, it is relevant information. :)
Hey it was fun. I back down pretty easy on issues I have no clue about, but medical questions are right up my alley. :D:

Anytime I need to argue with someone, I can be sure you will never let me down! :cool:

gosox41
02-17-2004, 08:04 AM
Originally posted by rahulsekhar
I thought insurer's had stopped handling the big contracts and especially for any pre-existing injury? If so, the Angels take on the entire risk of injury.

I know in general that's been the case. Obviously I don't know specifics on any policies out on Vlad. I think Jim Thome couldn't be insured because he's had a history of back problems. When he signed with the Phils, if his back went out, it was to bad for Philly.

Bob

gosox41
02-17-2004, 08:07 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
I have a buddy who had scoliosis, and he had a disc removed. He suffers from the problem I stated, a problem with circulation of the legs and muscle degeneration as a result. Surgery did not change that fact. Vlad may not suffer from it, but it is a legitimate concern.

And to think I put all my money down on the Angels to win it all. That Moreno guy is going to change baseball by increasing his expenses and lowering his revenue. It's guaranteed to work!!!

Bob