David Booth - All The Tools....No Toolbox

[F A N]

Why? He had completely fluky injuries and has always come back in good shape, in a reasonable amount of time. There's really no indication that Booth is injury prone.

And yet you're calling him injury-prone - because they might recurr - despite the fact that they've been one-offs and that there's no history of trouble like with Salo's groin. Maybe, I don't know, wait and see if it actually happens again before declaring him to be so? Many players could be called injury-prone by this same definition.

Umm... Booth has missed games almost every single season for the past decade. In the NHL he's played an 82 game season once in his 6 full time seasons in the NHL. You don't have to have recurring injuries to be labeled injury-prone. A player is injury-prone if he constantly suffer injuries and is out a significant period of time which Booth does. As far as I can tell, since college, Booth has missed games due to three knee injuries, a neck injury, two concussions, two rib injuries, a groin injury, an ankle injury, an upper body injury, and another injury that I couldn't find more information on.

Essentially he's missed significant playing time due to injuries in every season except for his freshman year in college, his 82 game season, and his first season as pro. That's 3 out of 11 years he's been healthy. Labeling him as injury-prone is a fair assessment.

If you want to call Booth 'bad luck prone', go ahead and be my guest. Just don't expect a GM to move a player out for that reason

You can call it what you want, but a GM will move player for the reason that he can't manage to stay healthy.

 

[Verviticus]

A player is injury-prone if he constantly suffer injuries and is out a significant period of time which Booth does.

no. a player is injury prone if you can reasonably expect that he's more likely to get injured in the future than an average player. since none of the injuries to this point have been the type i would use to predict future injuries, i don't think you can say that he is injury prone

what you are describing would be the phrase "has been injured a lot"

 

[TomWillander1RD]

no. a player is injury prone if you can reasonably expect that he's more likely to get injured in the future than an average player. since none of the injuries to this point have been the type i would use to predict future injuries, i don't think you can say that he is injury prone

what you are describing would be the phrase "has been injured a lot"

So based on your idea, Booth and H. Sedin have same probability to get injured next year.

Please don't compare Booth's injury history to that of Salo's to justify that Booth is not injury prone.

 

[Verviticus]

So based on your idea, Booth and H. Sedin have same probability to get injured next year.

no. henrik has a proven track record of amputation to avoid having to miss hockey

 

[vanuck]

^ Post #877 sums it up nicely.

Umm... Booth has missed games almost every single season for the past decade. In the NHL he's played an 82 game season once in his 6 full time seasons in the NHL. You don't have to have recurring injuries to be labeled injury-prone. A player is injury-prone if he constantly suffer injuries and is out a significant period of time which Booth does. As far as I can tell, since college, Booth has missed games due to three knee injuries, a neck injury, two concussions, two rib injuries, a groin injury, an ankle injury, an upper body injury, and another injury that I couldn't find more information on.

Essentially he's missed significant playing time due to injuries in every season except for his freshman year in college, his 82 game season, and his first season as pro. That's 3 out of 11 years he's been healthy. Labeling him as injury-prone is a fair assessment.


You can call it what you want, but a GM will move player for the reason that he can't manage to stay healthy.

Almost every player misses games throughout a season. But you have to look at how they're sustained too. We call Salo injury-prone because he could literally be doing stretches in warm-up and then rule himself out for the game after that. Booth's major injuries were largely the result of dangerous, suspendable plays (Richards, Porter, Wings player whose name I forget). So is that his fault or the fault of the guy who makes an illegal play?

So what's the likelihood of them occurring again? Not nearly as high as people seem to think - unless you think he must be cursed or something. You think Gillis believes in that sort of stuff? Hence why I call it bad-luck prone, or simply unfortunate. So really no reason for MG to move him out so far.

 

[moog35]

looks like we stuck with Booth as he will be hurt during the buy out period

 

[PG Canuck]

Doubt he'd get bought out if he was healthy anyways.

 

[Verviticus]

describing someone like booth as injury-prone at this junction would be kind of like describing jason blake or brad boyes as 'goal-prone'

 

[y2kcanucks]

describing someone like booth as injury-prone at this junction would be kind of like describing jason blake or brad boyes as 'goal-prone'

If Jason Blake or Brad Boyes consistently scored 40 goals year after year there would be an expectation that next year they would score 40 goals. Just like David Booth tends to get injured year after year so there's an expectation that he will get injured again next year.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

describing someone like booth as injury-prone at this junction would be kind of like describing jason blake or brad boyes as 'goal-prone'

Yeah, Booth has shown to be remarkably durable. If only Takahashi didn't come out of nowhere with that stationery bike, maybe Booth would have contributed a lick this season.

David Booth is prone to injury. Not sure why people try to argue this point. I've never once seen another players durability be defended this vigorously. It's very odd to say the least.

 

[Verviticus]

Yeah, Booth has shown to be remarkably durable. If only Takahashi didn't come out of nowhere with that stationery bike, maybe Booth would have contributed a lick this season.

David Booth is prone to injury. Not sure why people try to argue this point. I've never once seen another players durability be defended this vigorously. It's very odd to say the least.

booth hasnt shown himself to be remarkably durable and i didnt argue anything of the sort. people try to argue this point with you because you are wrong. dont worry though, if you want to continue to be obtuse about it, people will stop arguing the point with you (because they'll ignore you)

here lemme repost this for you, because you didnt read it

"no. a player is injury prone if you can reasonably expect that he's more likely to get injured in the future than an average player. since none of the injuries to this point have been the type i would use to predict future injuries, i don't think you can say that he is injury prone

what you are describing would be the phrase "has been injured a lot""

ok, done? now read it again.

 

[biturbo19]

booth hasnt shown himself to be remarkably durable and i didnt argue anything of the sort. people try to argue this point with you because you are wrong. dont worry though, if you want to continue to be obtuse about it, people will stop arguing the point with you (because they'll ignore you)

here lemme repost this for you, because you didnt read it

"no. a player is injury prone if you can reasonably expect that he's more likely to get injured in the future than an average player. since none of the injuries to this point have been the type i would use to predict future injuries, i don't think you can say that he is injury prone

what you are describing would be the phrase "has been injured a lot""

ok, done? now read it again.

You're trying to apply some sort of definition of 'injury prone', in which the only players who would qualify as such, are those with something like repeated concussions a la Savard, or recurring groin injuries like Salo though. Players who are barely in the league, or not at all anymore because of a specific injury. Which isn't so much 'injury prone' as it is 'plagued by recurring injuries' or 'had their career ended by an injury'.

Booth is an injury prone player. He is prone to being injured and his track record shows this, regardless of whether the injuries were 'his fault' or 'accidents' or 'bad luck'.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

"no. a player is injury prone if you can reasonably expect that he's more likely to get injured in the future than an average player. since none of the injuries to this point have been the type i would use to predict future injuries, i don't think you can say that he is injury prone

We CAN reasonably assume Booth is more likely to get injured in the future than an average player. He skates around at high speed with his head down into dangerous areas on the ice and his body has not been able to hold up to this style of play. Hence why he keeps getting injured. 3 knee injuries later, something tells me he's more susceptible to re-injuring it than someone without that history.

Why did you come off like such a whiny baby? That was embarrassing.

 

[Verviticus]

you dudes dont get it. there's nothing more that i can do i think

You're trying to apply some sort of definition of 'injury prone', in which the only players who would qualify as such, are those with something like repeated concussions a la Savard, or recurring groin injuries like Salo though.

yes. literally this. anything else is fundamentally indistinguishable from random noise

 

[Verviticus]

'all things that happen in a system with random events are predicative of the future' - opinions of people in this thread

 

[Drop the Sopel]

I called Booth injury prone this time last year and he couldn't get through stretching for his physical before suffering a serious injury. Must have been a lucky guess on my part.

Different styles of play open you up to different levels of risk. Look at the contrasting styles of Kesler/Booth and the Sedins and it should be a surprise to nobody the former has battled many more injuries than the twins.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

'all things that happen in a system with random events are predicative of the future' - opinions of people in this thread

You're assuming every player incurs the same level of risk on the ice. Which is obviously flawed logic when you consider the different roles and styles employed.

And somehow you've convinced yourself a person with 3 knee injuries isn't more prone to suffer another one than someone without that history. Again, flawed.

 

[Verviticus]

I called Booth injury prone this time last year and he couldn't get through stretching for his physical before suffering a serious injury. Must have been a lucky guess on my part.

i'm currently 3/4 in guessing the overtime goal winners these playoffs. i guess im just an elite overtime goal guesser and not a statistical outlier of a large random system! id better monetize this fast

Different styles of play open you up to different levels of risk. Look at the contrasting styles of Kesler/Booth and the Sedins and it should be a surprise to nobody the former has battled many more injuries than the twins.

the sedins have been injured plenty of times, they just do **** like amputating parts of their finger in order to avoid having to sit out. they are completely and totally incomparable to pretty much any player in the nhl today (well henrik, anyways)

also, kesler has what, one more injury where he missed time over sedin in the past couple years? danny has had a broken foot and a concussion, kesler has had a broken foot, a hip injury and a wrist injury?

 

[Verviticus]

And somehow you've convinced yourself a person with 3 knee injuries isn't more prone to suffer another one than someone without that history. Again, flawed.

hmm, please describe to me why high impact knee injuries rehabbed to completion are chronic. im waiting

note, preemptive advice: when parts of your argument are "just common sense", they look really bad.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

hmm, please describe to me why high impact knee injuries rehabbed to completion are chronic. im waiting

So if someone suffers a serious knee injury and rehabs it, you're saying there is an equal chance they injure either knee moving forward? What is your medical background again?

I have suffered 2 bad high ankle sprains and a fractured ankle on the same foot. Maybe I'm not the one to try and convince Booth's damaged ankle isn't more susceptible to injury than someone without that same history.

Booth's greatest asset is his willingness to play a reckless game and go to areas of the ice with speed that others are afraid to. To think this doesn't open him up to more risk than his peers because of it, is well, patently absurd on so many levels. And you know it. Hence why you keep avoiding the topic of Booth's style of play and how it's played into his injury history.

 

[Verviticus]

So if someone suffers a serious knee injury and rehabs it, you're saying there is an equal chance they injure either knee moving forward? What is your medical background again?

after rehab the doctor might point out "oh hey you're missing a piece of bone here!" and then that person is probably more likely to hurt that knee. from where we sit, booths last knee injury was completely and totally unavoidable. any person would have been injured in that situation. following that, his next two injuries were a groin injury (an injury of serious concern, as opposed to his knees) and a high ankle sprain + broken ankle, which is comically unlikely to happen in any given situation. if david booth hurts his knee during a routine hockey thing like a slapshot or mid-stride, i'll come back and fully admit that he is probably injury prone

if he had a history of groin injuries instead of knee injuries, and then hurt his groin this year, i'd be very concerned. he doesn't, thankfully.

i have suffered 2 bad high ankle sprains and a fractured ankle on the same foot. Maybe I'm not the one to try and convince Booth's damaged ankle isn't more susceptible to injury than someone without that same history.

what caused the fractured ankle?

Booth's greatest asset is his willingness to play a reckless game and go to areas of the ice with speed that others are afraid to. To think this doesn't open him up to more risk than his peers because of it, is well, patently absurd on so many levels. And you know it. Hence why you keep avoiding the topic of Booth's style of play and how it's played into his injury history.

of course it would open him up to being hit in the knees more often. it doesn't, however, lend any credit to the theory that because he was hurt more in the past, hes more likely to get hurt now. if i said something addressing the style of his play and suggesting that it wouldn't have an effect, please quote me and i'll retract it.

 

[Verviticus]

the important point in all of this is:

his doctor probably has a very good idea if booth is prone to injuries to his knee.

we don't have a good idea, because none of the injuries have occurred in such a way to suggest it. all we have are a bunch of impact injuries and a single off-ice groin injury

therefore, from our vantage point, he's not injury prone. he's been injured a lot. we don't know anything else - if you want to say 'hes injury prone', its really up to you to make that statement conclusive rather than speculative. until then, you're wrong!

if you talked to his doctor and he said "im worried about booth's knees" id concede the point

 

[Verviticus]

to add: i have no idea why people are focusing on impact knee injuries rather than a much more concerning dry land groin injury

kind of like how people are really concerned about kesler breaking his body blocking shots instead of the ****ing hip injury he had to have operated that took 1.5 years to heal properly

 

[vanuck]

We CAN reasonably assume Booth is more likely to get injured in the future than an average player. He skates around at high speed with his head down into dangerous areas on the ice and his body has not been able to hold up to this style of play. Hence why he keeps getting injured. 3 knee injuries later, something tells me he's more susceptible to re-injuring it than someone without that history.

Why did you come off like such a whiny baby? That was embarrassing.

That would make sense - if he actually did get injured playing that way. Except that isn't the case. As a Canuck, at least.

As Verv mentioned before, the ones he's suffered were not due to factors that you could reasonably predict to occur again going forward.

 

[BoHorvatFan]

Who cares how the injuries happened?

The question is simple: do you expect Booth to miss 10 or more games next season due to whatever injury/injuries he will suffer.

My answer is OBVIOUSLY. Jesus H f'ing Christ how the hell is a guy who is this prone to getting injured not injury prone, he's always hurt, every year.