Thanks! And thoughts on the final draft grade?

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by SAGA45

Here's the thing...Do you actually feel like you presented information that the CHIEFS didn't already know about, though? I'm not questioning the study itself. It's that you and a handful of others champion this study as if you stumbled on information that Burkholder and his staff weren't already aware of and hadnt already taken into account throughout their - from all accounts - meticulous evaluation process of Simmons' knee and his recovery progress.

It's one thing to prop up the study as a reason why YOU would personally pass on Simmons leading UP TO the draft. I get and got that part of it just fine. But now that the Chiefs have signed off on his rate of recovery by drafting him, that stance seems pretty weak and borders on you basically saying "Burkholder and his staff dont know wtf their doing! Meanwhile, I actually know wtf Im talking about!" ...which absolutely insane to me.

Literally nobody has said that.

We've said one of 2 things -- and really, a combination of both.

1) The Chiefs risk tolerance is higher than ours would be for a pick that early.
2) The Chiefs view the reward of Simmons higher than we would.

I don't know how many times this can be said - nobody is offering a medical opinion. About as close to it as any of us has offered is what amounts to a truism as it relates to surgeries -- outcomes are determined by the rehab.

We say the Chiefs medical staff CAN'T know how that's going to work out because the joint isn't even completely healed yet -- by their own admission. So they're projecting risk and weighing reward. It's no different than taking a small school prospect who doesn't run a complete route tree in the second round. They can weigh that risk vs. that reward and determine that Skyy Moore is a worthwhile selection in the 2nd round because they're willing to project that he'll be able to develop that area of his game. They got the projection wrong. And there projection here, while educated and informed, is still just projection. Because Simmons is about halfway through his recovery/rehab process.

We can say this a million times over and in a hundred different ways and there will STILL be folks like you that militantly refuse to get it. You absolutely insist on the same old tired saws that are - every single year - proven to be silly. "Do you think you know more than the Chiefs?!?!"

I mean...we get stuff right that they get wrong every year. No, we don't know more on balance. Yes, we might just have one specific issue/area right.

And in this case it has nothing to do with our ability to read diagnostic imaging. It's simply our risk tolerance and how we view the respective rewards. This has been the case for over a month now and has been explained repeatedly.

It's even been refined in some cases -- I took the 'risk' element down as the rest of the draft played out and the opportunity cost of busting on that pick diminished as the board played out. My grade went up, not because I earned a medical degree, but because I was comfortable turning the risk knob down a bit. So even though the reward knob didn't change, the overall calculus did.

I'm not sure how many more ways this can be said to get you to listen. Or you can refuse to bat at straw men - really no skin off my ass either way. It's been made ABUNDANTLY clear what led to dissent here; 'insane' to you or not. It's really not my fault you refuse to understand it.

[SAGA45]

Originally Posted by kccrow

This has been the response by 99% of this board despite the fact that the entire population of players with this injury was compiled to show the risk. I shared it with everyone, and yet the general response remains the same. It's not people overplaying the risk, it is the risk. It's not a representative sample of some segment of players with this injury, it is the entire population. It's like, you can't really refute it. It is it.

Originally Posted by SAGA45

Here's the thing...Do you actually feel like you presented information that the CHIEFS didn't already know about, though? I'm not questioning the study itself. It's that you and a handful of others champion this study as if you stumbled on information that Burkholder and his staff weren't already aware of and hadnt already taken into account throughout their - from all accounts - meticulous evaluation process of Simmons' knee and his recovery progress.

It's one thing to prop up the study as a reason why YOU would personally pass on Simmons leading UP TO the draft. I get and got that part of it just fine. But now that the Chiefs have signed off on his rate of recovery by drafting him, that stance seems pretty weak and borders on you basically saying "Burkholder and his staff dont know wtf their doing! Meanwhile, I actually know wtf Im talking about!" ...which absolutely insane to me.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Literally nobody has said that.

Well, until...

Originally Posted by kccrow

Yep. He doesn't even have a PhD. He's a MS in Athletic Training and has load of experience as an athletic trainer. Do I see him as qualified to give a sound opinion? Yes, for sure.

His opinion doesn't give me more optimism though. There's 25 years of sound data that tells me his opinion really doesn't matter. Only Simmons' body is going to matter.

So, Burkholder's opinion doesn't matter despite the fact Brett Veach leaned on it and that he and his team have been entrusted with/ are responsible for the design and oversight of Simmons' continued rehab/recovery, ultimately affecting how his body responds and continues to heal? That's crazy!

I'm kidding. Seriously, I get what you're trying to say...that in the end, regardless of what anyone thinks (Burkholder included), it's Simmons' body against unfavorable odds per the data. However, my point is that the same data was no doubt factored into the Chiefs' examination of his knee and the ultimate decision to draft him.

Now, does that mean they KNOW he'll defy those odds? No, it does not, nor does it mean they made the right choice, as only time will bear that out. Nonetheless, Burkholder (despite his academic shortcomings ) and his staff are LEGIT and held in high esteem both inside and outside of league circles for a reason. They also know more about Simmons' healing than will ever be publicly disclosed other than reports he's ahead of schedule. So, for them to feel good enough about Simmons medically to take him at 32, to me, speaks volumes.

To DJ's point earlier, this isn't to say Burkholder and the Chiefs are infallible. They've definitely been wrong where we've been right. However, that does not mean our guess (or projection as Duncan stated before) is as good as theirs because, unlike ours, their projections/guesses, both in terms of the sports medicine side and player eval side, are backed by and based on first-hand, boots-to-ground experience and knowledge in their respective fields that spans decades, collectively culminating in five Super Bowl appearances in six years with three wins including a back-to-back..

One would think that fact alone would buy the Chiefs the benefit of the doubt here but hey to each his own. I respect and understand the opinions of those who just simply don't feel good about Simmons. The history of the injury supports your angst and concerns. Nevertheless, I feel like he's in highly qualified and capable hands thus I'm a bit more optimistic that the pick actually pans out.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by SAGA45

Here's the thing...Do you actually feel like you presented information that the CHIEFS didn't already know about, though? I'm not questioning the study itself. It's that you and a handful of others champion this study as if you stumbled on information that Burkholder and his staff weren't already aware of and hadnt already taken into account throughout their - from all accounts - meticulous evaluation process of Simmons' knee and his recovery progress.

It's one thing to prop up the study as a reason why YOU would personally pass on Simmons leading UP TO the draft. I get and got that part of it just fine. But now that the Chiefs have signed off on his rate of recovery by drafting him, that stance seems pretty weak and borders on you basically saying "Burkholder and his staff dont know wtf their doing! Meanwhile, I actually know wtf Im talking about!" ...which absolutely insane to me.

No, I don't think Burkholder and staff don't know WTF they are doing. That said, they can't make this guy a success either.

Do you think the Ravens second-guess their decision to take David Ojabo at the 45th pick in 2022, despite his Achilles injury, because he looked to be "healing well?" I bet they do.

You can't turn these terrible injuries into a positive.

Veach plainly said that Burkholder didn't like the idea when he first heard what the injury was. That should at least indicate to you something about his knowledge of the severity. The staff prompted him to evaluate him anyhow, and he gave a positive endorsement that it was healing as good as it could be. That doesn't say anything about Burkholder feeling he was going to be a successful pick. All it means is that Simmons at least has the potential to beat the odds.

Even the most recent of injuries haven't had good outcomes.

The good thing about this year? We get to truly have a great sample of this "modern procedure" as 4 offensive linemen attempt to come back from it: Simmons (age 21), Cole Strange (NE, age 26), D'Ante Smith (CIN, age 26), and Trent Brown (HOU, age 32). LB Nakobe Dean (PHI, age 24) and RB Chris Evans (CIN, age 27) also tore theirs last season. Crazy that the Bengals had 3 guys tear it in one season (Trent Brown tore it with them and signed with Houston for this year).

DE Bradley Chubb (MIA) tore his in 2023 and missed all of 2024. WR Russell Gage (TB) tore his in 2023 during camp and missed the entire year. He ended up cut by Baltimore and spent all of 2024 on the SF PS. WR Jakeem Grant (CLE) tore his in 2023 and missed the year. He tried to come back last year but was twice cut by the Falcons. So far 2/3 are pretty much toast, we get to find out about Chubb this year.

[TRR]

Originally Posted by kccrow

No, I don't think Burkholder and staff don't know WTF they are doing. That said, they can't make this guy a success either.

Do you think the Ravens second-guess their decision to take David Ojabo at the 45th pick in 2022, despite his Achilles injury, because he looked to be "healing well?" I bet they do.

You can't turn these terrible injuries into a positive.

Veach plainly said that Burkholder didn't like the idea when he first heard what the injury was. That should at least indicate to you something about his knowledge of the severity. The staff prompted him to evaluate him anyhow, and he gave a positive endorsement that it was healing as good as it could be. That doesn't say anything about Burkholder feeling he was going to be a successful pick. All it means is that Simmons at least has the potential to beat the odds.

Even the most recent of injuries haven't had good outcomes.

The good thing about this year? We get to truly have a great sample of this "modern procedure" as 4 offensive linemen attempt to come back from it: Simmons (age 21), Cole Strange (NE, age 26), D'Ante Smith (CIN, age 26), and Trent Brown (HOU, age 32). LB Nakobe Dean (PHI, age 24) and RB Chris Evans (CIN, age 27) also tore theirs last season. Crazy that the Bengals had 3 guys tear it in one season (Trent Brown tore it with them and signed with Houston for this year).

DE Bradley Chubb (MIA) tore his in 2023 and missed all of 2024. WR Russell Gage (TB) tore his in 2023 during camp and missed the entire year. He ended up cut by Baltimore and spent all of 2024 on the SF PS. WR Jakeem Grant (CLE) tore his in 2023 and missed the year. He tried to come back last year but was twice cut by the Falcons. So far 2/3 are pretty much toast, we get to find out about Chubb this year.

Every scenario has nuances, and are different however. Chubb’s injury was much more significant than the patellar tendon. He tore his ACL and meniscus also. Much worse. Grant was coming back from an Achilles tear when he tore his patellar tendon. Different than Simmons. Time will tell, and no two injuries are the same.

[SAGA45]

Originally Posted by kccrow

Veach plainly said that Burkholder didn't like the idea when he first heard what the injury was. That should at least indicate to you something about his knowledge of the severity. The staff prompted him to evaluate him anyhow, and he gave a positive endorsement that it was healing as good as it could be. That doesn't say anything about Burkholder feeling he was going to be a successful pick.

For Burkholder to be skeptical initially, given his KNOWLEDGE (that includes data, studies, and other relevant precedents) and, after a thorough examination, sign off on Simmons' knee - which, from all accounts, is far ahead of schedule in terms of healing - should indicate to you that Burkholder and the Chiefs are, at the very minimum, optimistic about his recovery.

Nobody is trying to "turn a bad injury into a positive". But Burkholder, a leading authority in the field, endorsed Simmons' progress. That's enough for me to feel good or at least cautiously optimistic about the pick going forward. That may not be enough for you and others and that's completely understandable. But let's not sit here and present studies, data, etc. and even remotely imply that the Chiefs didn't already do their due diligence. That's bullsh*t.

[Why Not?]

I spend way too much time thinking about football during the fall as is, so I don't do even the shallowest of dives into the draft. I do enjoy reading y'all's stuff though so, thanks. I think this is an A draft, personally.

[poolboy]

im sure J. Paul Schroeppel, MD, the main ortho surgeon that is on the sidelines and the field EVERY Chiefs game signed off on the surgery being ok...the rehab is a different story Im afraid...thats where Burkholder comes in

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by poolboy

im sure J. Paul Schroeppel, MD, the main ortho surgeon that is on the sidelines and the field EVERY Chiefs game signed off on the surgery being ok...the rehab is a different story Im afraid...thats where Burkholder comes in

Sure, they can comment on how it looks and if the grafts were good and if the joint looks sound now.

That's great.

The problem with this injury is that ... well, that's not all there is to it. Until you're completely cleared and trying to max out his use of that leg/joint, you don't know if the knee is as good as it was before.

[kccrow]

Keep downvoting my ****ing posts. ****ing christ.

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by kccrow

Keep downvoting my ****ing posts. ****ing christ.

Not me.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Not me.

I let my little one take revenge by telling her to click the thumb down on as many posts as she liked. I had to stop her when she started to downvote everyone that said nothing of consequence lol

[O.city]

The issue is that...you can't know. Like has been said ad nauseum, with stuff like this it's not about the surgery or how it looks now.

[poolboy]

all I was saying was that the Chiefs ortho doctors signed off on the surgery looking ok..thats about all they can do at this point.
I agree that the next part doesnt look great at all

[Otter]

Haven't had a chance to look at all of them but I'm getting some beast mode vibes off ONL for sure. Eye of the Tiger look.