Jump to content

NE's Injuries this year


RichardSeymour

Recommended Posts

I've been keeping track of this over at KFFL and thought it might be of interest for any debates over here.

I count everyone who I conservatively feel would have started that particular game if healthy. Therefore there is one week, for instance, where I count Dillon, Faulk, and Pass, as I feel ANY of the three would have clearly started over Evans. One can argue that this exaggerates the number, and potentially it can if garbage players are injured and are replaced with similar garbage. On the other hand, to say that we have only lost 13 starter/games at SS would to me seem to be somewhat understating the situation---- likewise, to say that we are missing 1 starter/game at left tackle against Buffalo also seems to be more deceptive than to say we are missing 2. Numbers include projections for players on IR.

ONLY missed starts are counted: Kevin Faulk missed some games which are not shown here as Dillon was still healthy enough to at least nominally start. Some players on IR do not show up here because they never started and it is not clear if they would have.

My count is that to date the Pats have missed at least 104 games from players who would have started in those games, if healthy.

Updated with Bucs inactives

* before number= On IR

* after name= Still injured, not on IR

*15-- CB Tyrone Poole (started last year, week 1, DNP and IR since)

*13-- SS Rodney Harrison

*11-- SS Guss Scott (started last 2 before injury, starter w Harrison gone)

10-- LT Matt Light*

*8-- CB Duane Starks (Started last 6 games, however poorly)

*8-- CB Chad Scott (I submit he would be starting by now through end of season, either at CB or FS)

*7-- C Dan Koppen (IR projection)

6-- LB Tedy Bruschi

4-- DT/DE Richard Seymour

4-- RB Corey Dillon

4-- RB Kevin Faulk (would have started against Denver, Miami, NO with Dillon out)

3-- WR David Givens

3-- TE Daniel Graham*

2-- RT Tom Ashworth

2-- SS James Sanders (started vs Denver, DNP-injuries next two games)

2-- LT Nick Kaczur (starting LT with Light out)

1-- RB Patrick Pass (Would have started against Miami)

1-- TE Ben Watson

By Unit

DB--57 starter/games missed

OL--21 starter/games missed

RB-- 9 starter/games missed

TE/WR-- 7 starter/games missed

LB-- 6 starter/games missed

DL-- 4 starter/games missed

Randall Gay has missed 4 games he MIGHT have started over Starks. I list him seperately because I do not feel that it can be stated with full confidence. It could be argued Ted Johnson was an effective 16 game injury scratch. I do not agree with that logic, so I do not include him in the overall numbers.

By my count we've lost 104 starter/games so far this season, counting projections for IR. If one counted Gay's scratches that would be 108. If one were inclined to count Johnson that would be 124.

If one looks only at games lost from opening day starters....

15 (Poole), 13 (Harrison), 7 (Koppen) are confirmed due to IR, and there are so far 10 for Light, 4 for Seymour, 4 for Dillon, 3 for Givens, 3 for Graham, 2 for Ashworth, 1 for Watson.

So to date (well, including full season IR projections) we have missed 62 games from opening day starters, 68 if one wants to count Bruschi which would seem reasonable to me, as he was an obvious 'intended starter'.

Rick Gosselin reported in the past the figures below. I do NOT know what his methodology was and it is VERY likely that it was different from my own: a seemingly safe guess though would be that the current number for games lost by opening day starters (62 if not counting Bruschi) would at a minimum be comparable.

Per Gosselin the 2003 Pats lost 87 starter/games

Per Gosselin the 2004 Pats lost 55 starter/games

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been keeping track of this over at KFFL and thought it might be of interest for any debates over here.

I count everyone who I conservatively feel would have started that particular game if healthy. Therefore there is one week, for instance, where I count Dillon, Faulk, and Pass, as I feel ANY of the three would have clearly started over Evans. One can argue that this exaggerates the number, and potentially it can if garbage players are injured and are replaced with similar garbage. On the other hand, to say that we have only lost 13 starter/games at SS would to me seem to be somewhat understating the situation---- likewise, to say that we are missing 1 starter/game at left tackle against Buffalo also seems to be more deceptive than to say we are missing 2. Numbers include projections for players on IR.

ONLY missed starts are counted: Kevin Faulk missed some games which are not shown here as Dillon was still healthy enough to at least nominally start. Some players on IR do not show up here because they never started and it is not clear if they would have.

My count is that to date the Pats have missed at least 104 games from players who would have started in those games, if healthy.

RS,

First off, where the hell have you been?

Second, the dumbass Jet fans are going to come back with the stupid "Where would the Pats be if they lost Brady and Flutie" hypothetical cheap arguement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RS,

First off, where the hell have you been?

I'm going to be pulling somewhere between a 3.7 and a 4.0 this semester, while overloading and taking 5 classes, making up two incompletes, and studying for the LSATs in February (I'm not 100% certain about the lawyer idea, but with what my cumulative will end up as, Law might be the only grad school type I can get into at a high level, since the LSAT is God to law schools and I test better than Larry Johnson runs.)

Basically "doing it right" (thanks in part to drugs for ADD, which have turned me around 100% from waste of talent to kicking ***) has eaten into my posting time, most of which is reserved for the Pats board at KFFL these days, particularly with the Jets so miserable....

Missed y'all though. Group hug.

Second, the dumbass Jet fans are going to come back with the stupid "Where would the Pats be if they lost Brady and Flutie" hypothetical cheap arguement.

Honestly: if Brady had gone down early on TOP of the injuries we had, I think we would have started the season off 1-8 or 2-7. Up until post-Indy, basically, this was (in large part due to injuries, but not solely) an awful team with a good receiving corps and a GREAT QB. Brady held us up and now FINALLY the defense is getting its act together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn the only thing missing from that post is the mention of your SuperModel girlfriend.

:mrgreen:

Well, until I got dosed up on drugs and started doing well in school, the testing and the GF were about the only two things I could particularly brag about.... other than my rugged good looks and natural charisma.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, until I got dosed up on drugs and started doing well in school, the testing and the GF were about the only two things I could particularly brag about.... other than my rugged good looks and natural charisma.

Translation = Im fat ,Bald and Gay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good for you RS on taking charge of the problem.

TX suffers from OCD but refuses our suggestions to seek treatment.

Now TX....why is it when you look to RS to back you on the following and he busts you out as wrong you disappear from the thread?

PatsFanTX wrote:

Second, the dumbass Jet fans are going to come back with the stupid "Where would the Pats be if they lost Brady and Flutie" hypothetical cheap arguement.

RS wrote:

Honestly: if Brady had gone down early on TOP of the injuries we had, I think we would have started the season off 1-8 or 2-7. Up until post-Indy, basically, this was (in large part due to injuries, but not solely) an awful team with a good receiving corps and a GREAT QB. Brady held us up and now FINALLY the defense is getting its act together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can we stop this "if the Pats lost Brady and Flutie they would be just as screwed as the Jets" argument. It should read: "If the Pats lost Brady they would be just as screwed as the Jets" Feidler is FAR superior to Flutie Flake. Flutie is a JOKE. a Joke, I tell yah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can we stop this "if the Pats lost Brady and Flutie they would be just as screwed as the Jets" argument. It should read: "If the Pats lost Brady they would be just as screwed as the Jets" Feidler is FAR superior to Flutie Flake. Flutie is a JOKE. a Joke, I tell yah.

Garb,

Do you think BB will sit Brady next Monday night against the lowly Jets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but I doubt he will play the entire game if the Pats look dominant. It would not shock me to see him rest Brady the last game of the year, at Gillette, against Miami.

That game will feature a half-time (or is it pre-game?) ceremony where 40 members of the 85 SB Pats team (you know, the one the Bears RUINED :lol: )will be trotted out. This makes me think they will give Flutie His last %&$^#% hurrah at home. GAG ME. GAG ME. GAG ME.

Anyway, since the Pats will not have a first round bye this year, I suspect many starters will "rest" the last game of the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...