Doc Concerned about Paul Pierce's Heel

[hwangjini_1]

Is it time for this yet?

When in trouble
or in doubt,
run in circles,
scream and shout.

 

[chambers]

for gods sake. The sky isn't falling just yet.
Pierce hasn't had his leg amputated, Doc specifically said he was not worried long term.

Now when talking about Jeff Green, Doc said he was very worried because he should have passed his physical by now.

We have to get to the playoffs.
We were never going to make it far if one of the big four went down- this has been the same scenario since 2007, and as usual people start questioning our teams age and injury problems.
It's understandable, but for the most part, Pierce, Rondo and Ray have been durable warriors. I doubt he's done anything too serious in light warm ups if he's running around at the open practice like an excited 12 year old with all the fans.

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=7hfjssm

You are joking, right?

[PosImpos]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=7hfjssm

You are joking, right?

sadly, I don't think he is.

[JustAfam]

really worried but we see how this plays out

[celtics2]

I'd rather lose to LA than NY and we will lose without Pierce. NY team and crowd gets ugly when their winning. When Pierce comes back he won't be as aggressive with the heal deal. Celts may make playoffs 5 spot on down.

[BballTim]

Doc tends to exaggerate a lot. I'll believe it when Pierce misses multiple games.

the team does tend to exaggerate a lot . . . like how Shaq was only going to miss a couple weeks last year, or like how in '09 KG just had a bit of knee soreness and he'd be back ok in a month . . . .

  Don't forget about TA and Perk, who came back from their knee injuries months ahead of schedule.

post-surgery.  it's a little bit different.  in those cases we knew what the injury was, and the recovery time ended up being shorter.  the issue has always been with the celtics not being straight with the fans about what the injury actually is and how long the player is going to be out as a result.

  So when a player has a non-surgical injury, how many unexpected setbacks should they figure into their estimates about how long a player will be out for? If they think a player will be back in a couple of weeks, should they announce it will be up to two months just in case? Consider their fanbase. They say PP may miss the opening game and people here are giving up on the season because of it, or claiming it's proof that the team is doomed to fall apart. They don't need to push the worst case scenario, plenty of people here will do it for them no matter the case.

[KP43]

BREAKING NEWS: David Stern vetoes injury; Pierce forced to play

TP. hahaha

[slamtheking]

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=7hfjssm

You are joking, right?

sadly, I don't think he is.

Danny would be justifiably fired for that.

[clover]

Does it really make sense for them to have him go from full rest directly to full play?  Seems like there are smarter ways for him to test it a little at a time.

[PosImpos]

Doc tends to exaggerate a lot. I'll believe it when Pierce misses multiple games.

the team does tend to exaggerate a lot . . . like how Shaq was only going to miss a couple weeks last year, or like how in '09 KG just had a bit of knee soreness and he'd be back ok in a month . . . .

  Don't forget about TA and Perk, who came back from their knee injuries months ahead of schedule.

post-surgery.  it's a little bit different.  in those cases we knew what the injury was, and the recovery time ended up being shorter.  the issue has always been with the celtics not being straight with the fans about what the injury actually is and how long the player is going to be out as a result.

  So when a player has a non-surgical injury, how many unexpected setbacks should they figure into their estimates about how long a player will be out for? If they think a player will be back in a couple of weeks, should they announce it will be up to two months just in case? Consider their fanbase. They say PP may miss the opening game and people here are giving up on the season because of it, or claiming it's proof that the team is doomed to fall apart. They don't need to push the worst case scenario, plenty of people here will do it for them no matter the case.

my point is they should be straight with us.  if they don't know how bad the injury is, they should say so.  once they have a good idea of how bad it probably is, they should say so.

they shouldn't be so [dang] ambiguous about it.  they shouldn't string us along.  i don't think that's too much to ask.

[Fafnir]

Doc tends to exaggerate a lot. I'll believe it when Pierce misses multiple games.

the team does tend to exaggerate a lot . . . like how Shaq was only going to miss a couple weeks last year, or like how in '09 KG just had a bit of knee soreness and he'd be back ok in a month . . . .

  Don't forget about TA and Perk, who came back from their knee injuries months ahead of schedule.

post-surgery.  it's a little bit different.  in those cases we knew what the injury was, and the recovery time ended up being shorter.  the issue has always been with the celtics not being straight with the fans about what the injury actually is and how long the player is going to be out as a result.

  So when a player has a non-surgical injury, how many unexpected setbacks should they figure into their estimates about how long a player will be out for? If they think a player will be back in a couple of weeks, should they announce it will be up to two months just in case? Consider their fanbase. They say PP may miss the opening game and people here are giving up on the season because of it, or claiming it's proof that the team is doomed to fall apart. They don't need to push the worst case scenario, plenty of people here will do it for them no matter the case.

my point is they should be straight with us.  if they don't know how bad the injury is, they should say so.  once they have a good idea of how bad it probably is, they should say so.

they shouldn't be so [dang] ambiguous about it.  they shouldn't string us along.  i don't think that's too much to ask.

What part of "may miss the first game, we'll see how it responds" (paraphrasing) isn't saying "we don't know how long its going to effect Pierce"?

[GreenFaith1819]

I say let him stay off of his foot, if there is any doubt to the soreness of it.

If he misses the Christmas day game at NY? That's ok, IMO.

The last time Paul sat out a Christmas day game, to my memory, was 25th Dec, 2009...a guy by the name of Tony Allen subbed for Paul that day, and all he did was score 16 pts on 6-11 shooting, added 4 rebs, 1 assist, and a block - in just over 21 min of play.

 http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200912250ORL.html

IMO, that game was where Tony Allen first started to turn some heads as far as his usefulness and importance to the team.

I loved that game. It was a big game without our captain, and not only TA but the entire team stepped up.

Fast forward to now? We have Marquis Daniels. While not being as good a defender as TA, he is still a good one - but with a slighly better offensive game, IMO.

Marquis is just as capable of putting up the same numbers and doing the same things to help the team on Sunday - just like TA did in that game almost two yrs ago.

Looking forward to great things from Marquis (and the team) on Christmas day if Paul doesn't play.

[Celtics18]

Tommy Point to GreenFaith for that nice post.

Speaking of Paul Pierce's back ups, does anyone know the story on Sasha.  Will he be playing tonight?

[clover]

Tomy Point to GreenFaith for that nice post.

Speaking of Paul Pierce's back ups, does anyone know the story on Sasha.  Will he be playing tonight?

Doc said he went through the full practice yesterday.