Zoubek breaks foot--again

[Bob Green]

Through 12 games, Zoubek was averaging 11.7 minutes per game. Who sees more PT as a result of the injury? Lance Thomas? Dave McClure? Taylor KIng? Or do all three share the minutes?

Don't forget the perimeter players, if Duke goes small more often.

I might be guilty of overlooking the obvious with my post. The small lineup has been very effective so Zoubek's minutes could easily equate to more minutes for Nolan Smith off the bench. Today's game against Temple will be a litmus test of sorts seeing as Temple starts a 7'0" Center and 6'9" Forward. If we can succeed with the small lineup, it might be a glimpse into the rotation strategy for our upcoming ACC games.

I'm convinced all nine scholarship players will see significant minutes as long as they stay healthy. The question, in my mind, is which reserves play 15-18 minutes per game vs. which reserves play 8-10 minutes per game.

[Uncle Drew]

First one of these I remember was Brand. Any chance this is all related to the floor change in Cameron (if I recall occurred after the 96-97 season)?

I was think this VERY same thing at work last night!!!!!!!! Call me crazy, you all know I'm crazy any freakin' way. But the number of foot injuries to Duke basketball players over the years ESPECIALLY since they replaced the floor HAS to be unusually high. (I'm looking at a piece of the old floor on my wall right now!)

So many of these injuries happened in practice and I'm assuming they still practice IN CIS. Boozer hurt his foot in a game against MD, I can't remember if he landed on someones foot or exactly what happened. (I'll let the fact finding researchers name off all the foot and ankle related injuries and where they happened!) But I'm telling you people from years of playing on all kinds of floors there may be something about this floor that contributes to foot and ankle injuries. Anyone who's ever played on a floor with concrete underneath (regardless of top surface) knows the jarring each time you land feels much different when playing and makes you feel sore the next day. (Back and feet especially.)

Yes logic says Duke would have the highest quality / safest floor available. But we all know a rim in one arena isn't quite the same as a rim in another arena. (Soft rims hard rims etc.) You make a list of ACC teams over the last 10 years and the number of foot / ankle / toe injuries sustained and I'd bet my mom's dog Duke has had a higher rate than ANY other ACC school.


It's freakin' great Duke has the medical staff to work miracles and get the players back as fast as possible. But I'm not sure someone shouldn't investigate possibles causes. Duke can't be the only school recruiting players with bad feet and ankles, the odds defy it.

[Karl Beem]

First one of these I remember was Brand. Any chance this is all related to the floor change in Cameron (if I recall occcurred after the 96-97 season)?

As I recall the floor change was supposed to reduce the number of high ankle sprains. The new floor was springier.

[allenmurray]

I had to say this... "because it's fun?" ... "for us fans"? even if it doesn't make any sense?

Great post!

Somethimes we say things for fun, even if we are not serious. My post about Ogabaase was not serious, but it was fun to think about (can you imagine driving the lane and seeing him there, I think I'd just say, "Here you go sir, would you like the ball? I don't need it anymore.")

[jimsumner]

RE: Steve Johnson.

Duke is hoping to redshirt him.

[rsvman]

Zoub needs to spend some time with his body, learning how his hips work and how they can work better, learning how the alignment of his feet are affected by his hips, his pelvis, his toes, etc, and learning how those parts and others can work in better sync. Heck, we all need to be learning about that. Movement is an essential part of life; why anyone would take it for granted, or work on body parts in isolation based upon other's directions with no greater understanding for themselves is understandable given our cultural paradigm--go to an expert and they will make it "better."

It is, however, silliness if you bother to think about it.

Greybeard, sometimes you say some really bizarre things, and this is one of those times.

I would make the exact opposite argument. I think it is "silliness" to overthink how the body parts work when your body moves. Movement, as you noted, is an essential part of life; it follows that movement is natural, kind of like breathing. You COULD spend a lot of time thinking about how your body breathes, how the diaphragm works, how the air goes in and out, how oxygen is passed through the walls of the alveoli into the bloodstream, etc., etc., but you can breathe just as well without thinking about it at all. And the human body is made to move in the same way that it is made to breathe. Effortlessly and without aforethought. We SHOULD take movement for granted.

[RepoMan]

Greybeard, sometimes you say some really bizarre things, and this is one of those times.

I would make the exact opposite argument. I think it is "silliness" to overthink how the body parts work when your body moves. Movement, as you noted, is an essential part of life; it follows that movement is natural, kind of like breathing. You COULD spend a lot of time thinking about how your body breathes, how the diaphragm works, how the air goes in and out, how oxygen is passed through the walls of the alveoli into the bloodstream, etc., etc., but you can breathe just as well without thinking about it at all. And the human body is made to move in the same way that it is made to breathe. Effortlessly and without aforethought. We SHOULD take movement for granted.

Oh boy. Now you've done it.

[Karl Beem]

RE: Steve Johnson.

Duke is hoping to redshirt him.

Why? Do they think that he has scholarship potential?

[BlueDevilBaby]

Greybeard, sometimes you say some really bizarre things, and this is one of those times.

I would make the exact opposite argument. I think it is "silliness" to overthink how the body parts work when your body moves. Movement, as you noted, is an essential part of life; it follows that movement is natural, kind of like breathing. You COULD spend a lot of time thinking about how your body breathes, how the diaphragm works, how the air goes in and out, how oxygen is passed through the walls of the alveoli into the bloodstream, etc., etc., but you can breathe just as well without thinking about it at all. And the human body is made to move in the same way that it is made to breathe. Effortlessly and without aforethought. We SHOULD take movement for granted.

So we should just throw kinesiology out the window?

[jzp5079]

objectively speaking - would Duke have spent so much time and effort recruiting Lance Thomas if they would have known he would have only been averaging 2 rebounds against marginal non-conference opponents in his sophmore season in 18 minutes per game? He dosn't even really have any competition down there to pull down boards (from teammates), but he still can't get them.

[greybeard]

Greybeard, sometimes you say some really bizarre things, and this is one of those times.

I would make the exact opposite argument. I think it is "silliness" to overthink how the body parts work when your body moves. Movement, as you noted, is an essential part of life; it follows that movement is natural, kind of like breathing. You COULD spend a lot of time thinking about how your body breathes, how the diaphragm works, how the air goes in and out, how oxygen is passed through the walls of the alveoli into the bloodstream, etc., etc., but you can breathe just as well without thinking about it at all. And the human body is made to move in the same way that it is made to breathe. Effortlessly and without aforethought. We SHOULD take movement for granted.

Everyone is entitled to his or her view. You would, however, be amazed, neigh your brain would be frazzled, about how a conscious exploration of movements of the pelvis and ribs, which necessarily involve conscious movement of the limbs, could expand exponentially one's ability to take in air and expel it; to do it with ease and greatly facilitate the exchange of gases. In fact, just the other night, lead by the words of the man himself, Moshe Feldenkrais, taped in SF some 30years ago, I had just such an experience. I can assure you it was quite impressive; afterwards, the feeling of freedom in through my ribs, actually my entire torso, remained for some time; very nice to know what can be different.

Or one could delve into the breath work of Hatha Yoga, known as praniama. My suggestion is that you pursue that in the Iyengar tradition, which will require you to take at least one six month instructional series in posture work in most Iyengar studios. Can we say lala land boys and girls.

Movement without the ability to make a conscious choice leaves us no different than lower stratta animals. The ability to chose how to organize oneself to perform simple tasks is empowering and produces growth.

Or you could leave it all to chance, until you get injured, in which case you will do it exactly the way some "expert" tells you, and you will then pay attention to the smallest detail. You will, however, have no ability to chose and learn nothing in the process, which is the shame of the paridigm you embrace.

[tweeze]

Ask yourself would Thomas have came to Duke if he knew he would be forced to play the center position when he is really a small forward?

I think he could contribute if he gets consistent minutes.


How bout we get the center from Unc-Asheville, 7'7 360lbs? Hope Handsbrra has fun with that tonight.

[rsvman]

Movement without the ability to make a conscious choice leaves us no different than lower stratta animals.

A. You're out of your mind (in my humble opinion; others are entitled, as you so eloquently pointed out, to form their own opinions).

B. The lower "stratta" animals have been doing quite well without the help of the Maharishi Yogi (or whomever) for hundreds of thousands of years. In fact, one could make a cogent argument that when it comes to movement, many of the lower animals do much better than lowly homo sapiens does. Compare your sprint speed to that of a cheetah, or your leaping ability to that of, say, an impala. And I dare say that their injury rates, despite all their predator/prey-induced vigorous activity, is considerably lower than ours. In short, when it comes to movement, most might consider it PREFERABLE to be able to move in the manner of the animals you seemingly disparage with your misspelled reference to their strata.

[greybeard]

A. You're out of your mind (in my humble opinion; others are entitled, as you so eloquently pointed out, to form their own opinions).

B. The lower "stratta" animals have been doing quite well without the help of the Maharishi Yogi (or whomever) for hundreds of thousands of years. In fact, one could make a cogent argument that when it comes to movement, many of the lower animals do much better than lowly homo sapiens does. Compare your sprint speed to that of a cheetah, or your leaping ability to that of, say, an impala. And I dare say that their injury rates, despite all their predator/prey-induced vigorous activity, is considerably lower than ours. In short, when it comes to movement, most might consider it PREFERABLE to be able to move in the manner of the animals you seemingly disparage with your misspelled reference to their strata.

Lower animals, most all of them, are born with almost a complete set of amulatory skills. Humans learn them, except the ability to breathe. Even suckling takes some practice.

So, you and lower stratta animals are not on the same plane; they have it all over you from the get go. On the other hand, you have an ability to learn that is superior to theirs. And, that ability is most discernible in the realm of movement. You can grow emotionally, but how should we measure that. You can grow spiritually, but again we are at a loss.

Ah, intellectually, you will say, the ability to think. What about that, you ask. That sir, is precisely where I began.

So did you, whether you acknowledge it or not, and it was not by sticking your head in no book. It was in the realm of movement, at least until your parents decided to "teach" you to stand. Then apparently the process got stopped. It does happen to the best of us.

Moshe Feldenkrais was a world class scientist; his methodology is in the forefront of the educational and wellness sytems in one of the most inventive and progressive democracies in the world today; and the practice of pranayama has been around for thousands of years.

Mr. Iyengar is a scientist equal to Mr. Feldenkrais. He knows more about the human body in movement than the collectivity of orthopedic surgeons who practice at Duke University hospital. He invented or at least codified every single stretch that every single trainer in every high end athletic program in the United States of America uses, or should I say misuses, because they do not know half what a certified Iyengar yoga teacher (I personally am a Kripalu Yoga guy myself, btw) knows because a certified Iyengar teacher will have engaged in a systematic course of personal exploration with numerous permutations of each stretch over a period of years to be certified and will continue that exploration as long as they teach. Those are facts.

I don't know what Marhar whatever you refer to, but can the insults and try educating yourself, even a tinge, before you speak about something you know nothing about. Or not. Frankly, what it mean to me?

[FishStick]

Not to mention, humans are still not fully evolved for walking upright. Knowing one's body better is a great suggestion for every athlete and would help reduce injuries. For example, training to correct running posture has already been shown to drastically reduce ACL tears in women. All that said, I'm sure Duke Med is way above and beyond most of the suggestions we're making. Hopefully they can fix Zoubs (more permanently this time) and he will be back sooner than later. Can we apply those foot x-rays on future recruits to ensure healthier players in the future?

[greybeard]

Oh, by the way, what do foulshooters do before they shoot. That's right, rman, they try to take a deep breath.

And, what do runners do to try to maximize their performance, either sprinters or distance runners. It's okay, rman, you could say it, we all know.

And, what do they tell women to do in order to make giving birth go better. Never mind, "I got no further use for this guy."

The point is, with all this importance being placed around taking a freakin deep breath, you think it might be worth a moment of someone's time to try to figure out how it might be done better? Yeah, I know, it comes naturally.

Well, we do have an ability to get in the way of nature, and the diaphram is a muscle that tends to get more than a tad cramped up, made rigid, by a little thing called stress. Ditto for the ribs. Forget it, what's the point.

[rsvman]

First off, I appologize if anything I said came across to you as an insult. I DID say you were out of your mind, but I didn't mean it in a disparaging way. What I meant was that your viewpoint appears to be eccentric (at least as compared to that of those of us who are familiar with neither the scientists you mentioned nor their field of study). Eccentricity is not bad; in fact, I think that generally it should be celebrated. So, again, I apologize if you took my post as an insult. I'm rather enjoying the conversation.

Furthermore, I will readily admit to ignorance when it comes to yoga and the like. I am not, however, a closed-minded individual, and I enjoy learning new things. Therefore, I will take your advice and cease pontificating until I have educated myself further on the points in your post.

So did you, whether you acknowledge it or not, and it was not by sticking your head in no book. It was in the realm of movement, at least until your parents decided to "teach" you to stand.

The quoted part is the only part of your post that bothered me in the least. I am hoping it doesn't mean that the scientists you referenced are the type who believe that humans are not meant to walk upright. I don't think that humans need to be taught to stand. I think standing and walking upright are natural for our species.

However, as I said, I don't know the positions of the two men you mentioned, so I will refrain from further comment until I have had a chance to learn something about them and their work.

[greybeard]

Not to mention, humans are still not fully evolved for walking upright. Knowing one's body better is a great suggestion for every athlete and would help reduce injuries. For example, training to correct running posture has already been shown to drastically reduce ACL tears in women. All that said, I'm sure Duke Med is way above and beyond most of the suggestions we're making. Hopefully they can fix Zoubs (more permanently this time) and he will be back sooner than later. Can we apply those foot x-rays on future recruits to ensure healthier players in the future?

I would not be too confident. If you read the research article on metatarsal injuries conducted at Duke several years ago that a poster on this thread made available you will see not one word in it about how to improve anything. That he offered would be the business of atheletic trainers. Ditto for the studies on the high incidence of ACL tears in women athletes. All kinds of inquiries into possible causes; nothing as to solutions, except a few training techniques for which there is some anechotal evidence of marginal success over a 10 year period.

Athletic trainers are in the business of improving performance. Like the entire business of medicine, they are driven by the need to produce discernible results. Can the kid jump higher, change direction better, be more explosive out of a three point, turn on a fastball more efficiently, etc.

They have machines that image body mechanics, again to improve on output. I do not think that the trainer community is equiped or trained to explore the question of how do I reduce the incidence of injury. I just don't. Nor do I think that the responsibility for that lies with them.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

First off, I appologize if anything I said came across to you as an insult. I DID say you were out of your mind, but I didn't mean it in a disparaging way. What I meant was that your viewpoint appears to be eccentric (at least as compared to that of those of us who are familiar with neither the scientists you mentioned nor their field of study). Eccentricity is not bad; in fact, I think that generally it should be celebrated. So, again, I apologize if you took my post as an insult. I'm rather enjoying the conversation.

Furthermore, I will readily admit to ignorance when it comes to yoga and the like. I am not, however, a closed-minded individual, and I enjoy learning new things. Therefore, I will take your advice and cease pontificating until I have educated myself further on the points in your post.



The quoted part is the only part of your post that bothered me in the least. I am hoping it doesn't mean that the scientists you referenced are the type who believe that humans are not meant to walk upright. I don't think that humans need to be taught to stand. I think standing and walking upright are natural for our species.

However, as I said, I don't know the positions of the two men you mentioned, so I will refrain from further comment until I have had a chance to learn something about them and their work.

Have you tried any forms of alternative medicine or meditation to improve some aspect of your life? The world offers many viable alternatives to the strictly scientific approach so valued in the western world.

Are you familiar with visualization as a method to improve performance? What about Pilates to improve strength and flexibility? Or using dance to improve movement for other activities such as playing football or basketball?

[greybeard]

First off, I appologize if anything I said came across to you as an insult. I DID say you were out of your mind, but I didn't mean it in a disparaging way. What I meant was that your viewpoint appears to be eccentric (at least as compared to that of those of us who are familiar with neither the scientists you mentioned nor their field of study). Eccentricity is not bad; in fact, I think that generally it should be celebrated. So, again, I apologize if you took my post as an insult. I'm rather enjoying the conversation.

Furthermore, I will readily admit to ignorance when it comes to yoga and the like. I am not, however, a closed-minded individual, and I enjoy learning new things. Therefore, I will take your advice and cease pontificating until I have educated myself further on the points in your post.



The quoted part is the only part of your post that bothered me in the least. I am hoping it doesn't mean that the scientists you referenced are the type who believe that humans are not meant to walk upright. I don't think that humans need to be taught to stand. I think standing and walking upright are natural for our species.

However, as I said, I don't know the positions of the two men you mentioned, so I will refrain from further comment until I have had a chance to learn something about them and their work.

Eccentric I can live with; heck, I have to!

I saw a recent National Geographic special that put forth your view that standing upright is instinctual for humans. I found the argument terribly unscientific. They put forth pictures of newbies, who when held under their armpits, would move their legs in a walk like fashion. They point to this as evidence of an instinct to walk. The reality is that newbies have an instinctual fear of falling, or at least curl up using their flexors most of the time. You suspend them, the legs hang. Now, there are only so many ways legs can move.

I can go on, but suffice it to say that I found other parts of the argument they put forth as scientific theory unsustainable.

With regard to standing, what I was referring to is the fact that infants learn incredibly complicated movements like rolling over, sitting up, which are really, really quite complicated, and, in most cases figure out ways to do so with terrific ease and grace that most adults no longer can replicate (it is readily accessible by the way), and then, when it comes to standing and walking, parents intercede, and usually not to the good.

I can see people's eyes rolling around in their heads about now. Sorry, folks, I'll stop.

grey "the ever so eccentric and sometimes so exquisitly ultra sensative to even a hint of criticism" beard