hoopschick03 wrote:You can sweat me on the details and the point is taken. But the overall question remains... The injections are supposed to help him play, right? They're supposed to give him more fluidity, less swelling, less discomfort, right? So what's with the continued 'soreness' from the initial plasma shot in Sept, missed camp and preseason completely in Oct and we're now into Nov and the reg season with no debut date in sight? If he can play, why wouldn't he? Simple answer, he can't.
1) The synvisc injection is to prevent arthritis. Ditto with plasma injections. He lost some cartilage in 2010. The injections keep it from wearing down further, so he won't be "bone on bone" someday.
2) The bone bruise is something else entirely. Unlike arthritus, which is gradual, the bone bruise happened while he was doing a drill on a practice court. These injections don't deal with bone bruises.
3) If he can play and it won't get worse and won't prevent the injury from healing on it's own, then he should play. The problem is that Bynum and the 76ers front office are giving different answers that don't clarify what is going on.
The questions I want answered are
1) Can he actually play if the team needed him to play?
2) Would playing on the leg make the problem worse?
3) If the answer to question #2 is no, then would playing on the knee not allow it to heal all the way if he plays too long on it?
None of the Philly reporters are asking these questions, so it's hard to get a read on what's going on. This whole situation makes me notice the difference between the Lakers organization and other organizations. The Lakers don't BS about what the injuries are to the players. They give straight answers.