Earl Thomas and (almost) signing with KC

[Mloe68 1,521]

13 minutes ago, Balto said:

Do we know for sure that Chiefs signed Honey Badger before Thomas told them he was heading to Baltimore?  Reports seem that KC had to up HBs offer by several million to get it done.  Seems like they didn’t wanna loose another Safety?

Honey Badger agreed to a deal on March 11th.  Thomas was set to sign here and instead went to Baltimore  on March 13.  

Very clear we targeted the younger player who’s been healthy and only were interested in a short term deal with Thomas who had missed 19 of 48 games over the prior three years. I was surprised a player of Thomas’s ability didn’t have more suitors with long term deals until realizing this. Meanwhile the competition for Mathieu mandated a guarantee bump to get the deal done. 

Sure seems like the Ravens were negotiating against themselves for Thomas long term. 

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

12 hours ago, Mloe68 said:

So you are saying his injury in 2016 and the treatment of such was the primary reason for the injury two years later? 

I think LiquidFriend is wrong.  A tibial fracture that is well aligned can be placed in a cast without putting a rod through the shaft of the bone.  The latter makes it a little more stable during healing, preventing non-union of the fracture. But it carries the risk of either infection or permanent pain in the knee above the fracture. With today's antibiotic resistance, an infection in the bone can be an absolute disaster. Definitely career threatening and possibly life threatening in a small number of cases.  Thomas is a young athletic guy without any reason to suspect reduced blood supply to the area like a person with diabetes might have. Obviously, the fracture was well aligned, and it was perfectly reasonable to tell him that surgery is optional. It is up to the patient to pick, obviously.  No one can force a patient to have or not have a surgery.  The healing time for the surgery averages about 6 months.  For just the cast, it averages about  4 months.  Thomas placed his own bet and is responsible for his own outcome. He made his own decision, just like any patient does (except for a pregnant woman in some states when church and state are not kept separate).  To say that the doctors "botched it" is ignorant and presumptuous.  And yes, if it remains unstable with no rod, it is more likely to re-fracture, even two years later.  This is all on Thomas, not the docs. Just like it was Eric Berry's decision whether or not to have surgery for his Haglund's deformity.

https://www.prolianceorthopedicassociates.com/leg-injury-doctor-evaluation/

[Balto 723]

3 hours ago, Mloe68 said:

Honey Badger agreed to a deal on March 11th.  Thomas was set to sign here and instead went to Baltimore  on March 13.  

Very clear we targeted the younger player who’s been healthy and only were interested in a short term deal with Thomas who had missed 19 of 48 games over the prior three years. I was surprised a player of Thomas’s ability didn’t have more suitors with long term deals until realizing this. Meanwhile the competition for Mathieu mandated a guarantee bump to get the deal done. 

Sure seems like the Ravens were negotiating against themselves for Thomas long term. 

Just saying it never says Thomas and his agent didn’t decide stuff till the 13th.  Could of been the plan to sign Thomas on the 11th but Ravens swooped in last min thus taking a couple days to sign.  KC found out about Thomas so up’ed offer to Badger to make sure they get a safety.

[Mloe68 1,521]

16 minutes ago, Balto said:

Just saying it never says Thomas and his agent didn’t decide stuff till the 13th.  Could of been the plan to sign Thomas on the 11th but Ravens swooped in last min thus taking a couple days to sign.  KC found out about Thomas so up’ed offer to Badger to make sure they get a safety.

Not only does the timing add up but the contract offers make no sense in reverse order of priority. Here’s a great article about why Honey Badger was the clear bigger prize. 

https://thesportsdaily.com/2019/03/01/cowboys-should-sign-tyrann-mathieu-in-free-agency-not-earl-thomas/

[liquidfriend 1,151]

10 hours ago, Mloe68 said:

You were right that initial injury weakened the bone and created a greater possibility of reinjuring it by not inserting rod.  Makes sense but it was hardly any misdiagnosis like Justin Houston had to endure.   Thomas had the facts and made a choice. 

And so we are back to a player having sour grapes about having to play in the last year of a contract that paid him over 40 million  Heck if anyone should be upset it’s the Seahawks who paid big money for a players who missed multiple games over three straight seasons   Perhaps the last even preventable  

Said Thomas in June of 2017 when asked why he did not have surgery then: “I wasn’t getting surgery. When I got surgery on my shoulder (following the 2014 season), it feels good. But I don’t want nothing in my leg. When they told me there was like a 50 percent chance it would heal naturally, I said I’m going to take the 50 percent chance.”

They didn't press him on the surgery.  That's a botch.  Thanks for playing.

[Mloe68 1,521]

1 hour ago, liquidfriend said:

They didn't press him on the surgery.  That's a botch.  Thanks for playing.

Laughable to say the least. He said no. You got it flat wrong. End of story. 

[ChiefThunder 154]

Nvrmnd 

[liquidfriend 1,151]

38 minutes ago, Mloe68 said:

Laughable to say the least. He said no. You got it flat wrong. End of story. 

They left it to him, which was pretty damn stupid.  He's not a doctor.

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

19 minutes ago, liquidfriend said:

They left it to him, which was pretty damn stupid.  He's not a doctor.

Are you out of your mind? Do you seriously think a procedure can be done against a patient's consent or without a patient's consent?  When I practiced medicine, we had a thing called a "consent form."  Unless a patient or legal representative signs a consent form, a procedure doesn't happen, unless there is a life threatening emergency, and no ability to contact a spouse or representative.  That is the only situation.  Why are you belaboring this?  Admit you are wrong, and just move on. Nobody is going to hold it against you.  But continuing this fantasy is just embarrassing you more and more. He made his own well-informed choice when given the various options.  Period.

[liquidfriend 1,151]

11 minutes ago, Fmbl2187 said:

Are you out of your mind? Do you seriously think a procedure can be done against a patient's consent or without a patient's consent?  When I practiced medicine, we had a thing called a "consent form."  Unless a patient or legal representative signs a consent form, a procedure doesn't happen, unless there is a life threatening emergency, and no ability to contact a spouse or representative.  That is the only situation.  Why are you belaboring this?  Admit you are wrong, and just move on. Nobody is going to hold it against you.  But continuing this fantasy is just embarrassing you more and more. He made his own well-informed choice when given the various options.  Period.

No?  Do you not read?

They can certainly reccomend procedures and that's the whole point of a staff.  They (the MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS) gave the call to the not professional.  

They absolutely should have reccomend the surgery and if he refuses, that's on him.  

Talk about poor assumptions.  As a professional athlete that signed a contract with the Seahawks club, he had an obligation to follow the advice of the medical staff.  Go take a lap now, hot head.

I mean really, what part of Earl Thomas isn't a doctor is a struggle here?

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

20 minutes ago, liquidfriend said:

No?  Do you not read?

They can certainly reccomend procedures and that's the whole point of a staff.  They (the MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS) gave the call to the not professional.  

They absolutely should have reccomend the surgery and if he refuses, that's on him.  

Talk about poor assumptions.  As a professional athlete that signed a contract with the Seahawks club, he had an obligation to follow the advice of the medical staff.  Go take a lap now, hot head.

I mean really, what part of Earl Thomas isn't a doctor is a struggle here?

I'm certain they made recommendations.  This choice has this benefit and that drawback, and this other choice has this benefit and that other drawback. I would do this, but  Its up to you."  So, they did, and he did, and that is that.  Berry also made his choice.  The only people left in the dark in that case were the fans.  And it isn't really any of our business anyway.  Like I posted early along with a reference, it depends on a number of factors that only the patient can decide.  https://www.prolianceorthopedicassociates.com/leg-injury-doctor-evaluation/

[liquidfriend 1,151]

5 minutes ago, Fmbl2187 said:

I'm certain they made recommendations.  This choice has this benefit and that drawback, and this other choice has this benefit and that other drawback. I would do this, but  Its up to you."  So, they did, and he did, and that is that.  Berry also made his choice.  The only people left in the dark in that case were the fans.  And it isn't really any of our business anyway.

Berry went out of his way to get a recommendation that he didn't need the surgery, so they was 100% on Eric Berry and strongly why I'm glad he's gone.  Unless there's more to this, it seems the medical staff gave the non-professional the decision and it was a bad result.  I think those are two different scenarios, unless Thomas followed the same route EB did.  If he did, well that's on him.

[Mloe68 1,521]

1 hour ago, liquidfriend said:

They left it to him, which was pretty damn stupid.  He's not a doctor.

So in your world the employer gets to tell the employee how his or her body will  be treated medically. Enough said. 

[PhataLerror 370]

As for "professional opinions", I'm not inherently against chemotherapy, but chemotherapy often takes a lot of lives and the quality of life long before the cancer might.

It's hard to quantify gut feelings. It's also very spurious binary reasoning to conclude that a medical decision was wrong in hindsight, as you don't really know what the exact consequences would have been had the "professional opinion" been followed.

In many countries a patient is never obligated to consent to a professional opinion except under very extreme circumstances that should never be available for purchase by contract.

[Lamardirts 2,121]

Can you imagine a world without hypothetical situations.....?

[liquidfriend 1,151]

54 minutes ago, Mloe68 said:

So in your world the employer gets to tell the employee how his or her body will  be treated medically. Enough said. 

No, but if they give me improper advice thst impacts my futute earnings well than yeah there will be consequences.

And again, that's not what I said.  ffs

They strictly left the decision to him and doesn't sound like they gave a professional suggestion one way or another.  

[Mloe68 1,521]

1 minute ago, liquidfriend said:

No, but if they give me improper advice thst impacts my futute earnings well than yeah there will be consequences.

And again, that's not what I said.  ffs

They strictly left the decision to him and doesn't sound like they gave a professional suggestion one way or another.  

All good man. I understand your point and we will just have to agree to disagree about this.  

[liquidfriend 1,151]

1 minute ago, Mloe68 said:

All good man. I understand your point and we will just have to agree to disagree about this.  

Fair enough.  

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

10 hours ago, Lamardirts said:

Can you imagine a world without hypothetical situations.....?

That depends

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

10 hours ago, liquidfriend said:

No, but if they give me improper advice thst impacts my futute earnings well than yeah there will be consequences.

And again, that's not what I said.  ffs

They strictly left the decision to him and doesn't sound like they gave a professional suggestion one way or another.  

There ARE situations where the choice is a toss up, and a patient is given the pluses and minuses of each choice.  Then the patient decides, based on many factors, including recovery time, possible complications, fear or lack of fear, in Thomases case his contract and upcoming possible contracts, how he feels about rehab or length of time of pain, potential habituation or susceptiblity to habituation to pain meds, his sense of responsibility to teammates or to family, his own personal biases, his religion or faith, his financials, and a hundred other things.  Then he makes the best choice he can.  Would he rather play the rest of his career with pain near his knee because of a rod below it inside the bone marrow cavity, or would he prefer the risk of re-fracture but have no risk of pain forever near the knee?  What is more important to his situation? The complications regarding his playing career or the complications or quality of the many decades beyond the end of his career?  It is not cut and dried, and the team has no say in it. The premise that he is obligated in his contract to turn over his medical decisions to the preferences of the team or the fans is utterly absurd. Sometimes the choice is clear:  have this heart surgery or die fairly soon, for example.   You really should let it go.

[liquidfriend 1,151]

11 minutes ago, Fmbl2187 said:

There ARE situations where the choice is a toss up, and a patient is given the pluses and minuses of each choice.  Then the patient decides, based on many factors, including recovery time, possible complications, fear or lack of fear, in Thomases case his contract and upcoming possible contracts, how he feels about rehab or length of time of pain, potential habituation or susceptiblity to habituation to pain meds, his sense of responsibility to teammates or to family, his own personal biases, his religion or faith, his financials, and a hundred other things.  Then he makes the best choice he can.  Would he rather play the rest of his career with pain near his knee because of a rod below it inside the bone marrow cavity, or would he prefer the risk of re-fracture but have no risk of pain forever near the knee?  What is more important to his situation? The complications regarding his playing career or the complications or quality of the many decades beyond the end of his career?  It is not cut and dried, and the team has no say in it. The premise that he is obligated in his contract to turn over his medical decisions to the preferences of the team or the fans is utterly absurd. Sometimes the choice is clear:  have this heart surgery or die fairly soon, for example.   You really should let it go.

He is contractually obligated to follow the advice of the teams medical staff and that's just how it is.  Same way if I were to get injured on the job.  That's just the way it is, m8.

[Fmbl2187 2,279]

11 minutes ago, liquidfriend said:

He is contractually obligated to follow the advice of the teams medical staff and that's just how it is.  Same way if I were to get injured on the job.  That's just the way it is, m8.

And a contract can be broken at any time by any party. He can then negotiate a new contract with that team or another one.

[Calichief 3,024]

49 minutes ago, liquidfriend said:

He is contractually obligated to follow the advice of the teams medical staff and that's just how it is.  Same way if I were to get injured on the job.  That's just the way it is, m8.

You can’t go to your own dr.? 

[Calichief 3,024]

Earl Thomas is a grown ass man. He could have got other opinions.

[PAChiefsFan79 136]

On 4/13/2019 at 10:55 AM, Fmbl2187 said:

I think LiquidFriend is wrong.  A tibial fracture that is well aligned can be placed in a cast without putting a rod through the shaft of the bone.  The latter makes it a little more stable during healing, preventing non-union of the fracture. But it carries the risk of either infection or permanent pain in the knee above the fracture. With today's antibiotic resistance, an infection in the bone can be an absolute disaster. Definitely career threatening and possibly life threatening in a small number of cases.  Thomas is a young athletic guy without any reason to suspect reduced blood supply to the area like a person with diabetes might have. Obviously, the fracture was well aligned, and it was perfectly reasonable to tell him that surgery is optional. It is up to the patient to pick, obviously.  No one can force a patient to have or not have a surgery.  The healing time for the surgery averages about 6 months.  For just the cast, it averages about  4 months.  Thomas placed his own bet and is responsible for his own outcome. He made his own decision, just like any patient does (except for a pregnant woman in some states when church and state are not kept separate).  To say that the doctors "botched it" is ignorant and presumptuous.  And yes, if it remains unstable with no rod, it is more likely to re-fracture, even two years later.  This is all on Thomas, not the docs. Just like it was Eric Berry's decision whether or not to have surgery for his Haglund's deformity.

https://www.prolianceorthopedicassociates.com/leg-injury-doctor-evaluation/

Good information in there. Thanks for posting.