Remove this Banner Ad

Game Day 2017 National Draft

The OP for our new picks must be accurate and informative. Who should do it?

  • Anyone

    Votes: 39 35.5%

  • Wait for TD

    Votes: 71 64.5%
  • Total voters
    110
  • Poll closed .

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Thanks The Royal Sampler that was a compelling post with a lot of detail given as you said we don’t have any detail! I’m probably inclined to let another club take the risk as well and be a casual observer of his career, but your post has provided some terrific context should we go with him, IMO.
 
The Royal Sampler said:
It probably becomes semantics after a point, but I'd consider it to be one. The second tear wasn't of the ACL but a graft. The devil is in the detail, unfortunately, because we don't have any (no doubt the clubs would, however).

The trauma associated with knee reconstruction is generally in the mechanism of injury itself; most ACL injuries in elite athletes are of the non-contact variety, that is to say, they occur in change of direction or landing without "taking a hit" from an opponent. In these instances it can frequently be the ACL which is ruptured in isolation, or perhaps with some meniscal damage (not always, however, see Minnesota Vikings QB Teddy Bridgewater who had a non-contact knee dislocation). However when the foot is planted and the athlete takes a hit from the side, you see more of the combination ACL + MCL/LCL + meniscus + articular cartilage injuries which can leave the knee very unstable, do a lot of damage and take a much longer recovery time.

Which did Bonar have? I have no idea. Where did they take the graft from? Well, we don't know that either, but in terms of most commonly used grafts, you're looking at;
1) Hamstring tendon (semitendinosus, gracilis) "autograft"
2) Central 1/3 patellar tendon "autograft"
3) LARS graft
4) Cadaver graft "allograft"
5) Porcine graft "xenograft"

1) and to a lesser extent 2) dominate the market, 3) has reasonable results but when it does fail it's disastrous, 4) is rarely performed and has an unacceptably high failure rate, and 5) is still in the experimental stage. In all likelihood, Bonar would have had a hamstring tendon graft from the same knee as the donor site. Why did it fail? Well that could be because of a less-than-ideal graft... surgeons I work with prefer to get 10cm worth of donor tissue to make up the ACL graft, and anatomical variation from person to person means that sometimes that just isn't possible. It's also possible that he had an ideal surgery with a very viable graft, went through rehab, started training for or playing footy again and it ruptured. In the first year after surgery, generally, the operated knee is more likely to re-rupture than the good knee, but after one year the surgically repaired knee is stronger than the good knee and the good knee is actually the more likely to rupture. So assuming he was still within that first year post-surgically, the rehabbing knee was at a higher risk of re-injury when it happened.

Then we come to the question of what did they perform the second surgery with? Bonar likely has no suitable hamstring tendon on the injured side, so did they go for patellar tendon, or harvest the hamstring from the good side? And how "traumatic" was the second injury, was it simply that the graft failed early under increasing loading, or was there a traumatic event involved? Certainly a second injury increases the chance for articular cartilage damage which could cause premature arthritis, for example. Possibly they went for a LARS surgery second time around, but I wouldn't recommend that in any athlete let alone one so young.

So yeah, there's a boatload we don't know. The injured knee could be bad. The musculature around the knee could be in need of a lot of rehab, as we saw with Brent MacAffer after he did his ACL, then had ongoing hamstring problems as they were the donor site for the ACL graft. His other knee could also be affected in this way. And then you have to consider that a revision of a knee reconstruction has a higher failure rate, and he's also statistically more likely to rupture his good knee now, as he's been proven to have a predisposition to ACL injury, be it contact or non-contact.

I'd let someone else take the chance on Bonar given what I do know, while conceding there's a great deal I don't... but the clubs knowing a great deal more would be in a better position to make the risk assessment.
Click to expand...

Boo!!!!! I want him. Hunches, Mystery and Excitement, that's where it's at. Stuff all this logical assessment malarkey. Good thing that I didn't understand most of that, therefore my excitement, if we get him, won't be dampened.

Admittedly, I was gutted that we didn't get Beau Muston, would have loved Dylan Gartlett too. Has Chris Yarran nominated for the draft? Wouldn't mind re-rooking Abbott.
 
Last edited:
cityslick1 said:
Remember Beau Muston? Fell to the 20's, and never made it. Recruiters may be wary.

Then there's Selwood of course...
Click to expand...
Hadn’t Beau Muston had a fractured pelvis?

Quite a different thing to an arthritic knee without ligament tear.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

unplugged said:
Has Lochie O'Brien bolted into top ten calculations yet?

Oh wait, still only me who wants him.
Click to expand...
I feel that way about Andrew Brayshaw. Looks like a gun to me.
 
sr36 said:
Boo!!!!! I want him. Hunches, Mystery and Excitement, that's where it's at. Stuff all this logical assessment malarkey. Good thing that I didn't understand most of that, therefore my excitement, if we get him, won't be dampened.

Admittedly, I was gutted that we didn't get Beau Muston, would have loved Dylan Gartlett too. Has Chris Yarran nominated for the draft? Wouldn't mind re-rooking Abbott.
Click to expand...
Ummm, do you mean Dayle Garlett?
 
campbell023 said:
Do we take him now that Murray has been acquired? I think he’s a better small lock down defender then Murray and that’s a role I think we lack in. There’s a good chance he’ll be gone with before our 4th round, we might have to pounce at 38. All depends if we go KPP at 6 too.
Click to expand...

I would bc am view that Sinclair and Ramsay should be cut.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

I'm not so sure we can simply say take the best available at pick 6 if that player type is already well covered on our list.

Someone like Cerra while considered highly skilled by foot looks to be your pure midfielder and one who is more inside and not overly quick.

Now while his foot skills would be welcomed with the likes of Pendlebury, Adams, Greenwood, de Goey and Maynard available for me someone who is more a quick outside distributor or even a utility type like Fogarty would appear a better list fit.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Leviathan Pie said:
First point, valid.

Second, awful - remove all nostalgia.
Click to expand...
Genetics is not nostalgia, stats would prove he has a greater chance of making it than the mean average of hopefuls and you are pretty much rolling the dice after the top 10 to 20 anyway, so you would take that added advantage into consideration
 
DraftBalta said:
Genetics is not nostalgia, stats would prove he has a greater chance of making it than the mean average of hopefuls and you are pretty much rolling the dice after the top 10 to 20 anyway, so you would take that added advantage into consideration
Click to expand...
What stats would those be? There have been plently of FS busts over the journey. Only 1/3 of the Cloke's had meaningful careers and 1/2 Abletts. Jaxon Barham? Tony Shaw's son (who's name I forget)? Show me these amazing stats that prove he has a greater chance of making it over other draftees because of who his Dad is please.
 
DraftBalta said:
Nothing for you to worry your pretty little head over, statistical probability as applied to genetics is for the Weinstein boys to worry about
Click to expand...
I’ll take that as you have no idea and are just talking out your arse. Thx for confirming.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Game Day 2017 National Draft

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top