Celtics' Davis Strains left Patella Tendon

Celtics' Davis strains left patella tendon
By Gary Washburn, Globe Staff

The Celtics' 115-103 victory over the Phoenix Suns was dampened slightly when Glen Davis left the floor late in the fourth quarter after a game-sealing dunk. He didn't land awkwardly when landing, he said after the game that his left knee had been bothering him for weeks and was diagnosed with a strained patella tendon.

Davis will undergo an MRI tomorrow and his status for Friday's game against the Golden State Warriors is uncertain. Davis did not appear concerned after the game.

"I guess I'm not the only one concerned," he said. "I'll be all right. I've been dealing with the pain all season."

He finished with 14 points and eight rebounds in 26 minutes.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

UPDATE: Carolyn Manno tweets: MRI for Baby tom on left knee...says its been bothering him all year, to pt where he thought he may not be able to play at times

2nd UPDATE: Greg Dickerson reports Davis is suffering from a left knee patella strain.

112288

GLEN DAVIS TO HAVE MRI ON LEFT KNEE 03.03.11 at 2:06 am ET
By Paul Flannery | No Comments

Glen Davis knew something was wrong before his feet touched the ground. For most of the season he has been battling pain in his left knee, and as he went up for a game-capping dunk against Phoenix Wednesday night, he sensed that he would not have a happy landing. Davis hobbled off the court with the help of the team’s medical staff.

The Celtics are calling it a strained left patella tendon and Davis is scheduled to have an MRI Thursday. While he said he’s not concerned, he also acknowledged that his knees have been a problem this season.

“That’s why I don’t jump that high,” Davis said. “That’s why I missed that dunk [against Miami]. I can’t jump. My knees hurt.”

The Celtics won’t know the extent of Davis’ injury until the MRI, but the feeling in the locker room was that he would likely miss some time.

“It’s hard,” Kevin Garnett said. “We’re back to this injury bug. Hopefully he’s not out for too long. Baby’s a trooper. He’s been playing hurt throughout this whole year and some last year.”

112288 wrote:
“That’s why I don’t jump that high,” Davis said. “That’s why I missed that dunk [against Miami]. I can’t jump. My knees hurt.”

Why do you think your knees hurt Glen? Could it possibly be because your a hamburger away from 300 pounds?

I really do hope he is alright but as others have said he needs to lose some weight or this will become a reoccurring issue.

Tick

If we ever knew the truth, I think he is probably a few burgers over 300 right now.

Sad because he does move well and has good footwork, has developed a reliable jumper, plays good possition defense and seems like a good all around player..........but how much better and quicker he could be if he did loose some weight.

beat

I think it's the nature of the beast...please forgive the pun. Baby is just big! I am not sure if he could lose as much as people are telling him to do because it's just his physical make up as a human. He probably would have been better as a football player in that he would not be putting so much jarring physical activities on his knees with jumping in basketball.

So does it drop to 250 or 275. Not sure that would help and let say he did would he be as effective?

112288

Patellar tendon issues are common in basketball, even to the point that it has been called "jumper's knee." Increased weight means increased strain on the tendon. Losing weight would help Davis minimize a recurrence of the problem, but there have been plenty of thinner players who have had patellar tendon problems, so this may be something he has to deal with regardless.

Sometimes, a player's ability to withstand the strain is genetic. Shaq obviously isn't the player he used to be, but the fact that he's in the league at all is a complete shock to me. Not only is he massive, but he used to move and jump pretty darn well, which would transfer even more force on his weight-bearing joints. I was sure he'd be broken down and out of the league by the time he was 34. Boy, was I wrong. He's learned to manage himself quite nicely, but I'd vote for good genetics being a significant factor on his side. Just amazing to me that he's still playing.

Outside

112288 wrote:I think it's the nature of the beast...please forgive the pun. Baby is just big! I am not sure if he could lose as much as people are telling him to do because it's just his physical make up as a human. He probably would have been better as a football player in that he would not be putting so much jarring physical activities on his knees with jumping in basketball.

So does it drop to 250 or 275. Not sure that would help and let say he did would he be as effective?

112288

I hear that excuse all the time at work 112288.
"My kid is just a big kid"
In my view that just means that they will have to work harder at losing weight-or else run a higher risk of heart disease, diabetes, cancer etc etc
Its not that Davis is muscle bound; he is fat. He can lose the weight, and I think he would be quicker and more effective-but the effect on his basketball talents aside, its about his health. Exercise alone is not enough.

I guess we agree that we disagree. However what the X factor here is.........

What does Baby really weigh and what is his body fat percentage?

112288

Pumpsie,

I don't think Davis is all that fat. He is a very muscular guy. I've seen times that Pierce looked like he was carrying as much extra weight as Davis.

I believe he came in to camp the past couple of years looking pretty trim and fit, but he has seemed to gain a few pounds during the season. To me, that points to diet more than anything. As much as these guys work in practice, shootarounds, and games I don't see how they could gain weight during the season. I always lost weight, and that was during a much shorter high school and college season. Davis would benefit greatly by hiring someone to cook for him.

None of us are privvy to the stats on Davis' real weight or body fat percentage, but all of us have eyes and can see that he is not exactly fit and trim. I am sure he is strong too, but his size does stand out. Its not really hard to see that, especially when he stands next to the other athletes on the court. Despite running up and down the court every other night, Davis remains overweight, if not obese (ie BMI over 30). A BMI over 30 is associated with a lot of very bad things; a BMI over 25 is too, but less so. His race is also a factor. Black Americans have a higher incidence of diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure.
And its 90% diet and only 10% related to how much exercise he gets, as it is with everyone. You cannot exercise off eating too many calories. I know; my BMI is about 27 despite all the miles I run.
The kind of weight Davis is carrying around will catch up with him either on the court or off.

Pumpsie Green wrote:None of us are privvy to the stats on Davis' real weight or body fat percentage, but all of us have eyes and can see that he is not exactly fit and trim. I am sure he is strong too, but his size does stand out. Its not really hard to see that, especially when he stands next to the other athletes on the court. Despite running up and down the court every other night, Davis remains overweight, if not obese (ie BMI over 30). A BMI over 30 is associated with a lot of very bad things; a BMI over 25 is too, but less so. His race is also a factor. Black Americans have a higher incidence of diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure.
And its 90% diet and only 10% related to how much exercise he gets, as it is with everyone. You cannot exercise off eating too many calories. I know; my BMI is about 27 despite all the miles I run.
The kind of weight Davis is carrying around will catch up with him either on the court or off.

Well said Pumpsie.

Pumpsie, you are right about African American having a higher then normal rate of heart disease and diabetes. he needs to watch himself more in the future then now because he could really get heavy fast when retired.

112288

Outside wrote:I don't think Davis is all that fat. He is a very muscular guy. I've seen times that Pierce looked like he was carrying as much extra weight as Davis.

There is a big difference between NBA fit and fit enough to be healthy. Looking at someone’s body size is a poor judge of fitness, or healthiness for that matter. Some people have bigger bones and are just plain big – while other can be rail thin and as unhealthy as the day is long.

In terms of NBA fitness level, Davis could stand to lose some weight, which would help him gain some quickness and stamina. But it is a big leap from saying he could lose some weight to be a better player – to he needs to lose weight because of long term health reasons.

BMI is one of the most unreliable and misleading calculations ever devised – the main problem especially among younger people and athletes, is that BMI does not distinguish between body fat and muscle mass.

“A previous study of NFL football players found that a large percentage of them – around 60 percent – were considered obese,” he said. “But when you look at an athlete like that, you see that in many cases he is not obese. Many athletes have huge BMIs because of muscle mass, but in many cases are not fat.”

http://news.msu.edu/story/1198/

DAVIS OUT 3-5 DAYS - DOC

SEE POST

112288

MrKleen, I agree that in some situations BMI does not tell the whole story, but those situations are rare and usually limited to body builder types. Most big football players have lots of muscle mass, but also a ton of fat and are rightfully considered obese in terms of risk for a cluster of diseases called the metabolic syndrome. BMI remains a very useful tool that is widely used throughout the Kaiser system; I use it in graph form for every patient over age 3 or so to show parents where their kids stand. Frequently the "plus sized" parents who have older (for me, over age 8 or so is "older") children that are also too big use terms like "large boned" as a defense mechanism against the truth. Similarly, some adults do not accept the use of BMI because of what it would mean to their own situation. In short, BMI remains the most useful predictor of real obesity and the diseases associated with it.

Pumpsie Green wrote:MrKleen, I agree that in some situations BMI does not tell the whole story, but those situations are rare and usually limited to body builder types. Most big football players have lots of muscle mass, but also a ton of fat and are rightfully considered obese in terms of risk for a cluster of diseases called the metabolic syndrome. BMI remains a very useful tool that is widely used throughout the Kaiser system; I use it in graph form for every patient over age 3 or so to show parents where their kids stand. Frequently the "plus sized" parents who have older (for me, over age 8 or so is "older") children that are also too big use terms like "large boned" as a defense mechanism against the truth. Similarly, some adults do not accept the use of BMI because of what it would mean to their own situation. In short, BMI remains the most useful predictor of real obesity and the diseases associated with it.

That is one opinion. Here is another:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106268439

1. The person who dreamed up the BMI said explicitly that it could not and should not be used to indicate the level of fatness in an individual.

The BMI was introduced in the early 19th century by a Belgian named Lambert Adolphe Jacques Quetelet. He was a mathematician, not a physician. He produced the formula to give a quick and easy way to measure the degree of obesity of the general population to assist the government in allocating resources. In other words, it is a 200-year-old hack.

2. It is scientifically nonsensical.

There is no physiological reason to square a person's height (Quetelet had to square the height to get a formula that matched the overall data. If you can't fix the data, rig the formula!). Moreover, it ignores waist size, which is a clear indicator of obesity level.

3. It is physiologically wrong.

It makes no allowance for the relative proportions of bone, muscle and fat in the body. But bone is denser than muscle and twice as dense as fat, so a person with strong bones, good muscle tone and low fat will have a high BMI. Thus, athletes and fit, health-conscious movie stars who work out a lot tend to find themselves classified as overweight or even obese.

4. It gets the logic wrong.

The CDC says on its Web site that "the BMI is a reliable indicator of body fatness for people." This is a fundamental error of logic. For example, if I tell you my birthday present is a bicycle, you can conclude that my present has wheels. That's correct logic. But it does not work the other way round. If I tell you my birthday present has wheels, you cannot conclude I got a bicycle. I could have received a car. Because of how Quetelet came up with it, if a person is fat or obese, he or she will have a high BMI. But as with my birthday present, it doesn't work the other way round. A high BMI does not mean an individual is even overweight, let alone obese. It could mean the person is fit and healthy, with very little fat.

5. It's bad statistics.

Because the majority of people today (and in Quetelet's time) lead fairly sedentary lives and are not particularly active, the formula tacitly assumes low muscle mass and high relative fat content. It applies moderately well when applied to such people because it was formulated by focusing on them. But it gives exactly the wrong answer for a large and significant section of the population, namely the lean, fit and healthy. Quetelet is also the person who came up with the idea of "the average man." That's a useful concept, but if you try to apply it to any one person, you come up with the absurdity of a person with 2.4 children. Averages measure entire populations and often don't apply to individuals.

6. It is lying by scientific authority.

Because the BMI is a single number between 1 and 100 (like a percentage) that comes from a mathematical formula, it carries an air of scientific authority. But it is mathematical snake oil.

7. It suggests there are distinct categories of underweight, ideal, overweight and obese, with sharp boundaries that hinge on a decimal place.

That's total nonsense.

8. It makes the more cynical members of society suspect that the medical insurance industry lobbies for the continued use of the BMI to keep their profits high.

Insurance companies sometimes charge higher premiums for people with a high BMI. Among such people are all those fit individuals with good bone and muscle and little fat, who will live long, healthy lives during which they will have to pay those greater premiums.

9. Continued reliance on the BMI means doctors don't feel the need to use one of the more scientifically sound methods that are available to measure obesity levels.

Those alternatives cost a little bit more, but they give far more reliable results.

10. It embarrasses the U.S.

It is embarrassing for one of the most scientifically, technologically and medicinally advanced nations in the world to base advice on how to prevent one of the leading causes of poor health and premature death (obesity) on a 200-year-old numerical hack developed by a mathematician who was not even an expert in what little was known about the human body back then.

MrK....I am not going to get into a long arguement about the validity of a measurement that is widely accepted as valid, in general, in the medical community. I work in a multispecialty group of over 4000 doctors and I have not heard a single discussion at any level about deleting this measurement from our discussions with our patients-nor relying solely on it as an indicator of obesity and risk for the "metabolic syndrome". You can argue for or against anything, and some arguements are based more on facts than others.
Suffice it to say that the definition of obesity is having a BMI over 30. This is what the CDC has come up with, and you know what? I think they are a pretty smart group of people. Here is the link for proof:

http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/defining.html

All jokes aside, Baby is an important part of the team and I am relieved that he will not be out for a long time.

Regarding his weight, baby has 'big bones' People with big bones carry more weight. You cannot just lose that weight easily. I think he needs to be on a special diet and training program to drop a few pounds.

I think one thing that Doc can do would be to cut back on his muntes. He is playing almost 30 MPG. Perhaps get him down to the 22-25 MPG level to lessen the stress on the knee. With the additions of Green and Murphy you could argue that Glen does not have to play the 4 spot. Play Krstic 25 MPG at the 5 and let Glenn play the other 23 MPG and also consider using a smaller lineup where KG moves over to the 5 and put Green at the 4 spot.

Once Shaq/JON return that will also impact the minutes needed from baby.

dboss

Thats the bottom line dboss; its good that there is no serious damage to his knee. That said, it would probably take several weeks off the court for him to become pain free, so more than likely he is going to have to continue to play hurt for the rest of the season. Of course, he is not alone in that regard.

Pumpsie Green wrote:MrK....I am not going to get into a long arguement about the validity of a measurement that is widely accepted as valid, in general, in the medical community. I work in a multispecialty group of over 4000 doctors and I have not heard a single discussion at any level about deleting this measurement from our discussions with our patients-nor relying solely on it as an indicator of obesity and risk for the "metabolic syndrome". You can argue for or against anything, and some arguements are based more on facts than others.
Suffice it to say that the definition of obesity is having a BMI over 30. This is what the CDC has come up with, and you know what? I think they are a pretty smart group of people. Here is the link for proof:

http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/defining.html

I agree there is no point debating this with you, as you clearly choose to disregard all the facts I posted from the NPR story.

For the average person sitting on his couch for a living - I agree with you and the CDC. Baby is NOT the average person.

MrK, I think that we basically agree about this. The BMI tool is accurate for the vast majority of people in the world, but for superathletes it is less useful. In the case of Glen Davis we both look at him and see him differently. You see him, it seems, as someone who is not overweight and at risk for all the conditions associated with being heavy; I look at him and see someone who is in great cardiovascular shape, but still overweight and most likely carrying too much fat. Good cardiovascular shape reduces but does not eliminate the risks of a high BMI. I am not even sure if that risk would be eliminated if all that extra weight were muscle rather than fat; not sure that has been studied.
Neither of us can prove our case decisively because we are never going to know his body fat percentage.

one thing i notice is that his weight seems to fluctuate during the season. he also seems to play better when his minutes are around 26 rather than 36...i think he would benefit greatly from losing 25 pounds and keeping it off.

Pumpsie Green wrote:Good cardiovascular shape reduces but does not eliminate the risks of a high BMI.

Again, I do not agree. A person who is rail thin with a high metabolism, can have a very low BMI - and be incredibly unhealthy and out of shape.

As I have said in my previous posts, I think Big Baby is a bit out of shape from an NBA player stand point. But I think it is a BIG leap to take it to the point that he is so out of shape that his health is in jeopardy.

I am 6' - 220 - and while I could also stand to lose a few pound and probably could not keep up with you on a track or in a bike race...I run 3 miles 4 x a week, control the boards in my 35+ league, and come from a long history of big, sturdy, irish catholic men who live well into their 80s. BMI is a vast oversimplification of what is and is not healthy.

Jeb

I know this has been kicked around a lot but I agree 25 pounds less and a few less minutes would be the best solution but i give BB credit he gutted it out cause we needed him, now he needs to get healthy cause we are going to need him going forward.

Should be intersting to see the new guys again this eve. Like to see Murph hit a three, Green go for 20, Kristic get a double double, and Bradley have 5 dimes.

There I'm not asking for too much am I?

beat