New data has been compiled by this NY Giants blog that points to a systemic problem with NY Giants injuries. While some may point to “1” freak injury for Victor Cruz as a sign of randomness, data of NY Giants injuries since 2008 indicate a worsening trend and alarming underachievement from the organization in maintaining adequate physical conditioning of their football players.
UltimateNYG has been critical of the NY Giants Strength & Conditioning coach for many years. We have seen a truckload of injuries, with particular note paid to the rash of hamstring injuries in 2009 and the series of Round 1 draft picks all having injuries to one degree or another. Last year, after the brutal 2013 season was over, the NFL reported that the Giants finished in last place with the most games lost to starters due to injury. It was a quantifiable metric that supported our running belief that an absence of up to date stretching and flexibility regimens were costing the Giants players starts and by its implication, competitiveness.
Then this past week, the NY Times reported that through Thursday, the NY Giants were in 2nd to last place in injuries for the 2014 season…
A survey of every team revealed that through Thursday, 223 players populated those three (injury) lists, out of almost 1,700 players on the active rosters. The Colts, with 13, and the Giants, with 11, had been clobbered the hardest.
All of the anecdotal pieces of data were accumulating and it was painting a very poor picture of the Giants and the work they do to have their best players on the field as much as possible. Two years of data plus anecdotal evidence allows for inference, but more data was needed to support the claim that injuries have been systemic. Enter Football Outsiders.
The people at Football Outsiders have been collecting team injury data for years and I just needed to sort through old posts to see what was going on for the Gmen. Their site uses a metric called Adjusted Games Lost (“AGL”), which it contends is actually more accurate than starter games lost. The point is that we have an objective meaure of how the Giants rank and it is using the same calculation method year after year, for every team. The table below contains the results of the Giants:
[table id=3 /]
There are a number of things to consider from the data. For starters, with a data set this large for 53+ players and many starters over a 7 year period starting from when the team was 12-4, we can look past “freak” injuries from one player like Victor Cruz and look at general group data. Second, since each team has to face the same yearly conditions that the Giants have to face (i.e. the changing 2011 CBA), all of that noise is normalized when looking at the team’s ranking vs the other 31 NFL organizations. So even if AGLs are rising for everyone due to less practice, it’s rising faster for the Giants. Third, the Giants have been living in the bottom half of the league since 2009 and the bottom quartile for the past 4 years. Fourth, and perhaps most damaging, is that the trend of the ranking has been declining consistently during this period.
Naysayers will point to data that shows that AGL is poorly correlated to playoff teams and Super Bowl Championships. And we already know the quick retort- hey, the Giants won a title in 2011 when they were 26th in the NFL in AGL ranking. But this is where it is important to understand the contribution of injuries as ONE variable in the larger picture of competitiveness. If anything, the 2011 AGL ranking goes EVEN FURTHER to explain just how important injuries really are to a team. Remember that in 2011 the team lost Osi Umenyiora for 9 starts before he returned in the playoffs. Justin Tuck battled through injury (likely captured in the AGL stats better than his loss of 5 starts) all season, only to come on at the end of the season to make an impact. And lesser known player (who got the call from the couch to fill in for an injured LBer corps) Chase Blackburn made a late season impact that we on this blog have only recently understood to be far more important than one would otherwise believe. In other words, the injuries accounted for a very sloppy 7-7 start. The reemergence of Osi, Tuck and Blackburn put the team on a 6-0 Super Bowl run.
The data is stark and compelling. Not only are injuries consistent for this organization every year relative to the rest of the league, they are also trending more negatively as well. In the last ~3.5 seasons when the Giants have been in the lower quartile of injuries, the team has amassed a 28-27 won loss record. It is certainly not being helped by a steady and worsening undercurrent of injuries. Relative to its competitors, it can do a lot better. And if you think that the strength and conditioning programs of all NFL teams are equal, just read this link as a reminder that all forms of technology and techniques are moving forward, leaving others behind.
The Giants have won a grand total of 2 games vs teams with a winning record in the last season and a half. Those two games were last year against 3rd string starting QBs Matt Barkley (PHI) and Scott Tolzien (GB). The Giants injury data is not “the” reason that the team is not beating the NFL’s better teams, but it certainly isn’t helping them. Obviously there are a number of reasons why the team has not been competitive. Common sense would dictate that when your team is in the lower half of NFL injuries for the last 6 years and lower quartile for the past 4 seasons, that the Giants need to change some of the things they are doing to make their players healthier from a macro organizational approach. That starts with the responsibilities of your strength and conditioning coach.
Add The Sports Daily to your Google News Feed!
