News Archives

New York Giants were Least-Injured Team in NFC East, Which was NFL’s Most-Injured Division

January 10th, 2013 at 9:05 AM
By Dan Benton

The New York Giants were devastated by injures again in 2012, but as it turns out, they were the healthiest team in the NFC East, which was, ironically, the NFL's most-injured division.

In a surprising statistical breakdown of games missed by starters (courtesy of Rick Gosselin of the Dallas Morning News), the Giants lost a total of only 38 games. By comparison, the Philadelphia Eagles had starters miss a total of 63 games, which led the entire league. Further, the NFC East had starters miss a total of 247 games, which also led the league … by quite a bit. The AFC South came in second with 210 total games missed by starters.

One thing this breakdown does not account for is games missed by potential starters lost during training camp/preseason. For instance, there was thought that cornerback Terrell Thomas would come back and reassume his previous role as starter, but he suffered an ACL injury which cost him all 16 games. The same line of thinking applies to defensive tackle Shaun Rogers, who would have likely started in the absence of Chris Canty, who began the season on the Physically Unable to Perform (PUP) list.

Collectively, and assuming Rogers would have gone to the bench upon Canty's return, that's an additional 22 games, which would put the Giants' total at 60 games missed by starters. And that's not even accounting for games missed by depth players turned starters due to other injuries.

It's a complex "what if" scenario any way you wish to break it down, but it's clear from the numbers that the NFC East – not just the Giants – were hit hard with the injury bug in 2012.

Also…

Facebook Twitter Plusone Pinterest Linkedin Digg Delicious Reddit Stumbleupon Tumblr Posterous Email

Tags: Chris Canty, Football, New York, New York Giants, NFC East, NFL, Philadelphia, Philadelphia Eagles, Shaun Rogers, Terrell Thomas

No related posts.

22 Responses to “New York Giants were Least-Injured Team in NFC East, Which was NFL’s Most-Injured Division”

  1.  G-MenFan says:

    There’s no calculation for games NOT missed by injured starters. Baas, Snee, Bradshaw, Nicks, Tuck, etc. This takes its toll as well.

  2.  G-MenFan says:

    Speaking of Baas, he’s the only player on the Giants on which I hear wildly different assessments of his play this year. Some people say he played pretty well; others say he stunk. I was wondering if there was a consensus of opinion on G101.

    ??

  3.  demo3356 says:

    interesting stat.. I think the Problem for the Giants were guys playing when they were too banged up to contribute. I think they would have been better off having MORE missed games by starters.. . I think team would have been better had Nicks missed 6-8 games in middle of year and came back healthy. I believe Bradshaw should have sat longer with sprained knee and let Wilson start. Phillips came back to play in Skins game and re injured self. Snee played most of the year with a torn muscle in his hip and was horrible at times. This is one aspect where Coughlins loyalty to his guys is a fault. Sometimes you have to sit the vets till they are right and ride the younger guys

  4.  demo3356 says:

    Also Key guys like Bennett and Webster played most of the year with injuries.

  5.  GOAT56 says:

    I bet if we had seen this stat in 2011 we would be top 3 and certainly would have lead the division. I posted several times through the year I stated we were healthy NFL wise, with no major injuries. Now the banged up players in Nicks and KP did hurt us and are not captured in this but I still think this means something.

    I go back to the discussion of lack of hunger this year. The SB is the easy explanation but I also think the lack of injuries effect that as well. When you have injuries everyone knows they have to step up and do their job a little better. Also, guys who are hungry get shots and playing time and give the team more hunger. As crazy as it seems to say I think injuries are good sometimes because of these reasons. Especially, with us because we form a deep team that might not have as many superstar or pro-bowl players as other teams but we have more good players than just about anyone.

    For example with Nicks I think the offense might have been better off without him than the version we had for most of the year. Not to say Nicks didn’t help in way because he drew coverage but I think there’s tendency to relax because 88 is out there. If he wasn’t everyone would know they need to be better to somehow overcome his loss from Eli to Cruz to Randle to Gillbride. I think some of this is what gave us the focus and energy necessary to win the SBs we did. Of course it’s a fine line because you cannot afford to lose many key players. But I think there is a part of it that helps.

  6.  TuckThis says:

    I think the Giants did a terrible job of managing injuries. It is certainly not an excuse for a lousy season, but I’ve kvetched about it all year. They threw people out there who never practiced week in and week out and expected them to get into a rhythm. Bad job all around!

  7.  Levito says:

    They might have missed the least amount of games due to injury, but they probably led the league in players who played, but shouldn’t have. Nicks shouldn’t have played half the season. Bradshaw was pretty banged up. And they only consider starters, so the loss of Brown didn’t count. KP was rushed back only to miss 2 more games, and Rivers was a walking injury report from the waist down. They probably didn’t consider Locklear a starter, but he was a big loss on the right side of the line.

    And the entire D line played like a bunch of pansies all season anyway, hurt or not.

  8.  Samardzija says:

    Im going to go out on a limb and guess other teams also played injured….

  9.  Chad Eldred says:

    We can go back and forth all day on who had more injuries or who had more “key” players injured. I’ll play that game for a moment. Consider that the Redskins lost Orakpo and Carriker back in September. Please tell me how we had anything to compare to that.

    Injuries are part of the game and as frustrating as they are, all teams deal with them. The best you can do is sign and draft guys with a track record of durability and don’t do stupid things with your key players. Think Jason Sehorn returning kicks in the preseason. I’m a big fan of yoga and calisthenics to prevent injury, but I’m not going to contend that there is enough data to support the validity of those techniques for preventing injury. At the end of the day there is always a luck factor in the mix.

    •  GOAT56 says:

      The redskins had more key injuries for sure. But I’m tired of people including Carriker. He was a nice player and he started but was just part of the rotation for them. They lost Orakpo, Davis, Brown and several safeties that were all key players. Carriker was not one.

  10.  fanfor55years says:

    The only thing that interests me about our injuries this year is whether Snee, Baas and Webster were so affected by theirs that we cannot really judge their performances properly.

    I thought Baas looked very good at times, horrid at others. My problem with him is that he has rarely been healthy since he arrived. I know that’s just bad luck, but it’s fact. I still expect a really good season out of him in 2013 because he is completely familiar with the system and should be ready to tie down the position for years to come if he gets healthy.

    Snee worries me, because his injuries have destroyed his ability to pull. That was a very good part of the Giants’ scheme when Tiki was so successful and should be a huge part of the scheme as Wilson becomes the lead dog. (Boothe, btw, is not good at pulling and that’s one reason that I’m not as high on him as are some around here….I like him, but still think we can do better).

    And can Corey Webster have really shrunk by that much in one off-season? He went from an A- corner to a horror show. It’s impossible to believe it was either a sudden full physical skill deterioration or a season-long “slump”. That hamstring HAD to have been more of a problem than we ever knew. I still think he should renegotiate his contract, but I expect a bounce-back season from him in 2013.

    The other injuries were more obvious and we were better able to discern to what extent they affected the play of the injured. But in the case of Baas, Snee and Webster (and maybe Canty) I think it’s hard to figure that out. The team knows. We don’t.

    •  Levito says:

      Webster never really looked hurt out there. He was never limping, never favoring any body parts, and I don’t recall seeing him on the injury report. I find it hard to believe he’s regressed that much in a year, it just doesn’t make sense. But, unlike many here, I’m not ready to send this guy packing. He’s needed in the secondary (at a reduced salary), and it’s also partially Fewell’s fault for not realizing this kid hasn’t been able to cover #1 WRS one on one this season, yet he still left him on an island game after game. Fewell really has no idea how to adjust a defense to fit the players.

      • Dan BentonDan Benton says:

        He was seriously injured. My guess (and it’s just a guess) is that his hamstring was torn off the bone and he couldn’t do any additional damage to it, so he just played.

      •  LUZZ says:

        “left on an island” implies man coverage. PF sits in zones mostly 90% of the game.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Login with: