I have been diagnosed with patellar tendinitis, among other issues with my leg. Mine wasn’t too severe and I have more significant nerve issues. But there is a range in terms of the severity of symptoms from this injury and it’s dubious to assume Pettersson had the most severe symptoms (from the get go, I might add).
My original theory was something along the lines of that, on a balance of probabilities (I.e., 51% or more probability), I doubted whether he had a significant injury that was the predominant cause for his poor play. I’m sure I’ve stated it many different ways, but that’s been my general point from the beginning. Based on the new evidence I’m still not sure and I’ve already stated why.
The problem is, you are seeing this in black and white and ignoring nuance. You are taking Pettersson’s disclosure that he had a knee injury (later confirmed as patellar tendinitis but no one is speaking to the severity of his symptoms) as confirmation that the injury caused his bad play.
You have made some unsubstantiated assumptions in coming to this conclusion, mainly, that the injury was significant and the cause of his bad play. We all know, of course, that players can have insignificant injuries that don’t significantly affect their play. And really, if it was a debilitating injury you’d kind of expect Tochett to not throw his franchise player under the bus.
But anyway, I’m pretty tired of talking about this. I’ve never been certain or had a ton of confidence one way or the other. That’s why I’ve repeatedly used the term “balance of probabilities”.