02-03-2013, 12:27 AM
(02-02-2013, 10:18 PM)76lsjumb link Wrote:Interestingly, I've been unable to track the articles down on the web, although I've founds references to the 2003 series - described as an "informal survey/study" -- in a couple of different places.
From a search at http://www.mercurynews.com/archive-search
Quote: Article 1 of 3, Article ID: 0212200103
Published on December 19, 2002, San Jose Mercury News (CA)
MAPLES FLOOR MAY BE TAKING TOLL ON PLAYERS
Mark Madsen disagrees with me. Adam Keefe, too.
Kris Weems argued against my theory Tuesday night, standing on the bouncy Maples Pavilion floor I believe could be the root of so many sprained joints, torn tendons, shattered bones and fractured hopes.
But despite my mini poll of former Cardinal standouts, the anecdotal evidence mounts against Maples' unique, 34-year-old, spring-reinforced wood floor.
Most recently and crushingly, the toll grew Monday when point
Complete Article, 771 words ( )
Article 2 of 3, Article ID: 0302160036
Published on February 15, 2003, San Jose Mercury News (CA)
TOO MUCH FLEX IN THE HARDWOOD?
In the past 10 seasons, the Stanford men's basketball team has won 85.5 percent of its games at Maples Pavilion, one of the best home-court advantages in the Pacific-10 Conference.
But the Cardinal may also have a home-court disadvantage: It leads the league in stress-related injuries.
There is growing anecdotal, statistical and scientific support that Maples' bouncy floor, which was designed to reduce wear and tear on the body -- think of it as basketball on
Complete Article, 1493 words ( )