Imrem: The ethics behind getting injured athletes back
Pro sports teams have psychologists, orthopedists, cardiologists, urologists and periodontists on retainer.
So why not a certified sports ethicist, if there is such an animal, to advise players?
From the NFL to Little League, sports and ethics have been a rare pairing these days.
Still, a couple of Bulls players might want to visit an ethicist and fans, journalists and even team officials might want to make it a group session.
The question looming for Derrick Rose and Jimmy Butler will be how to balance what's best for the Bulls and what's best for them.
An imaginary line is drawn somewhere down the cover page of a contract, but where exactly that "somewhere" is clouds the ethics.
There was a time when players fought to get back from injuries because they felt obligated to do so.
The heck with tomorrow, as in decades from today. Mattering most was helping teammates in need of reinforcements for a postseason run.
Maybe that time was too long ago, before humongous financial stakes and players' rights and lawyers and agents and financial advisers.
Rose was hammered a couple of years ago for declining an invitation to rejoin the Bulls after his surgically repaired knee was medically cleared.
Count me among Rose's hammerers. Players play, young man. You're being paid a considerable amount of money to give up your body.
Later, Rose irritated fans and the media by saying that he had to be cautious because he wanted to be fit to attend business meetings and his kids' graduations later in life.
Nobody wants to hear that. We want to hear that a player will saw off a limb to help his team and justify his contract.
But would a sports ethicist tell the player to get his butt into baggy shorts and contribute to the team's title hopes?
Or would an ethicist say that the imaginary line in the contract is drawn on the side of long-term health?
Rose might face a similar situation this spring: He is expected back from knee surgery in four to six weeks.
The label slapped on Rose in the past is that he won't hurry back if less than 100 percent healthy, if he might reinjure one of his knees or if he might be disabled later in life.
So, does Rose have the right to protect his future at the expense of his team's present?
If he's so worried about it should he retire now and sacrifice tens of millions of dollars left on his contract so he won't need new joints some day?
I'm thinking he should retire but am a few credits short of my degree in sports ethics.
Then there's the case of Jimmy Butler?
The Bulls' all-star forward was diagnosed Monday with a Grade 2/3 ulnar ligament sprain and small bone impaction injury to the left elbow … in layman's terms a bum wing.
According to the Bulls' news release, "Butler may be out three to six weeks." That "may" leaves wiggle room for more than six weeks.
Butler seems like the kind of guy who would want to get back sooner than later, but who knows?
Butler turned down a sizable contract, will be a free agent after this season and is gambling on his play and his health … the latter being at risk of being compromised if he rushes back.
It might be difficult to blame Butler if he wants to leave absolutely no doubt about the strength of the elbow before coming back.
We'll blame him anyway, of course, because players play, and it's only natural for us to expect them to sacrifice everything for the team.
Please, Mr. Sports Ethicist, tell me where exactly that imaginary line on a contract is drawn.