Ray Whitney Injury: Updates on Stars Winger's Foot
Dallas Stars winger Ray Whitney is going to miss some serious time with a foot injury.
UPDATE: Tuesday, March 12, at 12:20 p.m. ET by Timothy Rapp
Good news, Stars' fans—Whitney will be back in action for the team this evening, according to Mark Stepneski of DallasStars.com:
Whitney in tonight. Morrow out. Jamie Benn unlikely.— Mark Stepneski (@StarsInsideEdge) March 12, 2013
---End of update---
On Saturday, Dallas Morning News' Stars beat writer Mike Heika passed along a press release from the club noting that Whitney had been placed on injured reserve and that Reilly Smith was being recalled to take his spot on the roster.
The nature of the injury was not broached in the press release, but Heika added some more with this tweet:
From the Stars and Ray Whitney today: Stars LW Ray Whitney has a broken bone in his foot and will be out 4-6 weeks.— Mike Heika (@MikeHeika) February 2, 2013
By placing him on IR, Whitney will not be eligible to return to game action for seven days. Given the timetable in the tweet, he is not going to be ready for significantly longer than that, and that timetable is if there are no setbacks.
Unfortunately, that is a reality that needs to be considered with Whitney. The 40-year-old is ancient in hockey years, and the heeling process gets muddied with age.
The Stars (3-4-1) will undoubtedly be hoping there are no setbacks for one of their prized offseason acquisitions.
The Stars were confident enough in the winger's ability to help their power play and bring some offensive play making that they signed him to a two-year, $4.5 million contract this past offseason.
Things were going well for the Stars and Whitney in this regard. He led the team in scoring before being forced from action with this injury.
Forward Reilly Smith from the Texas Stars of the American Hockey League in Dallas will try to find someone who can fill the void created by Whitney's absence.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?