His last three years in Boston he had a 3.x ERA and a 1.29 WHIP. In fact, in the second half of the '96 season, BEFORE HE EVER MET McNamee, he was 6-2, with a 2.09 ERA in his last 10 starts, and after the All-Star break struck out 123 men in 111 1/3 innings. So when the let him go he was as dominant as he'd ever been. It really isn't since you're calling a year (94) with a sub 3 ERA (second in the league and also second in the league in strikeouts) proof he was 'washed up' and and another (96) where he finished (as I point out above) with a 2.09 ERA in his last ten starts. 96 (his last with the Red Sox) and 97 (his first with Tornto) were almost carbon copies except for Toronto giving him runs when he needed them to win.
I'm lumping his last 4 years in Boston together to get a full picture of where his career was, which was a .500 winning percentage and plenty of missed time. Probably the main reason they let him go was because he couldn't stay healthy, despite how he finished up in 1996. For most 34 year-old pitchers, the next 4 years would be, at best, equal to the prior 4. Instead, he goes from 40-39 to 68-31. His IP increased significantly also. This is even when you account for 30% of 1994 being canceled. The Fountain of Youth.
Also, stop using wins and losses to evaluate pitchers, for Pete's sake. If you're going to "lump the previous four years together", then do by all means at least lump together numbers that mean something--ERA, WHIP, ERA+.
I have yet to read the thread, but I found this article on espn that addresses his statements about getting lidocaine injections in his butt. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=hruby/080107
The point is that if you want to look where he was before and after he allegedly started using steroids, he was on fire in the second half of '96, PRE-McNamee, pitching as well as ever. So that he pitched well in 97 & 98 isn't some crazy aberration. Even before his move to Toronto, Clemens was not 'most pitchers.' He already had 2 Cy Youngs, he previous four years included having a 3x era, he was 6-2 with a 2.09 era and 1.29 whip at the end of that run. So suggesting his 97 & 98 years can only be explained by steroids is crazy. His IP in 96 was more than in 98! That's pre and post McNamee! He was injured in 93 & 95 so you're skewing the data.
Quotes are from Mitchell report....... "Clemens approached McNamee and, for the first time, brought up the subject of using steroids." - Around June 11, 1998. Clemens' stats up to June 8, 1998: 6-6, 3.23 ERA, 6 (AVG K's/game) Clemens' stats after June 8, 1998 14-0, 2.60 ERA, 9.2 (AVG K's/game) 1999 stats: 14-10, 4.60 ERA, 5.4 (AVG K's/game) "According to McNamee, during the middle of the 2000 season Clemens made it clear that he was ready to use steroids again." Clemens' stats up to June 14, 2000 (about mid-season): 4-6, 4.76 ERA, 5.8 (AVG K's/game) Clemens' stats after June 14, 2000: 9-2, 3.69 ERA, 5.9 (AVG K's/game) Thats all the evidence that I need to know. LIAR!!!!
Why the hell hasn't anyone (Wallace or in the conference today) pressed him about this? I'd love to hear his response.
I was gonna make a post about Lidocaine. Im in dental school, so I use it as an anesthetic every day and I really saw no reason for him to take it for joint pain...and have it injected in his arse. Makes absolutely no sense at all. And shots of Vitamin B12? Are you kidding? First off, since when have athletes needed to be injected with vitamins? Secondly, with his diet, I doubt his body needs any additional B12. Eat a piece of meat, a cup of milk, an egg...if it comes from an animal, then it pretty much has a boatload of B12. Who knows, he might really believe his own story. However, the facts just dont add up. The guy took steroids.
Why would anybody fabricate a story which implicates them in the commission of a felony (trafficking in steroids)?
anyone have a reason better then "book deal" that mcnamee would make this story up? if anything, the tape today showed he didn't want this to happen but with the threat of jail time he had to tell the truth and unfortunately that came at the expense of a man he still idolizes. clemens just comes off as a complete liar trying to save his legacy.
I've noticed something here, everyone is thinking about every little detail with the taped phone call except the obvious. If you knew a person for 10 years, wouldn't you be cautious if you had linked them to a serious crime and their: voice, sentence structure, vocabulary, and even tone changed over the phone? I mean come on people think about it, McNamee has known Clemens for over 10 years and they were best buddies. The questions that were asked by Clemens sounded very generic like and not normal everyday conversation that you would have with someone who you have known for a while. There are people that I have not talked to for years but as soon as I hear their voice and some catch phrases then I know exactly who I am talking too. My point is that McNamee had to have known something was fishy when he was talking to Clemens over the phone. If McNamee did not know he was being recorded then he is dumber than I thought. There is no way that McNamee did not know what was going on. Hearing this tape and all the loosely premeditated questions just confirmed how dumb Roger Clemens and his staff of r****ded lawyers really are.
After listening to the tape, I am convinced Roger did it. HE was very careful. "I didn't do it"....of course not...Roger, Macnamee injected you. It seemed staged....or at the very least orchestrated. I do think Macnamee feels bad that he outed a guy he probably worked for and liked.....but it doesn't change the facts. DD
Also at one point didn't Macnamee say "The truth is the truth, it is what it is." and Roger sort of ignored that comment. When you go through it, piece by piece it just seems like a well thought out strategy by Clemens. I am 100% convinced that Macnamee injected him with Steroids. Let's see if Clemens now claims before Congress that he thought it was B12 and Lydocaine. And if he does continue the charade, I hope they treat him just like Bonds etc... DD
...and if it is a charade, I hope they treat him just like Bonds. I've always had 'issues' with RC, ie the bat 'toss' v Piazza...the 'tude...so on and so forth, scoobie doobie doo...I find his explanations boring and I am, frankly, not a 'roids-user-hatah, however - but what if his side is TRUTH? Besides - the whogivesacrap, why is this our lead sports story???
