The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Can we please put this whole silly steroid issue behind us now? It really is getting really old and really stupid.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/roger-clemens-verdict-not-guilty-six-counts-204828190--mlb.html

I still say he took them.

^^Does it really matter? I mean whether he took them or not, not whether or not you think he did. Does that make sense?

The case against Roger was a witch hunt. While I feel he took the steroids and lied, he wasn't the only one sitting there doing the same thing.

To answer your question, it really doesn't matter to me. All sports are tainted in my opinion.

he definitely took steroids.  the case was not about him taking steroids, it was about wether or not he lied under oath, etc.

He wasn't being prosecuted for that.  He was being prosecuted for lying to a grand jury.  Same reason why Barry Bonds is a convicted felon.

I think I addressed that by saying he lied and that he was not the only one up there doing it.

The question is, did the others lie to a grand jury?  Regardless, I think the jury in this case saw it as an issue best handled by MLB and threw it out accordingly.  Same reason why Bonds was only convicted of only one of the many charges he was facing.

Neither of them will get into the Hall of Fame because of this scandal, and neither will Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Rafael Palmeiro, Jose Canseco, or Miguel Tejada.  I say let them be found guilty in a proper court..... The court of public opinion

I wouldn't be too sure about that.

I'd hate to break it to ya, but you need 75% of the votes from the writers to get in.  Mark McGwire only got around 20% his first year on the ballot and Rafael Palmeiro only got around 13%.  Shows what the writers think of people who used PEDs

Neither of which had the career that Roger had. I'm not sure that McGwire or Palmeiro are first ballot hall of fame material even without PED involvement. Roger is. Now maybe he doesn't get in on the first ballot, but he gets in at some point I would say.

He was NOT being prosecuted for lying to a grand jury, he was being prosecuted for lying to a Congressional Publicity "Show".  While I don't condone lying to Congress while under oath, it was a waste of taxpayers money for the Congressional hearing to begin with, and in light of the results of the Bonds trial it was a waste of taxpayers money to persue the Clemens case.  I mean really, $2 - $3 million spent on this, after millions spent on the Bonds case.  Colossal waste.

I'd disagree with you on Palmeiro, 3000+ hits and 500+ homers he would have been in on the first ballot.  The last time I was in Cooperstown, probably 6-8 years ago, they had an exhibit setup of Palmeiro and his various stats, etc.

^^ Baseball-reference.com has Clemons as the 12th best pitcher by their criteria and Palmeiro as the 119th best hitter. Pameiro is definately hall material, but first ballot hall material? I don't think so.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/clemero02.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/p/palmera01.shtml

Palmeiro had a remarkable career.  Sadly, he will be remembered for adamantly denying steroids use before Congress, then trying to make Miguel Tejada the scapegoat when he tested positive.  The Orioles were so pissed about it they deactivated him for the remainder of the 2005 season and he never played another game. 

I don't care if Clemens had a better career.  Fact is, he cheated to have it.

Barry had 3 MVPs before the home run explosion.  I think his ticket to Cooperstown was punched long before his retirement.

I think the worst case scenario for Barry is something similar to Pete Rose.  There will be a lot of hemming and hawing over it, but both of them will be in the HOF when it is all said and done.

This is a crap statement.  Do some research.

Pete Rose will never be a Hall Of Famer as long as Bud Selig is in the commissioner's office.  A buddy of mine is of the opinion that he will never get in while he is still breathing.  Then after he punches his ticket to that big ballpark in the sky, MLB will induct him posthumously to honor his achievements as a player.


For a guy like you that I've heard is notoriously known for going off on players who are busted for steroids, I find your defense of ROIDger Clemens disturbing. 

Clemens was a power pitcher and was on the decline for three years straight when suddenly at the age of 35 his arm became as strong as when he was young, and then went on a tear that resembled him in his athletic prime. This also happened to coincide when he was to have started taking PED's. Hell even his wife admitted to taking PED's from Clemen's trainer.
It is naive toi think that his sudden resurgence was all natural.

I don't think they'll do it to honor his achievements, they'll do it to make money off of him.

Baseball-reference.com may have Palmeiro as the 119th best hitter, but only 25 players have reached the 500 home run mark, and only 28 players have reached the 3,000 hit mark, Palmeiro has done both.  Only four other players have accomplished both these feats (Aaron, Mays, and Eddie Murray - ALL HOFers).  To say Paleiro would not be a first ballot inductee (w/o the steroid debate) is far fetched IMO.

I have Maine. Clemens was a power pitcher who after being dominant in his prime was in a decline in his mid 30's. This is not uncommon for power pitchers. Yet in 1997 he seemed to miraculously regain his youth and went on a tear throughout his late 30's and into his 40's of similar stats to his athletic prime.
During this time there was rampant steroid use in the league, he was teammates with multiple people who have used or are suspected of using, and his wife was injected by his own personal trainer.
But you are right there is nothing to make people believe Roger Clemons ever cheated.

I agree that he was well on his way to the HoF when he went to SF. This is why I have never understood his decision to use PED's. He did not need them as he had the talent.

I'll buy that, but what percentage of players do you think were taking PED's at the time? 50%? 70%? Higher? There were guys in the '80's experimenting with PED's when I was playing college baseball. You really think that just about anyone in Baseball hadn't tried them at one time or another? Maybe Roger was using them more than most, but he certainly wasn't one of the few using them, he was one of the majority.

Everyone was taking them or just about everyone. It's not about HoF or not HoF for these guys, they want to be the BEST in baseball period. If another guy is getting an advantage by popping some pills, then you're going to try it too. That's just the way professional sports is.

I honestly believe that the '98 season is what did Barry in.  He looked at the adulation surrounding a scrub like Sammy Sosa and (not unfairly) thought, "Well, if people are going to turn this blind of an eye, screw it, let's go."

Barry is really the star example of what happens when you take a player who is already at the top of the league and give him PEDs.  He basically became a demigod.

You hit it right on the head.  How do you know he wasn't using cheating the whole time as opposed to when he had his resurgence?  According to Canseco's tell all book, guys were using PED's all the time as far back as the 80's. 

Is this English?  Did you type it with your nose, while drinking?

Again, do some research. 

My regards,
"A guy"

I have.  So has bsmooth.  His accomplishments will be forever tainted by this scandal, and who's to say he wasn't using cheating his entire career?

And if the best you can do is take some swipes at me below the belt with comments like that, than maybe you should just keep quiet.

Maine,
How do you explain Clemens sudden resurgence in 1997 after a three year decline and in his mid 30"s. Also how did this resurgence continue into his 40's? His career from 1997 on looked eerily similar to his stats during the first part of his career before his decline started.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/goose-gossage-new-york-yankees-says-rogers-clemens-does-not-belong-in-hall-of-fame-062212

Probably my ass. Goose isn't buying it because he knows damn well he would have been taking them if they were available when he pitched. You don't think the Goose was throwin' down Bennies or Greenies when he played? Yeah right. Whatever and I have a bridge I'd like you take a look at...

I agree. Which makes it even more unlikely that Clemons never took anything.

1:  Anyone paying attention would know better.  Crap career my ass.  Crap statement.  Don't like it?  I don't really care.  I am also enabled to have an opinion on this site as well.  My opinion on this thread is your opinion is bunk.  Additionally, I don't appreciate having anyone putting words in my mouth, but we'll get to that in a bit.

2:  Don't speak as though you know me.  You don't.

3:  Below the belt?  I'm not letting the world know (at every chance I get) that I'm educating the youth of America...and then taking a meat cleaver to the English language beyond recovery.  Ain't enough stitches in the Bronx ER sewing it back up.  I'm quite open about my hack job(s), thanks.  When I write entries for this web site I seek out help from Stroke.  My editors used to hated me, I created more work for everyone.  I know my weaknesses.  Ya know what?  I'm not an educator.

4:  Don't tell me what to do.  "Quiet" is not my style, slick, and if you don't like it - you could also find a different forum to talk in.  This one, when you make a crap statement, you'll be challenged.  You made a crap statement.  You've been challenged.  It's my fault you have thin skin? 

You're the one making assumptions about what you think you know about someone you've never met.  Don't come on here talking about "below the belt."  You made a personal statement, based on nothing, about someone you don't know.  Again, do some research - or go find a hobby.  Maybe maritime law, I don't know.  What I do know is you shouldn't speak to someone like you know them when you don't.  It shows a lack of cuth.

This is all.

Completely back on track, I don't believe for a second Clemens took anything earlier in his career.  By the time the "steroid ERA" started, Clemens was an All-Star pitcher (by about 7 seasons).  From a medical standpoint, I don't believe a body (any body) is physically capable of withstanding 23 seasons of cycling without a complete and utter break down.  There are significant short and long term side effects from prolonged use / abuse.  I think there are certain players that you can almost point a finger on a map and say "here" and footnote when the use may have started.  Clemens and Bonds are case points "A" and "B", respectively, on this list.  Both players were also HOF worthy well before they decided to dabble.  I liken when they did to Bill Gates playing Power Ball each week.  Sure, he could.  But why? 

You aren't the only one not an educator in this discussion.

Maine it is the second half of his career I am addressing. He was in a decline in his mid 30's and suddenly regained the power and dominance of his prime and kept it up through his 30's and into his 40's.
That screams of PED's.

^^Agreed.  Like I said, I think you can point at his career like a road map and almost say "turn here."  I think he had HOF numbers before then.

Maine, would you say that his turn coincided with the point where BOS got rid of him?

Not really.

His last year in Boston he was 10-13.  His next season he went 21-7.  But you need to look inside the number of that 10-13 year.  3.63 ERA, 242 innings pitched, *257* strike outs.  Two years before that?  2.85. 

His years leading up to Toronto:

1992 2.41 18-11  IP 246.2  SO 208
1993 4.46 11-14  IP 191.2  SO 160
1994 2.85    9-7   IP 170.2   SO 168
1995 4.18 10-5   IP  140.0  SO 132
1996 3.63 10-13 IP  252.2  SO 257

People tend to look at record (W/L) alone when they see the jump from Boston to Toronto.  They also hear the GM's statement of "he is in the sunset of his career" statement (back in the day) and believe it.

His two years north of the Border he posted 2.05 and 2.65 ERA seasons (back to back Cy Youngs) and won 21-7 and 20-6. 

His body of work was mostly consistent for a team mostly consistent.  Boston was an 85-ish win team (3rd place), Toronto was around the same.  He didn't benefit either way from being on a "head knocker" team until after leaving Toronto.

His body of work, as a pitcher, was consistent enough that his numbers don't jump out at me, Boston to Toronto.  You can't look at win / losses in baseball, not for a pitcher.  So much of his 21-7 season (and 20-6) was completely and utterly out of his control.  What was in his control (for the most part)?  ERA, WHIP, things of this nature.  It was all pretty even-steven.  He had posted low 2's before.

Where I am concerned is any time a late 30's guy is throwing harder than ever, placing the ball better than ever and not breaking down...

I am too. He was not the same pitcher he was prior when his sudden resurgence. Unless some other evidence comes out to show how how he regained his youth and vigor, it will always be PED's for me.

So we should assume that Nolan Ryan was also using PED's from say around '81 (when he was 34) and had a career best 1.69 ERA to the end of his career?

Besides that one season, can you show where he was having an obvious decline in his career and then went on a tear as good as his best years in his youth?

Yes but I really don't have to since you both questioned whether anyone could sustain that type of excellence thru his late 30's and into his 40's without PED's which he did.

From '72 thru '77 (6 years) Ryan had an ERA under 3.00 and won the Cy Young 4 times.

Then from '78 thru '80 (3 years) Ryan never had an ERA under 3.00 and never won the Cy Young. Down years by Ryan standards.

Then in '81 (when he was 34) he had a career best 1.69 ERA which was half that of the preceeding 3 year average and won the Cy Young.

From '81 thru '89 (9 years) he had an ERA under 3.00 3 times and won the Cy Young 4 times during a time he went from being 34 to 42 years old.

You must admit that If Roger's career "screams" of PED's, then at the very least Nolan's career "shouts" of PED's or the possibility exists that it can be done without PED's.

Perhaps.

Let me let you all in a lot little secret about pitchers:  They all cheat.  Every last one of them.  The movie "Major League" was cute, witty, funny, clever...and on the mark.  Every one of them has something in their hair, something up their nose, on their hip.  Something to grip the ball a little tighter, to make it drop a little harder, cut a little more, spin a little faster...

Pitchers cheat.  Every last one.  We do it in Little League, Babe Ruth, American Legion, College, the minors and MLB. 

Nolan Ryan's last pitch was 98 miles per hour.  No, it would not shock me if the man had a little help.  Both  Clemens and Ryan were breaking down at the end.  Old age, finally catching up to them?  Or the steroids finally catching up?  We'll never know...but the numbers to end their careers certainly look an awful lot a like, don't they?

Ryan
13-9  3.44  204 IP
12-6  2.91  173 IP
 5-9   3.72  157 IP
 5-5   4.88    66 IP

Clemens
18-4 2.98 214 IP
13-8 1.87 211 IP
 7-6  2.30 113 IP
 6-6  4.18   99 IP

I'm glad he got off.  The fact that the government wasted 3 years and a couple million dollars on this is laughable.  Why congress decided to stick their nose into this is still beyond me.  We all know they took steroids, there was no reason to have a congressional inquiry especially when we have a million other more important things to do.  Baseball didn't give a shit and instead of going after the league, they went after the players. 

I went after Bonds for being a juicehead, he probably shouldn't have gone to jail over it though.  And Clemens shouldn't either. 

Just to play the other side of this, I think that Congress had more business in this than you might think.

On the surface, I don't want the government involved in sports, but consider this...

Because of the MLB's unique "monopoly", it's arguably up to the government to ensure that it's a safe working environment with fair competitive practices.  This is according to regulations regarding monopolies.  It's the same reason that your cable company can't just raise your rates to whatever they want, simply because they're the only game in town.

So, since apparently the MLB knew about steroids for some time and did nothing, one could argue that it was an unfair environment for those following the law and NOT using steroids.  In other words, baseball's inaction could be considered as advocating steroid use.  And if you were a player trying to do the right thing, it's not like you could leave your job and go to the competition -- there is no other competition. 

I agree that this was mostly turned into legal showboating, so that Congress could flaunt themselves in front of a bunch of superstar athletes, but the idea of them getting involved is more justified than you might think.