What about Clemens?
-
- December
- 13
As Mets fans, I would assume many of you aren’t neutral when it comes to the topic of Roger Clemens. He was named prominently in the report. So, if you’re MLB, do you place an asterisk next to his name and keep him out of the Hall of Fame?
This entry was posted
on Thursday, December 13th, 2007 at 5:15 pm by John Delcos.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Print This Post
| 
Leave a Reply
It is a condition of your use of the comment features associated with the blogs that you do not: Use the site to post or transmit any unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane or indecent information of any kind, including without limitation any transmissions constituting or encouraging conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability or otherwise violate any local, state, national or international law. You alone are responsible for the material you post or send. Refer to the
Terms of Service.
John you get to vote ? What are you going to do ?
I would leave Clemens off the ballot year 1 and then vote for him year 2. I would also do this for Barry. I believe both were HOF players before they cheated and for that reason they both should get in.
I’d leave him out forever. It looks like he started with Toronto, does anyone believe he stopped after that based on his performance? Based solely on his clean years he isn’t a HOF’er.
No matter what, this certainly should stop any debate about Roger being greater than Pedro and Maddux.
I don’t think there’s any question that he should be out of the Hall of Fame (or at least that he should enter posthumously or on his deathbed for testicular cancer) since his numbers after leaving Boston are all artificially enhanced. Basically, he had become a .500 pitcher with Boston and then “rediscovered” his stuff via shots in his buttocks with Toronto. The turnaround was clearly timed with the shots. As were subsequent turnarounds. In Toronto he went off, his numbers dipped, and he went back on again and they soared. His trainer with the bag of needles followed him to Yankees and shot up seemingly the entire staff. What more evidence of the power of drugs to aid performance could one ask for?
I hope that if he is ever placed on the ballot, those of you who vote will ignore him.
I don’t know if you’ve heard yet, but Clemens through his attorney, issued a strong denial claiming that the trainer who accused him was doing so under pressure from federal law enforcement to save his own skin. Given Clemens’ denial, I think it warrants further investigation. I’d need more than the testimony of one questionable witness before I’d ruin his reputation or chances at the HOF. But if they came up with more proof, I’d have no problem leaving him off the HOF ballot.
Hi John,
Hope you’re satisfied with the report. Remember when you didn’t think they’d come up with any real good names? Well they did. And I think the report has real teeth. I’m pleased with it and think Mitchell did a terrific job. I hope you’ll give Selig some credit now for having initiated this.
As for Clemens, can you say schadenfreude? Of course if Piazza had been named, I wouldn’t be feeling so good now. But all is well. The fact that so many 2000 Yankees were named in the report really tarnishes their 2000 WS win. Clemens, Pettitte, and Stanton all played key roles in that WS. Wow. The Mets deserve the title! I know it will never happen, but it would be the right thing to do.
It’s funny reading all the lame excuses from Yankee fans over at Abraham’s blog. Even Abraham was starting to make excuses. They think Mitchell had in them and is biased because he’s a Red Sox fan, lol.
Schadenfreude … it’s the word of the day!
Clemens was 192-121 with Red Sox ( I think # are correct I may be a little off ) These are numbers that would have put him on a Hall of Fame track.
He may have muddled on for enough years to reach 300.
Do we really know.
We will never know for sure unless they come up w/a test he failed.
He said/he said from a guy trying to save his butt from prosecution.
That’s not proof.
But I’d keep him and Barry off simply b/c they are jacka$$es
Should read: “They think Mitchell had it in for them…”
“He said” is evidence in a court of law. If Clemens thinks he was unfairly tarnished, then let him put his money where his big fat mouth is. Sue McNamee. Sue Mitchell. C’mon Roger, don’t chicken out again.
I bet he won’t dare. Because he knows he’s guilty.
And of course there’s no failed drug test … because they didn’t test for it during that period. That doesn’t mean there’s no evidence Clemens cheated.
Mitchell gave Clemens the opportunity to meet with him, view the evidence, and deny it all. Clemens could have done so, accompanied by an attorney. But he declined to do so. He was too busy this summer robbing the Yankees of $18 million for 6 measly wins. LOL.
I don’t see how you can keep anybody out of the HOF because playersw on both sides were doing it and nobody was stopping them until recently. That’s like saying somebody with not-so-good numbers should get in because you think he was clean during this period, and nobody’s voting for that player. I say just take it as part of the game and move on. I still don’t see why Pete Rose can’t get in based on his playing career, but that’s of course an entirely different issue.
I wonder how many guys who used steroids are in the HOF who were simply fortunate enough not to get caught?
I don’t really like Roger Clemens. Yeah sure you thought it was the ball, and you also thought you were playing dodgeball? I think the reason a lot of these players are able to compete so far into their 40’s is roids. Plain and simple. And please don’t tell me about Satchel Paige. He wouldn’t last to the age of 42 in today’s major leagues. Baseball has gotten better, not worse, over time. Its more difficult for 40yr olds to compete against 28yr olds now than it was 30 or 40 yrs ago. I think Alou might be on something. Look at his musculature. He’s 40 people.
Clemens should walk straight into the HOF. His numbers and record ever since he college and JUCO are phenomenal. Steriods are not the reason Roger is one of the best ever to play.
Unlike Barry who put on tremendous mass (including his head!), Roger has basically stayed the same. He is thicker, but it looks consistent with anyone his age.
Has Roger picked up more velocity on his fast ball? Or has he demonstrating overpowering stuff? NO. Roger is very similar pitcher today than he was when he first arrived. Barry is not even close to the same player he was when he first came up, and amazingly he got better at age 37. Hmmmm?
I’ve had ESPN on in the background all day, and I must admit some concern about how Buster Olney’s hair isn’t holding up under the hot studio lights. Granted, his hair looked bouncing and behaving in the early hours, but I believe the Selig press conference took the starch out of it.
There are over 30 players that were on the rumored list that are not mentioned in the actual report including Albert Pujols.
You Met fans really crack me up. Did you even bother to read the Mitchell report or are you just sitting there with your 2000 National League Champions shirts on screaming ‘WE DESERVE THE TITLE!!’ Justice used AFTER the 2000 WS, Stanton used in 2003 when he WAS ON THE METS, Canseco had 1AB in the WS, Knoblauch hit .100 in the WS, Grimsley wasn’t apart of the WS, Pettitte supposedly used in 2002. I can’t wait until Clemens and Pettitte’s lawyers tear this apart.
Spiderpig—
Concerning Pete Rose, go back and read about his meetings with Bart Giamatti and the pledge he signed right before Commissioner Giamatti died. Pete Rose is out of the Hall of Fame by his own hand.
xyranx, yes we read the report. Do you really believe that the players’ usage of PEDs was restricted to just the documented instances in those pages? Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.
—First off, Pettitte has been a close training partner of Clemens since he became a Yankee and he’d already been juicing for years. Don’t tell me Clemens didn’t share his little dirty secrets with Pettitte. Apparently Andy wasn’t as dandy as you Yankee fans were led to believe.
—Same with Stanton. So many Yankees were doing PEDs in 2000 that I can’t believe Stanton didn’t do it either, since he was so eager to do HGH shortly thereafter.
—You then fail to mention that Knoblauch hit .275 and .333 in the earlier rounds. Well if you don’t win those games your team doesn’t even make it to the WS.
—Say for a moment we give Pettitte the benefit of the doubt for 2000, then there’s still Neagle. He and Clemens accounted for 2 Yankee wins in the WS. Now those wins are tainted, throwing into question the whole legitimacy of the Yankees 2000 title.
Lets face it, that whole Yankee team was tarnished badly by the Mitchell report. Take off your pin-striped blinders long enough to be objective.
No pitcher in the history of the game before Clemens turned around his performance as dramatically as Clemens did. In other words, there is no historical precedent for the way he pitched after having lost it. And the numbers don’t lie. Training/schmaining. Yes, some people have more natural ability than others, and yes, proper diet and exercise can increase your strength, endurance and longevity, and yes you have the odd freak of nature like Nolan Ryan, but you don’t just turn it around the way Roger did at his age without “assistance”. I don’t know whether that disqualifies him from HOF or not, but it sure is additional evidence of the use.
Thank you Bobby Bones for your entertaining, and very delusional post. I knew I’d find posts saying VClenmens is a good cheat and Bonds is a bafd cheat.
Personally, I could care less what any voter does on the HOF ballot as long as each one is consistant with the voting. If anyone follows, Mr Bones lead, they should be expelled from the voting process, All these guys will have to vote their own conscience and heart becasue I don’t see MLB giving any guidelines. So good luck to JD and all the other voters stuck with this dilemma.
Anyone that uses PEDs to perform need not apply to my HOF. They are baned pure and simple. Look at the report and add 20% for those not named and the vast majority of baseball players did not cheat and were unfairly compensated in retrospect.
Clemens, he was great but I never thought he was Steve Carlton, Lou Brock, or, Tom Seaver. I could never figure how he was doing it and couldn’t believe he just kept pulling down the Cy Young Awards. It just makes those that didn’t look so much better for their accomplishments.
As far as 2000? Well, as a Mets fan I can only say—Can you say Armando Benitez? That’s what killed us, not these cheaters.
I think this is very simple. This is a flawed report. Mitchell had no power to compel anyone to tell the truth. No one cooperated that did not already face jail time.
Players have been taking for far longer than 2000. I think the easy solution is to let stand whatever team records as far as win/losses because you cannot untangle the mess and you cannot go back and replay seasons.
You can punish individuals who cheated. That is a personal decision based on pride and greed. You zero out all their personal records. You do not quibble about when they started , how long they cheated, the relative talent of the individuals. White Shoes Johnson had lots of talent and his career ended and was wiped from baseball. He was also cleared I believe.
Clemens, Bonds, McGuire, etc should have all personal records rolled back to zero. No accomplishments no debate on HOF. They were made millionaires by cheating. That is their reward. They do not deserve immortality.
If you really want to get serious you go after the clubs. If you can prove that they knew what was going on you penalize them in some way. You also create penalties like the players have to face if they allow cheating to occur. Managers, trainers, owners, GM’s, scouts should all bear some form of penalty from $$ to suspensions or bans or a forced sale of their interest in the clubs.
Those are real penalties that will force a change in behavior and leave no doubt as to the integrity of the game.
Dave
Sure, ban him from baseball and the HoF. No need for real evidence, the Mitchell accusations will do. No need to offer him the opportunity to defend himself because it’s not a criminal trial. Impose some penalties, preserve the “integrity of the game” (whatever that is) and spend meaningful time dispersing all the money from the TV contract. It’s not like due process is required, is it?
We all should have been clued in when Clemens threw Gay Mike’s splintered bat back at him.Was this a case of Roid Rage,or just Clemens homophobia ?
adl
you miss the point. this is not a court of law. there are no criminal penalties. this is the court of public opinion. they are entertainers who pretend to be pure sportsmen.
for the short time they were tested they were given the test date ahead of time so they and their enablers can cheat the system. as the participants in track and field know when you know when you are going to take a test and you have well paid chemists at your disposal you can game the system. marion jones did, but the difference is that years later they still have the blood samples ( not urine ). they can test those samples years later with better techniques and prove the cheating that went on before.
she and others’ like her ( the east germans in the soviet era ) could game the system for a while and claim they never cheated. just like bonds.
the problem is the players assoc. will not allow real testing and real penalties to be enforced. they are serving their client which is the cheaters they are trying to protect.
don’t take baseball’s inept management of the situation as proof that no one is cheating.