Roger Clemens=the white Barry Bonds

[Skipaway]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

But public relations usually consists of lying to people, or at least spinning something.

And that's what I mean. People don't care about being lied to. People only care about if the lie sounds good enough.

The NFL constructed a good story about how they've tried their best on tackling the drug issue, while in reality they don't test on game days, giving the chance for players to use enhancement drugs that can get in and out of the system fast.

[Tribe Fan 24]

Maybe I'm just naive, but Bonds' biggest problem these days really isn't the fact that he took the stuff. His biggest problem right now is the fact that he perjured himself in federal court. This is a much bigger issue I would think.

[AnotherAlias]

Originally Posted by Prodigal Son

Fred McGriff isn't on the list. He should get in the Hall of Fame. He (and similar players) has been the biggest victim of this fiasco.

I was introduced to his wife once.

Nice lady.

[Jason Moyer]

I don't know why the same people who try to use statistical evidence to demonstrate guilt of PED usage (not so coincidentally, typically the same people who immediately dismiss sabermetric analysis) assume Fred McGriff never took anything. He hit as many homeruns at age 38 as he regularly did in his 20's.

[Kekkonen]

Can we assume that Tim Wakefield is clean?

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Skipaway

And that's what I mean. People don't care about being lied to. People only care about if the lie sounds good enough.

Sigh, you're right. You just made me remember Bill Clinton.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Tribe Fan 24

Bonds' biggest problem these days really isn't the fact that he took the stuff. His biggest problem right now is the fact that he perjured himself in federal court.

Bill Clinton got away with it. Maybe Bonds will, too.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Kekkonen

Can we assume that Tim Wakefield is clean?

We can certainly hope, but I'm not so sure we can assume that anyone is clean any more.

[Skipaway]

Originally Posted by Jason Moyer

I don't know why the same people who try to use statistical evidence to demonstrate guilt of PED usage (not so coincidentally, typically the same people who immediately dismiss sabermetric analysis) assume Fred McGriff never took anything. He hit as many homeruns at age 38 as he regularly did in his 20's.

Maybe because his early career was in a low home run total era, so it evens out after accounted for era?

Regardless of what's the reasoning, I don't think people can really figure out who used what simply by stats. To do that, at least we need a decent sample size of when and who used what before we can even construct a guess model.

[Jason Moyer]

Originally Posted by Skipaway

Maybe because his early career was in a low home run total era, so it evens out after accounted for era?

Yeah, but if you're the type of person who thinks steroids were responsible for offensive production increasing, chances are you wouldn't think of that.

Really I don't think stats show a hell of a lot in regards to Steroid users. Especially if Clemens didn't start doping until he joined the Yankees and went from having his best seasons to being completely mediocre.

[Prodigal Son]

Originally Posted by Jason Moyer

Yeah, but if you're the type of person who thinks steroids were responsible for offensive production increasing, chances are you wouldn't think of that.

Really I don't think stats show a hell of a lot in regards to Steroid users. Especially if Clemens didn't start doping until he joined the Yankees and went from having his best seasons to being completely mediocre.

I think you have to consider eras, age, and the extent of change. As Skip said, we don't really have a model for it, but with all the new info in the Mitchell report, we may be able to develop one. Without that model, you can still take an empirically-grounded approach, even if your frames of reference are blurry. There's a difference between a 35 year-old guy performing at a level below but in the same neighborhood as his peak and a guy who reaches a whole new level after 35, for example.

FWIW, McGriff's OPS+ in each of his 38, 39, and 40 year old seasons was below his career average, and his post-30 years as a whole were much worse than his pre-30 years. He hit homers at a higher rate in the down offensive years of the late 80's and early 90's when he was a twenty-something than he did in the live-ball era after that. All things considered, his career followed a very appropriate curve relative to his aging and the era.

[Jason Moyer]

Originally Posted by Prodigal Son

As Skip said, we don't really have a model for it, but with all the new info in the Mitchell report, we may be able to develop one.

New information? I really don't see what the Mitchell report added to the discussion aside from his recommendations going forward. The list of players is largely speculative, doesn't include much that we didn't already know, and came almost entirely from one source. I don't see how you could really make a statistical model of the effects of PED usage in baseball without a usefully large data pool to draw from.

[<Pion>]

Originally Posted by Jason Moyer

Yeah, but if you're the type of person who thinks steroids were responsible for offensive production increasing, chances are you wouldn't think of that.

Really I don't think stats show a hell of a lot in regards to Steroid users. Especially if Clemens didn't start doping until he joined the Yankees and went from having his best seasons to being completely mediocre.

I don't remember the details, but didn't Clemens "rediscover" his fastball after leaving the Red Sox. I thought there were stories about how he lost the zip and was through. Then a year or so later they had commercials on ESPN joking about how he re-found the zip. Injury? Maybe. Steroids? Maybe.

[Tribe Fan 24]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Bill Clinton got away with it. Maybe Bonds will, too.

Yeah, I guess you are right.

[Purple Cowboy]

60 Minutes is leaking parts of its interview and it appears Clemens has changed his story from a full denial of any injections to admitting injections but of course they weren't steroids they were lidocaine and B-12 vitamins.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ba..._receiv-3.html

[USN Squid]

Originally Posted by Purple Cowboy

Clemens has changed his story from a full denial of any injections

Did he ever really say "no injections at all?"

I've only heard no HGH or steroid injections.

[Prodigal Son]

IT WAS FLAX SEED OIL, I SWEAR!

[KurtBevacqua]

Those damn evil trainers. Just amazing how many evil trainers are shooting up world class athletes with performance enhancing drugs they would never allow into their bodies. Justin Gatlin, Gary Sheffield, Barry Bonds, and now Roger Clemens.

I still think Maurice Greene and his "I had a six pack and sex with my wife to raise my testosterone" excuse is the all-time greatest.

[Skipaway]

Originally Posted by USN Squid

Did he ever really say "no injections at all?"

I've only heard no HGH or steroid injections.

It now looks very much like the defense Bonds used.

He admitted letting the trainer injecting him something, but he believed those aren't steroids.

It's also the same as Palmeiro claiming he's only using B-12 Tejada provided.

[USN Squid]

Originally Posted by Skipaway

It now looks very much like the defense Bonds used.

He admitted letting the trainer injecting him something, but he believed those aren't steroids.

It's also the same as Palmeiro claiming he's only using B-12 Tejada provided.

Not really apples to apples.

The trainer said Clemens gave him the steroids to inject; Barry said he didn't know what he was being injected with.