The more I hear on the Mitchell Report and the more information that I gather, the more I believe Roger Clemens. I've never been a big fan of "the Rocket," but as I continue to do research and find articles online regarding the report, I'm not finding a thing to substantiate anything that Brian McNamee is claiming. For example, in this article on pages 2 and 3 of the January 6th Boston Globe, former major league players Wade Boggs and Mike Boddicker both seem to believe that "the Rocket" is innocent.
Boggs, who was a friend of McNamee's while a member of the Yankees, said of Clemens "It's an absolute shame that work ethic would come into question. The one thing I'll say through all of this is, as far as I can tell, only one significant big-name player has actually tested positive for steroids and that's Rafael Palmeiro. You can't hang somebody on speculation. Until they have a vial of blood and he's 100 percent guilty, then it's all speculation."
Boddicker went a lot further in his defense of Clemens, stating "I tell you right now, I've seen Roger Clemens get injected with a B-12 vitamin shot. I was in the trainer's room back in Boston when the trainer injected him. Unless B-12 is illegal, I'm believing Roger. If it's this guy's word against Roger, I'll go with Roger every time. I had a locker right next to him in Boston and I can tell you this was the most dedicated athlete I've ever been around. The reason he had to take the B-12 was because he overworked himself. People say he's still performing past 40 and he must be doing something. Well, Nolan Ryan did it."
One thing I would like to make VERY clear here is that IF the Rocket is guilty of doing something wrong, then by all means he needs to pay the price. Right now, we still have nothing but speculation on him. McNamee turned in "evidence" to federal investigators yesterday that he claims will confirm "the Rocket" used steroids and HGH. My question is, can you trust McNamee? Do you know how easy would it be to conveniently mix your syringes, one with B-12 and Clemens DNA, and the other with a banned substance just to prove your point? As a result, ANYONE who McNamee injected, whether it was B-12, steroids, HGH or whatever he used could be implicated provided he has syringes from these players with their DNA.
-----
Showing posts with label Mitchell Report. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mitchell Report. Show all posts
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Debunking the Mitchell Report - Part I
Believe it or not, Major League Baseball's regular season is less than two months from beginning. Sadly, many in the sports media (including many columnists and writers whom I respect) have decided that everything in the Mitchell Report is gospel and that all of the players must be cheats. We've already seen several cases where the information in the report was false - the Roger Clemens article and subsequent retraction by the Los Angeles Times and Jack Cust being singled out in the report as a user and saying he's never used for example.
Also, when you start seeing ridiculous stuff in forums questioning whether closer J.J. Putz of the Seattle Mariners started using PED's after the 2005 season, when the common sense reality of his improvement from 2005 to 2006 was the addition of two pitches - a two-seam fastball and a curveball to an already blazing fastball and splitter. Historically, when a pitcher adds new pitches to his arsenal, they get BETTER! Duh!
While on the topic of the Mitchell Report, I'm all but convinced now that Roger Clemens is innocent and that Brian McNamee is going to spend A LOT of time in prison. Some have questioned how Clemens' numbers have remained pretty good as he's gotten older and how it's impossible for a guy to pitch effectively into his 40's. Do any of you remember a pitcher named Nolan Ryan? "The Express" had an amazing career, but as anyone can see when looking at his career numbers, his stats started to decline in his late 30's. That said, they were still good as Ryan took very good care of himself and put together a legendary workout regimen. Ryan then added a split-fingered fastball to his repetoire and suddenly he experienced a rebirth in his 40's. He led the National League with a 2.70 ERA and 276 strikeouts at age 40 in 1987. He posted a 301 strikeout season at the age of 42 (his first 300 K season in 12 years) in 1989, and threw his seventh career no-hitter at age 44 in 1991 - a season where his ERA was only 2.91. He finally retired in 1993 at the age of 46 after posting a remarkable 5,714 strikeouts.
"The Rocket" is also a power pitcher, and has always had a workout regimen almost as legendary as that of Ryan's. Power pitchers take longer to decline for a very common-sense reason - their 95-100 MPH fastball at age 30 is still usually in the 90-95 MPH range at age 40, which usually is good enough to get hitters out a good percentage of the time. Ryan threw his fastball over 100 MPH at one time. When he retired in 1993, he was still capable of throwing the ball 95 MPH! Why is Randy Johnson still effective today at age 43? His once near 100 MPH fastball is still in the mid-90's and he still has a nasty curveball. The same can be said for Clemens. He doesn't throw as hard as he used to, but his fastball is still topping out in the 90's and he has a large arsenal of pitches. Most pitchers BEGIN with a fastball that will top out in the low 90's if they are lucky. When they get to be in their late 30's, their fastballs are typically running up to the plate in the 80's... That usually makes them very hittable and unless they have pinpoint control like Greg Maddux, it also means they rarely pitch into their 40's. Roger Clemens is simply the latest in a long line of power pitchers who has been able to pitch well into his 40's. Innocent until proven guilty. This is still how things work in this country. I wish people in the sports media would attempt to understand this concept.
For more on this topic, please check out this GREAT article by Gary Armida on the www.fullcountpitch.com site.
-----
Also, when you start seeing ridiculous stuff in forums questioning whether closer J.J. Putz of the Seattle Mariners started using PED's after the 2005 season, when the common sense reality of his improvement from 2005 to 2006 was the addition of two pitches - a two-seam fastball and a curveball to an already blazing fastball and splitter. Historically, when a pitcher adds new pitches to his arsenal, they get BETTER! Duh!
While on the topic of the Mitchell Report, I'm all but convinced now that Roger Clemens is innocent and that Brian McNamee is going to spend A LOT of time in prison. Some have questioned how Clemens' numbers have remained pretty good as he's gotten older and how it's impossible for a guy to pitch effectively into his 40's. Do any of you remember a pitcher named Nolan Ryan? "The Express" had an amazing career, but as anyone can see when looking at his career numbers, his stats started to decline in his late 30's. That said, they were still good as Ryan took very good care of himself and put together a legendary workout regimen. Ryan then added a split-fingered fastball to his repetoire and suddenly he experienced a rebirth in his 40's. He led the National League with a 2.70 ERA and 276 strikeouts at age 40 in 1987. He posted a 301 strikeout season at the age of 42 (his first 300 K season in 12 years) in 1989, and threw his seventh career no-hitter at age 44 in 1991 - a season where his ERA was only 2.91. He finally retired in 1993 at the age of 46 after posting a remarkable 5,714 strikeouts.
"The Rocket" is also a power pitcher, and has always had a workout regimen almost as legendary as that of Ryan's. Power pitchers take longer to decline for a very common-sense reason - their 95-100 MPH fastball at age 30 is still usually in the 90-95 MPH range at age 40, which usually is good enough to get hitters out a good percentage of the time. Ryan threw his fastball over 100 MPH at one time. When he retired in 1993, he was still capable of throwing the ball 95 MPH! Why is Randy Johnson still effective today at age 43? His once near 100 MPH fastball is still in the mid-90's and he still has a nasty curveball. The same can be said for Clemens. He doesn't throw as hard as he used to, but his fastball is still topping out in the 90's and he has a large arsenal of pitches. Most pitchers BEGIN with a fastball that will top out in the low 90's if they are lucky. When they get to be in their late 30's, their fastballs are typically running up to the plate in the 80's... That usually makes them very hittable and unless they have pinpoint control like Greg Maddux, it also means they rarely pitch into their 40's. Roger Clemens is simply the latest in a long line of power pitchers who has been able to pitch well into his 40's. Innocent until proven guilty. This is still how things work in this country. I wish people in the sports media would attempt to understand this concept.
For more on this topic, please check out this GREAT article by Gary Armida on the www.fullcountpitch.com site.
-----
Friday, December 21, 2007
Innocent Until Proven Guilty?
That is the way it's supposed to work in this country, but given the fallout that's happened in light of the findings of the Mitchell Report investigating the usage of steroids and other substances in Major League Baseball, you would hardly think that's how it is.
Witness the case of Roger Clemens. A story came out in the once respected, and now highly tabloidian (is that a word?) Los Angeles Times in October of 2006 regarding an affidavit in which several Major League Baseball players were accused of using performance-enhancing drugs. The Times reported that Clemens name was on that list of players. Yesterday, it was revealed that Clemens name did not appear in the document as was previously reported by the Times.
As those of us here in Los Angeles know, you can't believe everything you read in the Times today - particularly the sports section. It's much like reading the New York Times or the Washington Post. An alamring number of the columns have a definite bias to the left of center, and a similarly alarming number of the stories found in these three "newspapers" have later been proven to be untrue. Seriously, Bill O'Reilly could probably write a book on all of the inaccuracies and false stories these three "newspapers" have reported the past few years.
My point is that you can't believe everything you read, and if it's in a source that's not going to give you a fair and balanced viewpoint, it's best to check out that information with another source first. Innocent until proven guilty? I sure hope people here still believe that. Let's let things play out before we start convicting everyone on that Mitchell Report. Can the sources be believed? Let's look further into this aspect, OK?
-----
Witness the case of Roger Clemens. A story came out in the once respected, and now highly tabloidian (is that a word?) Los Angeles Times in October of 2006 regarding an affidavit in which several Major League Baseball players were accused of using performance-enhancing drugs. The Times reported that Clemens name was on that list of players. Yesterday, it was revealed that Clemens name did not appear in the document as was previously reported by the Times.
As those of us here in Los Angeles know, you can't believe everything you read in the Times today - particularly the sports section. It's much like reading the New York Times or the Washington Post. An alamring number of the columns have a definite bias to the left of center, and a similarly alarming number of the stories found in these three "newspapers" have later been proven to be untrue. Seriously, Bill O'Reilly could probably write a book on all of the inaccuracies and false stories these three "newspapers" have reported the past few years.
My point is that you can't believe everything you read, and if it's in a source that's not going to give you a fair and balanced viewpoint, it's best to check out that information with another source first. Innocent until proven guilty? I sure hope people here still believe that. Let's let things play out before we start convicting everyone on that Mitchell Report. Can the sources be believed? Let's look further into this aspect, OK?
-----
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Mitchell Report Out Today
In just another couple of hours, the content of the Mitchell Report and it's findings of up to 80 Major League Baseball players usage of steroids and other questionable substances will be made public. A lot of us have not at all been looking forward to this day. Hopefully, once the findings are made public, baseball and commissioner Bud Selig can take the steps necessary to clean up the game and it's soon to be very tarnished image.
-----
-----
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
