To juice or not to juice

[baseballPAP]

While researching peak performances, I came across an interesting paper that using some complex formulas (based largely on OPS only, so there are obviously some flaws there) that determined that players peak at roughly age 28, and decline somewhat slower than they improved. 18 players broke the curve of the study (http://fairmodel.econ.yale.edu/RAYFAIR/pdf/2005D.PDF#search='baseball%20peak%20performance'), and some interesting names were among the 18. Some, like Bob Boone and Charlie Gehringer probably just got better with age. The rest? Well, it reads like a who's who of the "did he take steriods?" debate. So, give your votes, and discuss. I included as many as I could in the poll, but feel free to throw names out there.

[baseballPAP]

BTW, I'll hold my votes for a little while to keep from influencing the vote. Also, I put this in the HOF section, because I feel this issue has a major impact on the HOF chances of EVERY player from the 1990-present era.

[leecemark]

--I only cast yes votes because, unfortunately, every player of the 90s has enough suspicion to make an outright no impossible. I did only vote yes for those I feel certain were users though. How did Raffy get a no vote? He is the only one of the options to actually test positive.

[KCGHOST]

I said yes to Bonds, Palmeiro, McGwire, Sosa and Boone, but for all I know maybe more/all of them did. I guess it is even possible for for or two of my "Yes" players didn't.

[Seattle1]

I seriously doubt Randy Johnson ever did. He's just a freak of nature, that's all. The Big Unit. :cool:

[Yankwood]

I said yes to Bonds, Palmeiro, McGwire, Sosa and Boone, but for all I know maybe more/all of them did. I guess it is even possible for for or two of my "Yes" players didn't.Mine are the same except I added Clemens. I'm 100% sure of the others but I have a hunch about Clemens. That whole Piazza broken bat deal looked like a man in a rage.

[Seattle1]

That whole Piazza broken bat deal looked like a man in a rage.

Yeah that was a big 'red flag' for sure.

[Pine Tar]

Yeah that was a big 'red flag' for sure.
I hope you guys are kidding, because if you aren't then you have seen too many after school specials.

[DoubleX]

This is silly. This poll should really include every player that played in the last 15-20 years for it to have any meaning.

[baseballPAP]

Just looking for a consensus..... at the time, there were a few posters saying McGwire was clean....I wanted to be sure it was a minority, and to throw out a couple guys I suspect (but have no evidence for obviously).

[Yankwood]

I hope you guys are kidding, because if you aren't then you have seen too many after school specials.I wish I was kidding. Was there an afterschool special about a pitcher taking steroids and throwing a bat at someone? I probably missed that one. Darn.

[Seattle1]

I wish I was kidding. Was there an afterschool special about a pitcher taking steroids and throwing a bat at someone? I probably missed that one. Darn.

Yeah that was just extremely odd behavior. We know there was some weird tension between the Rocket and Piazza because of the bean ball earlier that season, but still.

[Red Sox 521]

I believe that Roger Clemens did steroids, mainly because I do not think that someone who is clearly fully sane would through a broken bat at a player, and at times threaten to kill umpires for making calls he didn't agree with. This seems to hint at steroid use to me, however I could be completely wrong about it.

[Pine Tar]

I believe that Roger Clemens did steroids, mainly because I do not think that someone who is clearly fully sane would through a broken bat at a player, and at times threaten to kill umpires for making calls he didn't agree with. This seems to hint at steroid use to me, however I could be completely wrong about it.
Was John McEnroe on steroids then? I certainly wouldn't confuse an anger management problem or an intense player as an indication of steroid use. I mean was Cobb on roids too?

[Red Sox 521]

There's a difference between an immense temper and having fits of rage for absolutely no reason. Cobb did have a massive temper and outbursts, but the most common instances were either him being provoked or racially motivated. He never threw a piece of a bat at a player simply because it came near him when it broke as far as I am aware of. And from what I've seen of steroid users, Clemens' actions are rather consistent.

[The Big C]

Bonds yes, Palmeiro yes, McGwire yes, all the rest no.

[Seattle1]

Was John McEnroe on steroids then?

Coincidentally, didn't MnEnroe actually admit to some steroid use later in his career when he was trying to make a comeback after an injury?

[Ubiquitous]

Throw on that list Jim Edmonds, Craig Biggio, Jim Thome, Troy Glaus, Juan Gonzalez, Ivan Rodriguez, Jose Canseco (okay obvious on that one), Jason Giambi, Gary Sheffield, Phil Nevin, Ken Caminiti, and Piazza.

[W_Marone]

In all honesty, I dont think Jim Thome should be considered as being a steroid user, he's just a big ol' country boy, im not saying that just because he is a former phillie, its just that throughout his career I always remember Jim being a strong guy from the mid west. Also, the only person on there that I cant really even consider them using steroids is Roger Clemens, just to me he doesnt seem the type to use steroids, he's just a great pitcher, plain and simple.

[Red Sox 521]

I think that perhaps I should clarify what I said. It is completely possible that he is just abnormally intense when on the mound. I was just stating that some of his actions are similar to steroid rages I've seen.

[Taco De Muerte]

Add Rose, Mantle, and Reggie Jackson to the list. There's as much reason to believe they used steroids as the majority of players on that list.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Throw on that list Jim Edmonds, Craig Biggio, Jim Thome, Troy Glaus, Juan Gonzalez, Ivan Rodriguez, Jose Canseco (okay obvious on that one), Jason Giambi, Gary Sheffield, Phil Nevin, Ken Caminiti, and Piazza.

Don't forget Mickey Tettleton, Dean Palmer, Magglio, Kevin Mitchell, Ron Gant, Jay Buhner, etc...

[Pine Tar]

I think that perhaps I should clarify what I said. It is completely possible that he is just abnormally intense when on the mound. I was just stating that some of his actions are similar to steroid rages I've seen.

I am sure you have a lot of experience seeing steroid rages :rolleyes:

Clemens rusurrected his career by developing the split finger fastball. He didn't throw one before he went to Toronto. That is why his career strajectory is skewed. Most of his "anger problems" were actually things that happenned much earlier in his career, like when he was ejected from a playoff game against the A's for saying stuff about the ump's mother. The Piazza incident really was not a "rage" issue as much as impulse control. A rage is when someone can't be calmed down. Clemens wasn't in a rage. In fact he reminded me of a basketball player who commits a flagrant foul and then pretends like their innocent of it or that it was an accident. Bill Lambier comes immediately to mind.

Oh and shouldn't we throw Charlie Hough into this list since his career path was a bit out of the ordinary. During an off day, I saw him get really cranky at the movie theater when they wouldn't give him his senior discount. I think he he used the terms "dang nabit" and "whipper snappers." I bet he was using too.

[W_Marone]

why not just have people post who they thought did steriods, becuase you could add anyplayer pretty much from 80 on to the list of possible sterioid users, even before that you could question almost anyone, except of course shane victorino, he looks like a little leaguer.

[west coast orange and black]

Go Gomes: ...Roger Clemens, just to me he doesnt seem the type to use steroids, he's just a great pitcher, plain and simple.

:confused:

[BaseballHistoryNut]

Have I not looked far enough back on this thread, or how did Brady Anderson and Jeff Kent not make these lists? Kent, like Sosa, had about 8 fairly undistinguished years, then all of a suddent was putting up year after year where announcers were comparing his offensive output at 2B to that of Rogers Hornsby. And this was in the Bay Area. Y'all may attribute that mid-career explosion from the Bay Area to serendipity if you like, but I'm a bit more circumspect.

And Brady Anderson's from-out-of-nowhere venture into the 50-HR club, during the 1990's? Anyone got another rational explanation for THAT?

[Ubiquitous]

Clemens rusurrected his career by developing the split finger fastball. He didn't throw one before he went to Toronto. That is why his career strajectory is skewed.

No I'm sorry but a split fingered fastball at age 34 doesn't resurrect a career. The splitter doesn't defy age which has been the true key to his success. Clemens hasn't aged, he has already admitted to using Viox to remove the pain of pitching. Which he has said was one of the main reasons for his continued dominance. Yes the splitter is a great weapon and helps Roger but he has to been in good enough shape that it means something to have the splitter. It doesn't really matter if you can throw a splitter if your fastball is topping out at 86 and your splitting is moving at 80.

Clemens when he went to Toronto got healthy and he actually was getting back to normal before going to Toronto. The mid 90's were not kind to Clemens health wise which led many people including Dan Duquette to think he was washed up. He goes to Toronto and pitches 500 great innings of baseball. Now certainly the splitter allowed him to keep his ERA and hits down but it was his conditioning that allowed him to throw all those innings and to throw a great fastball and a great splitter.

[baseballPAP]

Have I not looked far enough back on this thread, or how did Brady Anderson and Jeff Kent not make these lists? Kent, like Sosa, had about 8 fairly undistinguished years, then all of a suddent was putting up year after year where announcers were comparing his offensive output at 2B to that of Rogers Hornsby. And this was in the Bay Area. Y'all may attribute that mid-career explosion from the Bay Area to serendipity if you like, but I'm a bit more circumspect.

And Brady Anderson's from-out-of-nowhere venture into the 50-HR club, during the 1990's? Anyone got another rational explanation for THAT?
I originally asked for a consensus opinion on these guys, and for voters to throw out anyone they wanted for discussion. IMO you could literally throw out 200+ names...I just picked the ones that the results interested me the most.

[Pine Tar]

No I'm sorry but a split fingered fastball at age 34 doesn't resurrect a career. The splitter doesn't defy age which has been the true key to his success. Clemens hasn't aged, he has already admitted to using Viox to remove the pain of pitching. Which he has said was one of the main reasons for his continued dominance. Yes the splitter is a great weapon and helps Roger but he has to been in good enough shape that it means something to have the splitter. It doesn't really matter if you can throw a splitter if your fastball is topping out at 86 and your splitting is moving at 80.

Clemens when he went to Toronto got healthy and he actually was getting back to normal before going to Toronto. The mid 90's were not kind to Clemens health wise which led many people including Dan Duquette to think he was washed up. He goes to Toronto and pitches 500 great innings of baseball. Now certainly the splitter allowed him to keep his ERA and hits down but it was his conditioning that allowed him to throw all those innings and to throw a great fastball and a great splitter.

Certianly his conditioning also impacted his career resurgence but I think its important to point out that immediately after developing his splitter and regaining his health Clemens had arguably his best two seasons with Toronto. Clemens splitter has been called one of the best pitches in baseball, if not the best, so adding the pitch to his already great fastball would make a big difference. In the years prior to going to Toronto, when he was not pitching nearly as well, he was still bringing the heater in the mid 90's. His fastball really hadn't lost any velocity, but yet his record still wasn't that great. Perhaps his conditioning allowed him to play for two years at Toronto without any injuries (and rack up a whole lot of innings), but it was his splitter that allowed him to dominate those innings.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

Go Gomes: ...Roger Clemens, just to me he doesnt seem the type to use steroids, he's just a great pitcher, plain and simple.

:confused:

TRANSLATION: A whole lot of us, including me, SIMPLY DO NOT WANT TO BELIEVE CLEMENS IS ONE OF THE CHEATERS.

I, for instance, have rooted for Clemens for over 20 years. He embodies all that was good about Bob Gibson, but is a much better pitcher and hasn't destroyed anyone's career (see, for comparison's sake, Jim Ray Hart) by repeatedly hitting him in the head.

Although I'm very large and was a tough guy when I was a young drunk, the real me is about as non-macho as any guy around. Yet even I am drawn by Clemens' on-field personality. I presently have him as the #1 RHP of all time, and the #2 pitcher of all time, though I may well move both Maddux and this site's sainted pitcher, Walter Johnson, ahead of him. Maddux had two much better peak years (than anyone but Pedro), and Johnson had an incredible 8-year run, albeit one which ended abruptly in the very year the live ball came into play.

So, Clemens is now my #2 all-time pitcher. Until I've seen 3 to 5 more years from Pedro--the #1 inning-for-inning pitcher of all time, WAY ahead of Lefty Grove, the #2 man--he absolutely will NOT fall any farther than down to #4, and he very well may stay right where he is, at #2. We all love watching that blazing fastball, his seek/give no quarter attitude, and some of the really classy things he does.

Example: When he pitched those heroic relief innings of shutout ball, deep into extra innings of Game 4 of the first round last year, with inadequate rest, and that young kid finally hit the series-winning walkoff, Clemens saw the cameras and mikes coming his way, grabbed the kid and held him there. He then said a few words to the interviewers, mostly along the lines of how he owed his teammates this (great, heroic) performance, after how badly he'd pitched earlier in the series, then he thrust the kid in front of them and said, "Now, how about the kid?" And he walked away, leaving the kid to have his moment in the national spotlight.

How many guys do that, least of all at his age? As much as I love Babe Ruth, I see him clinging to this perhaps last moment of great glory, if all the cameras and mikes are in his face at that age. (Yeah, I know He was the hitter and He was long-retired by 43, but you get my point.)

So, from an EMOTIONAL POINT OF VIEW, there is so much to admire about Clemens, even if you DON'T like the ultra-machismo, the drilling batters right and left, the going-postal-moment against Piazza with the broken bat, etc.

And THAT, I think, is why so many of us want desperately to believe Clemens is clean. And we cling to that belief, because there is, to date, zero actual evidence against him. Nothing like there is against McGwire, and nothing whatsoever like there is against Bonds or Palmeiro.

H O W E V E R, with that said, I am unaware of any pitcher who's ever done anything remotely like what Clemens has done since turning 40 in early August of 2002. He completed a 13-6 season, then went 17-9, 18-4 and 13-8. His last two adjusted ERA's were 145, which is 3 points below Lefty Grove's career record, and a staggering and literally incredible 221, posted NOT over 162.0 innings, but over 214-1/3 innings in which he blew away 218 batters. Playing in a park whose left field is a joke and a pitcher's nightmare, he was the HARDEST pitcher in the league to get hits off of, and he led the league in Adjusted ERA by 47 points, beat Chris Carpenter in unadjusted ERA by nearly a FULL RUN, and (somehow) didn't win the Cy Young Award. (When will they look past wins and losses?)

If he'd done that with a knuckleball, well, it might not be unprecedented and it wouldn't be suspicious. But in this day and age, where a hitter who put up anywhere near such historically great stats with such a physique would come under suspicion, and where the hitter would be pilloried if he were 42/43 that season, nobody breathed a word of suspicion about Clemens in the media.

Hell, just writing this post has made me more suspicious and amazed at how credulous I've been about all of this. A pitcher like Maddux can legitimately go on forever, as long as (1) he can make the ball do all of those goofy things, and (2) he's got enough of a "fast ball" to keep hitters honest. Clemens, we all realize, is over and done with as soon as his fastball is.

I think all Clemens fans, obviously including me, need to take a long, hard look at this situation. On paper, I am prepared to anoint him the greatest righty ever... pending my completion of this SABR-endorsed Johnson bio (no, not the laughable one by his grandson), and pending my reading of some very well thought-out and drawn-out arguments for Maddux over Clemens, on this site.

Hell, the 7 ERA titles--bested only by the incredible Grove's 9--are just about enough, by themselves. He won THREE of those starting in the year he was 34/35, which again is reminiscent of Grove, who won 4 of his 9 after age 35.

There literally are many millions of baseball fans who not only rate Clemens as the greatest righty ever, but, knowing nothing of Grove, rate him as the greatest pitcher ever. Then there are many millions more who "only" rate him as the greatest righty ever. We all need to take a long, hard look at what he's done from age 34/35 to age 42/43. It's not as ludicrous as the Bonds situation, nor is it close to that, but it's still damn difficult of belief.

I really want to believe in Clemens. If substantial circumstantial evidence comes out against him, or if they nail him cold like they did Palmeiro, I will really hate it. But I don't see where he's entitled to any more of a kid gloves treatment than anyone else who's poisoned and ruined the game in the last 15 years, if in fact that's what he's done.

Baseball History Nut

[W_Marone]

Honestly, not to start another Barry Bonds flare up but he is one I hope they do catch with evidence of steroid use.

[W_Marone]

Yes, the nut knows what I mean....I too will be shocked and truely sadend if in fact they do find substantial evidence that he used steroids.

[Pine Tar]

I am unaware of any pitcher who's ever done anything remotely like what Clemens has done since turning 40 in early August of 2002. He completed a 13-6 season, then went 17-9, 18-4 and 13-8. His last two adjusted ERA's were 145, which is 3 points below Lefty Grove's career record, and a staggering and literally incredible 221, posted NOT over 162.0 innings, but over 214-1/3 innings in which he blew away 218 batters. Playing in a park whose left field is a joke and a pitcher's nightmare, he was the HARDEST pitcher in the league to get hits off of, and he led the league in Adjusted ERA by 47 points, beat Chris Carpenter in unadjusted ERA by nearly a FULL RUN, and (somehow) didn't win the Cy Young Award. (When will they look past wins and losses?)

If he'd done that with a knuckleball, well, it might not be unprecedented and it wouldn't be suspicious. But in this day and age, where a hitter who put up anywhere near such historically great stats with such a physique would come under suspicion, and where the hitter would be pilloried if he were 42/43 that season, nobody breathed a word of suspicion about Clemens in the media.

Hell, just writing this post has made me more suspicious and amazed at how credulous I've been about all of this. Baseball History Nut
Nolan Ryan did some pretty amazing stuff after he turned 40. At the age of 42 he had and ERA+ of 124, struck out 301, and pitched 239 innings! At the age of 44 he had and ERA+ of 138 in 173 innings and struck out 203 batters. Tom Seaver at the age of 40 went 16-11 in 238 innings with an ERA+ of 136. So there is some precedent for power pitchers playing well into their 40's with success. Certainly not as much success as Clemens, but Clemens is a better pitcher than those other guys so that seems OK to me.

[Hammerin Hank]

Tony, are you the 'no' vote for Bonds? Or did you dare not vote either way for Bonds?

[Red Sox 521]

I am sure you have a lot of experience seeing steroid rages :rolleyes:

Clemens rusurrected his career by developing the split finger fastball. He didn't throw one before he went to Toronto. That is why his career strajectory is skewed. Most of his "anger problems" were actually things that happenned much earlier in his career, like when he was ejected from a playoff game against the A's for saying stuff about the ump's mother. The Piazza incident really was not a "rage" issue as much as impulse control. A rage is when someone can't be calmed down. Clemens wasn't in a rage. In fact he reminded me of a basketball player who commits a flagrant foul and then pretends like their innocent of it or that it was an accident. Bill Lambier comes immediately to mind.

Oh and shouldn't we throw Charlie Hough into this list since his career path was a bit out of the ordinary. During an off day, I saw him get really cranky at the movie theater when they wouldn't give him his senior discount. I think he he used the terms "dang nabit" and "whipper snappers." I bet he was using too.
Steroids are actually rather commonplace at my school. You can see them and speed being taken nearly constantly by different sports players almost constantly in the locker rooms. And many of these kids also have fits of rage similar to Clemens'. It is possible that he does have impulse control problems, and I would like to believe this just as much as you. But his "impulse control" combined with his career, just seems to tell me otherwise. I would like to believe that he is just a freak of nature who is capable of all this, but I have trouble fully believing it myself.

[yankillaz]

I picked Finley and Johnson as non PED users. Then all of them are cheaters. Even Clemens. He is an excellent pitcher, without a doubt, but there's an intrigue for his absence since the start of the season that has all of us "Conspiracy Theorists" thinking he may have used them, and took the time off to wipe them away.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

Nolan Ryan did some pretty amazing stuff after he turned 40. At the age of 42 he had and ERA+ of 124, struck out 301, and pitched 239 innings! At the age of 44 he had and ERA+ of 138 in 173 innings and struck out 203 batters. Tom Seaver at the age of 40 went 16-11 in 238 innings with an ERA+ of 136. So there is some precedent for power pitchers playing well into their 40's with success. Certainly not as much success as Clemens, but Clemens is a better pitcher than those other guys so that seems OK to me.

I hope like crazy that you are right, Pine Tar, but none of those guys ever had a year remotely like the one Clemens had last year, in the season when he turned 43. The adjusted ERA's you cite are commendable. The one Clemens had was phenomenal, one of the absolute greatest ever by a post-Dead Ball pitcher, and that's without regard to the pitcher's age. And while he may have done it with a certain amount of guile, he certainly didn't do it in a Warren Spahn, Greg Maddux or Hoyt Wilhelm kind of way.

But as I said, there is zero evidence of his guilt. His head isn't 3 times larger. He doesn't have heart palpitations. His trainer and the company he endorses aren't in trouble. And--most important--he hasn't suddenly become 5 times better than he ever was before, like you-know-who did at age 36.

Still, a reasonable person HAS to wonder.... And just because most of us love the guy is no reason to be blind, if something comes up. If it does, it will make me sad and sick, but I will accept it.

BHN

[Yankwood]

I picked Finley and Johnson as non PED users. Then all of them are cheaters. Even Clemens. He is an excellent pitcher, without a doubt, but there's an intrigue for his absence since the start of the season that has all of us "Conspiracy Theorists" thinking he may have used them, and took the time off to wipe them away.I' too, have suspicions about Clemens but didn't that World tournament that he participated in have testing?

[Whitesoxnut]

Sosa yes! He fits every part of the profile. Thome had suspicious spikes in HR production during the 'roid years but there really is no other aspects of the profile that fits him.

Whats the profile?

1, Suspicious muscle growth, body size gains and other physical signs "acne". 2, suspicious spikes in HR production during the years of heavy 'riod usage. 3, Being called out by other players. 4, Testimony or avoidance of it. 5, Character. 6, Personality changes. 7, Physical breakdowns/performance breakdowns after testing was implemented, and/or the lack of during the 'roid years, "add suspicious injuries during the 'roid years to this one".

For instance "Bonds" fits into every one. Sosa fits all but one. Thome only fits one, and thats hazy because he's a pure power hitter and his home run spike's weren't all that un-natural.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

Well, I beg to differ on one score. Bonds hasn't had a personality change.

He's always been an #$)(*&%#@

[csh19792001]

Tony, are you the 'no' vote for Bonds? Or did you dare not vote either way for Bonds?

Use your intuition and experience, and you can make an informed guess here.

Also, I wouldn't hold your breath for an answer. ;)

[BaseballHistoryNut]

Well, one thing: Anyone who's read my posts on The B-Word knows I'm not The Lone Voter. :D

BHN

[Ubiquitous]

How times have changed. In this poll the voters believed that Roger Clemens had not used steroids.

[Brad Harris]

TRANSLATION: A whole lot of us, including me, SIMPLY DO NOT WANT TO BELIEVE CLEMENS IS ONE OF THE CHEATERS.

I, for instance, have rooted for Clemens for over 20 years. He embodies all that was good about Bob Gibson, but is a much better pitcher and hasn't destroyed anyone's career (see, for comparison's sake, Jim Ray Hart) by repeatedly hitting him in the head.

Although I'm very large and was a tough guy when I was a young drunk, the real me is about as non-macho as any guy around. Yet even I am drawn by Clemens' on-field personality. I presently have him as the #1 RHP of all time, and the #2 pitcher of all time, though I may well move both Maddux and this site's sainted pitcher, Walter Johnson, ahead of him. Maddux had two much better peak years (than anyone but Pedro), and Johnson had an incredible 8-year run, albeit one which ended abruptly in the very year the live ball came into play.

So, Clemens is now my #2 all-time pitcher. Until I've seen 3 to 5 more years from Pedro--the #1 inning-for-inning pitcher of all time, WAY ahead of Lefty Grove, the #2 man--he absolutely will NOT fall any farther than down to #4, and he very well may stay right where he is, at #2. We all love watching that blazing fastball, his seek/give no quarter attitude, and some of the really classy things he does.

Example: When he pitched those heroic relief innings of shutout ball, deep into extra innings of Game 4 of the first round last year, with inadequate rest, and that young kid finally hit the series-winning walkoff, Clemens saw the cameras and mikes coming his way, grabbed the kid and held him there. He then said a few words to the interviewers, mostly along the lines of how he owed his teammates this (great, heroic) performance, after how badly he'd pitched earlier in the series, then he thrust the kid in front of them and said, "Now, how about the kid?" And he walked away, leaving the kid to have his moment in the national spotlight.

How many guys do that, least of all at his age? As much as I love Babe Ruth, I see him clinging to this perhaps last moment of great glory, if all the cameras and mikes are in his face at that age. (Yeah, I know He was the hitter and He was long-retired by 43, but you get my point.)

So, from an EMOTIONAL POINT OF VIEW, there is so much to admire about Clemens, even if you DON'T like the ultra-machismo, the drilling batters right and left, the going-postal-moment against Piazza with the broken bat, etc.

And THAT, I think, is why so many of us want desperately to believe Clemens is clean. And we cling to that belief, because there is, to date, zero actual evidence against him. Nothing like there is against McGwire, and nothing whatsoever like there is against Bonds or Palmeiro.

H O W E V E R, with that said, I am unaware of any pitcher who's ever done anything remotely like what Clemens has done since turning 40 in early August of 2002. He completed a 13-6 season, then went 17-9, 18-4 and 13-8. His last two adjusted ERA's were 145, which is 3 points below Lefty Grove's career record, and a staggering and literally incredible 221, posted NOT over 162.0 innings, but over 214-1/3 innings in which he blew away 218 batters. Playing in a park whose left field is a joke and a pitcher's nightmare, he was the HARDEST pitcher in the league to get hits off of, and he led the league in Adjusted ERA by 47 points, beat Chris Carpenter in unadjusted ERA by nearly a FULL RUN, and (somehow) didn't win the Cy Young Award. (When will they look past wins and losses?)

If he'd done that with a knuckleball, well, it might not be unprecedented and it wouldn't be suspicious. But in this day and age, where a hitter who put up anywhere near such historically great stats with such a physique would come under suspicion, and where the hitter would be pilloried if he were 42/43 that season, nobody breathed a word of suspicion about Clemens in the media.

Hell, just writing this post has made me more suspicious and amazed at how credulous I've been about all of this. A pitcher like Maddux can legitimately go on forever, as long as (1) he can make the ball do all of those goofy things, and (2) he's got enough of a "fast ball" to keep hitters honest. Clemens, we all realize, is over and done with as soon as his fastball is.

I think all Clemens fans, obviously including me, need to take a long, hard look at this situation. On paper, I am prepared to anoint him the greatest righty ever... pending my completion of this SABR-endorsed Johnson bio (no, not the laughable one by his grandson), and pending my reading of some very well thought-out and drawn-out arguments for Maddux over Clemens, on this site.

Hell, the 7 ERA titles--bested only by the incredible Grove's 9--are just about enough, by themselves. He won THREE of those starting in the year he was 34/35, which again is reminiscent of Grove, who won 4 of his 9 after age 35.

There literally are many millions of baseball fans who not only rate Clemens as the greatest righty ever, but, knowing nothing of Grove, rate him as the greatest pitcher ever. Then there are many millions more who "only" rate him as the greatest righty ever. We all need to take a long, hard look at what he's done from age 34/35 to age 42/43. It's not as ludicrous as the Bonds situation, nor is it close to that, but it's still damn difficult of belief.

I really want to believe in Clemens. If substantial circumstantial evidence comes out against him, or if they nail him cold like they did Palmeiro, I will really hate it. But I don't see where he's entitled to any more of a kid gloves treatment than anyone else who's poisoned and ruined the game in the last 15 years, if in fact that's what he's done.

Baseball History Nut

Some thoughts:

Only three of his seasons after age 38 really stand out. They begin with his first season in a new league. Most National League hitters had never faced the Rocket before and, well...how much can a scouting report help when you're facing a future Hall of Famer, really?

Another thought is that Clemens' final two seasons were shortened because of the extra months of rest he got not joining the team until later in the season.

Clemens faced weaker lineups in the Central Division teams (and did not have to face the Astros lineup) during his time in the NL.

Then there's the widely held opinion that Clemens was the hardest working pitcher in the game throughout his career at taking care of his body, staying in shape, and hitting the weight room. This alone - from the mid-80s to the mid-00's makes Clemens the "hardest working" pitcher in the game's history.

Just some more "anecdotal" support for the "I believe Clemens" crowd.

[futurehalloffamer]

Man, I really misremembered how innocent we all believed Clemens was!

[Seattle1]

How times have changed. In this poll the voters believed that Roger Clemens had not used steroids.

Not me I was one of the yes votes in this poll. I had him pegged even back then.

[Brad Harris]

Not me I was one of the yes votes in this poll. I had him pegged even back then.
http://www.moonbattery.com/frankenstein_villagers.jpg
Dont' worry. You're not hard to spot.

[Steven Gallanter]

Curt Schilling's torn tendon sheath in 2004 was treated by injections of Norcaine thus enabling him to pitch.

Schilling was never the same pitcher again.

Why are painkillers NOT conidered PEDs?

[Los Bravos]

For the same reason that LASIK, Tommy John surgery and Santo's insulin aren't: common sense.

Also, if he wasn't the same again, then the "E" in PEDs doesn't really apply.

[Ubiquitous]

And if LASIK, insulin, and TJ surgery become illegal it would be considered cheating as well. The difference between all of that and steroids is that we didn't come up with steroids. The Nazis did and then the communists followed suit. Before all of that steroids or I should say steroids ancestors were perfectly okay in American society.

[PVNICK]

And if LASIK, insulin, and TJ surgery become illegal it would be considered cheating as well. The difference between all of that and steroids is that we didn't come up with steroids. The Nazis did and then the communists followed suit. Before all of that steroids or I should say steroids ancestors were perfectly okay in American society. what were steroids ancestors?

[Ubiquitous]

hormones from animals.

[tag0519]

The only one of the group that I could be sure of NOT using would be Finley. He was always into eating well and that workout regime where he works on core strength and balance. Just didn't seem like a "user" to me.

[Los Bravos]

And if LASIK, insulin, and TJ surgery become illegal it would be considered cheating as well.I know Schilling always goes to the illegality of steroids early in his arguments, but that's a secondary issue, to me. I have problems with HGH and the various other steroids on the basis of my belief about their effect on players' bodies and consequently their games.

Using medical remedies to get you back close to the average baseline of health (I mentioned Tommy John surgery, LASIK surgery and insulin, you could also throw in Adam LaRoche's ADD meds and any number of other remedial treatments), is a lot different than trying to outpace that nominal baseline and thus get an advantage over everyone else. It's a distinction that's clear in my mind. I'm sorry that it isn't in the minds of a lot of people here, many of whom I really respect and agree with on a host of other issues.