guess whose B-R page isn't sponsored

[Gregory Pratt]

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

that about says it all, doesn't it?

[LouGehrig]

I am too cheap to sponsor ANY page, but if I were to choose one, that one would be at the top of my list. However, I will not tell you the TITLE of that list.

[ipitch]

Oh my goodness gracious! Of all the things... Roger Clemens' page isn't sponsored! Someone ought to let Suzyn Waldman know about this.

[Gregory Pratt]

Wish I had the money to sponsor it and make sure my stance on him is clear.

[Old Sweater]

No biggie. High demand always drives the price up.

Here is the regular price.

Let people know you like this site. Sponsor this page for $10 per year.

Then there is the Clemens price since so many fans look up his stats.

Promote your website or business by sponsoring this page for $325 per year on Baseball-Reference.com.

[Gregory Pratt]

There are plenty of expensive B-Rs sponsored, I'm sure. People don't want to shell out money for a disgusting and immoral cheat and liar.

[KCGHOST]

Do you really think Clemens alleged PEDs usage is stopping someone from sponsoring him?? Barry Bonds has a sponsor. Bonds is the poster boy for alleged PEDs usage and is currently under indictment for perjury.

[Gregory Pratt]

No, I think his PED usage and the disgusting revelations about him, coupled with the lack of opportunity to cash in on him without hurting your business, is what's doing him in.

[BlueBlood]

B-R doesn't even need to lower the asking price just desteroid his stats.

1999 - ERA+ of 103
2000 - ERA+ of 95
2001 - ERA+ of 90
2002 - ERA+ of 85 in a partial season

Retires before the 2003 season at the age of 40.

[Old Sweater]

B-R doesn't even need to lower the asking price just desteroid his stats.

1999 - ERA+ of 103
2000 - ERA+ of 95
2001 - ERA+ of 90
2002 - ERA+ of 85 in a partial season

Retires before the 2003 season at the age of 40.


Love how fans are so selective in the years a player used PED's based on assumption. PED's don't locate the ball or put movement on the ball which is more important then velocity in which most PED articles say is 0-3mph.

[SamtheBravesFan]

B-R doesn't even need to lower the asking price just desteroid his stats.

1999 - ERA+ of 103
2000 - ERA+ of 95
2001 - ERA+ of 90
2002 - ERA+ of 85 in a partial season

Retires before the 2003 season at the age of 40.

Says you.

I'm sure some people would just love this, but if there is one thing I can't stand, it's revisionist history, which is what you want to do.

[Old Sweater]

No, I think his PED usage and the disgusting revelations about him, coupled with the lack of opportunity to cash in on him without hurting your business, is what's doing him in.

No way. Bonds page is sponsored and the advertiser is getting more views.


33% in that national poll they conducted think that Clemens is innocent so there go's your thinking on that.

[Gregory Pratt]

Um, first of all, it's goes. Second of all, Clemens doesn't equal Bonds -- Clemens is a nasty man who people suspect of child molestation as a result of an NYDN article that doesn't say they started a relationship when she was fifteen but most have read as such, and Bonds is a steroid user with a bad attitude who is NOT under the type of personal allegations as Clemens. Third, Bonds' sponsor has the good opportunity as his name is very similarly related to the product, so there's some small market there. Unless NASA wants to sponsor a man perceived by and large as a pedophile and a cheat and a bat-throwing lunatic, there's no market out there for "Rocket." Those are the key differences.

Since you obviously believe in Clemens -- with your previous nonsense about McNamee being less credible than Clemens, and your present bull about that national poll and how it go's -- why don't you sponsor the damn page.

[SamtheBravesFan]

33% in that national poll they conducted think that Clemens is innocent so there go's your thinking on that.

That doesn't prove anything on its own. We need to know how many people were surveyed and what their general tendencies are to believe such things. That plays a factor too. Besides, I think Jayson Stark put it best yesterday in an article: Clemens isn't acting like an innocent man (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&page=rumblings), or a man who is even sorry for what he did, simply because of the "scorched-earth" tactic he decided to take.

[Old Sweater]

That doesn't prove anything on its own. We need to know how many people were surveyed and what their general tendencies are to believe such things. That plays a factor too. Besides, I think Jayson Stark put it best yesterday in an article: Clemens isn't acting like an innocent man (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&page=rumblings), or a man who is even sorry for what he did, simply because of the "scorched-earth" tactic he decided to take.

Sure it does. It proves for every rat lover out there, there is also a rat hater.


Take Pratt for instance. For every thing that he despises Clemens for Mcnamee is worse and he takes his word at face value.

Until Clemens admits to something I'm in his corner over a rats word.

[SamtheBravesFan]

Sure it does. It proves for every rat out there, there is also a rat hater.


Take Pratt for instance. For every thing that he despises Clemens for Mcnamee is worse and he takes his word at face value.

Until Clemens admits to something I'm in his corner over a rats word.

Well, that's your decision. I'm not in your corner, though. McNamee may be shady, but he's in a position to know what's going on and he has no incentive to lie because he doesn't have as much to lose. I don't think you can convince me that Clemens is innocent at this point.

[Gregory Pratt]

I think McNamee is a scummy human being and Clemens is scummier. But I'm not interested in pulling out a microscope to check whose being is made of a higher percentage of scum. Probably McNamee, because Clemens is 10% scum and 90% steroid. I simply can't stand it when people say, "Oh, someone's been arrested -- you can't believe them! You've got to believe Roger!" I believe McNamee and Pettitte and my own damn eyes with regard to Roger Clemens.

[Old Sweater]

Well, that's your decision. I'm not in your corner, though. McNamee may be shady, but he's in a position to know what's going on and he has no incentive to lie because he doesn't have as much to lose. I don't think you can convince me that Clemens is innocent at this point.

I'll just stick with Clemens along with the other 33%.

[SamtheBravesFan]

I'll just stick with Clemens along with the other 33%.

Fair enough.

[Gregory Pratt]

I agree that that's fair enough.

I just want to know what you think about Pettitte, then. And by that I mean what Old Sweater thinks about Lefty Pettitte.

[BoweryBoys]

I think McNamee is a scummy human being and Clemens is scummier. But I'm not interested in pulling out a microscope to check whose being is made of a higher percentage of scum. Probably McNamee, because Clemens is 10% scum and 90% steroid. I simply can't stand it when people say, "Oh, someone's been arrested -- you can't believe them! You've got to believe Roger!" I believe McNamee and Pettitte and my own damn eyes with regard to Roger Clemens.

Very well said and breath of the fresh air of common sense. However, there will always be some who always seem want to tend to give highly successful ballplayers the benefit of the doubt in all matters, even when continual good reason accumulates to the point of at least keeping and open mind and giving both parties an equal 50/50 benefit of the doubt. After all, where is it written that just because one is a great ballplayer they just couldn't have done some of the things that people who knew them closely and personally say they have done. Where is it written that because some guy seems to be a "scum" but he is just an average guy and not a hero ballplayer, he just has to be lying. The hero ballplayer just has to be telling the truth because he is a hero ballplayer. This despite the fact that all recent information that has come to light over the last six months seems to point very strongly that Clemens is a much worse excuse for a human being then McNamee has ever been, at least from what is known right now. With all fairness and not being biased, one to be most fair should actually say there is good reason to feel that both are equally sad excuses for people. But, everything that McNamee is alleged to have done seems to believed as gospel without question by the "33 percent". Everything that Clemens is alleged to have done, no matter where the allegation comes from, it is all not true. I guess a ballplayer will always get the benefit of the doubt over non players by some. And please let us not have any Bs about McNamee being someone who has maybe commited crime(s). Last I looked Clemens is also under investigation for possible crimes, he may have committed perjury and he may have vilotaed various federal drug laws as well. A crook is a crook and a scum is a scum.

[Old Sweater]

^You remind me of that lawyer who was on the board who use to get on his soap box about Bonds. Don't even know why you follow the game since the rat Canseco said that 85% of players use PED's. Myself, I don't support or follow anything that I despise.

[Wade8813]

This raises the question - how many other people's web pages aren't sponsored? I remember doing research for an all-time draft and being surprised by a couple people who weren't sponsored, although I don't remember who they are.

Just because someone isn't sponsored, doesn't necessarily mean much.

[Gregory Pratt]

Someone ought to study it. I looked a little and couldn't find anyone as "great" as Clemens unsponsored, but by no means was I comprehensive.

[CROM]

Ivan Rodriguez
Tom Glavine
Dave Winfield
Robin Yount


Just a few players who have no sponsors on baseball reference.. Im pretty sure that the speculation surrounding Clemens has absolutely nothing to do with him being sponsored on baseballreference.com.. In fact if i had something to sell his page would be one of the first pages that i sponsored due to the traffic it must receive. Im sure most business savvy people would say the same..

[Blackout]

325 bucks? LOL thats just crazy.

[Gregory Pratt]

I just learned from a friend who recently saw it that the page WAS sponsored until the story about the fifteen year old girl broke.

"That has nothing to do with it! It's just coincidence because money is scarce." No. It's because Roger Clemens is repugnant to everything that is good and decent in our world and emblematic of all that isn't.

[ipitch]

Im pretty sure that the speculation surrounding Clemens has absolutely nothing to do with him being sponsored on baseballreference.com.. In fact if i had something to sell his page would be one of the first pages that i sponsored due to the traffic it must receive. Im sure most business savvy people would say the same..

Spending a lot of money on advertising doesn't necessarily make you savvy. Some recent Super Bowl advertisers are now out of business.

[Old Sweater]

I just learned from a friend who recently saw it that the page WAS sponsored until the story about the fifteen year old girl broke.

"That has nothing to do with it! It's just coincidence because money is scarce." No. It's because Roger Clemens is repugnant to everything that is good and decent in our world and emblematic of all that isn't.



Odd that you always have a friend somewhere that is in agreement with your fantasies.

[Old Sweater]

Ivan Rodriguez
Tom Glavine
Dave Winfield
Robin Yount


Just a few players who have no sponsors on baseball reference.. Im pretty sure that the speculation surrounding Clemens has absolutely nothing to do with him being sponsored on baseballreference.com.. In fact if i had something to sell his page would be one of the first pages that i sponsored due to the traffic it must receive. Im sure most business savvy people would say the same..

Shouldn't have exposed those names. They could have a hater saint out there with some made up story from a rat, just waiting for a opening to get on their soap box preaching the evils of the player and why their page isn't sponsored.

[Wade8813]

I just learned from a friend who recently saw it that the page WAS sponsored until the story about the fifteen year old girl broke. If that's true, all that means is that ONE person (whoever was sponsoring it) agrees with you. It doesn't mean anything more than that.

[Gregory Pratt]

Your... eloquence is astonishing, as is your temperment and obviously keen judgement.

[ipitch]

Shouldn't have exposed those names. They could have a hater saint out there with some made up story from a rat, just waiting for a opening to get on their soap box preaching the evils of the player and why their page isn't sponsored.

My friend's mailman told me that Dave Winfield's page probably doesn't have a sponsor because he threw a ball and killed a seagull 25 years ago. :atthepc

[cardsfanatic]

Ivan Rodriguez doesn't have a sponsor because he forgot to wash his hands after using the bathroom one time. I got it from a credible source too! Personal trainers are to roid use as Bathroom attendants are to washing your hands. They know all and never lie.

[Gregory Pratt]

I suppose the man who sponsored Clemens' page can be reasonably inferred to have dropped it because he felt like it, with no purpose behind it. Or perhaps, with much greater propriety and by sheer coincidence, the expiration date came very recently and no one has renewed it for a lack of notice and funds. This is a more likely scenario in the fairy tale world of steroid apologists and flat-Earth society rejects -- this is logical and reasonable, objective, by the flimsy (nonexistent?) standards of these men.

[Old Sweater]

Tangibly:

John Clarkson murdered his wife.
John Clarkson is a Hall of Fame pitcher.
John Clarkson has the numbers to be a Hall of Fame pitcher.
John Clarkson was elected, I believe, sixty years after he died and about eighty after he retired.

Hypothetically:

Undisputably Great Pitcher Today (Not Linked to Steroids) kills his wife.
UGPTNLS is up for election to the Hall of Fame.
UGPTNLS has the numbers to be a Hall of Fame pitcher.
Do you believe he should be elected?

For me, "Don't murder anyone" and "don't commit any sex crimes" are about the only characteristic I asks for in "character" from a ballplayer. Much of everything else can be...underemphasized. I'm just not sure I know what I'd do in such a situation. Some, like DiMaggio and Monroe, can be understood; others, like any one of numerous drunks, are perfectly fine; jerks, well -- I don't care about that, and I find it endearing with some like Bob Gibson. But...murder?

What do you believe about murder and the Hall? (Clarkson didn't just murder his wife, he slashed her with a razor, if "way of murder" counts.) Do you think that, in today's age, it would take sixty years or would they never get in at all?



Absolutely right. This was discussed and answered in a thread Gregory Pratt started called "Murderers in the Hall of Fame." Yet, he still perpetuates false information.



Who is "psycho?" Ozzie?

I would play anywhere, for the minimum, all my life.

Except the Nationals OR the Loria-owned Marlins.
Under no circumstance would I play for the Nationals, but I would love to play for the Marlins only if Loria didn't own them anymore.


^LOL

Pujols and Rodriguez might well be on steroids; don't hold your breath that they'll "save" baseball with their integrity and decency and health (it is, after all, silly to expect them to...what? Break Bonds' mark? Wait a few years before you start holding). What does that mean, anyway? Baseball's not exactly in a bad place today. At least, the owners, the players and the Commissh aren't.

I'd bet money on Pujols and Rodriguez being steroid users. I know that'll prompt a variety of comments, "Oh, nothing suggests it!" but there's some things, if you look close enough. Not that I want to slander anyone. I'm not saying they are on steroids. Just that my skepticism, Pujols couple of injuries (plantar), Rodriguez' quickness to 500, their general era and their sizes make me skeptical.



Well, that's the thing -- what did he think the shot was supposed to do/be? What did the doctor tell him?

Sounds like another old-time player trying to "cheat" (as we'd call it now).


Even pointing a finger at Mickey Mantle. You're something else!

Umm

Someone mentioned Mantle's "Miracle shot" that ruined his season.

Is this true? Where is it from? What was the "miracle shot"? Some form of steroid?

I've googled but the first response is his post and I can't find anything else.

Help!


Looks like you just go around the board pointing the steroid finger at any player and don't even have a team you root for. All that seems to interest you is scandal.

[Gregory Pratt]

You are dishonest. I answered McKenna by noting that I had yet to read the correction by others and that was that; I wouldn't ever want to be associated with Loria for what he did to Montreal and does in Florida (I don't see what's objectionable about that); Rodriguez and Pujols are qualified criticisms on my part, and I stand by my doubts about them; and I was simply asking the question about Mantle, because I'd never heard anything about this shot before. If you go through my posts -- and evidently you did, you creep -- then you see that I quite often make posts asking questions for clarification about events. I was told in a different thread at one point that steroids have been around a long time, and when I heard about a Mantle shot I just wanted to know. That wasn't the same as this talk about Clemens or Bonds, and it isn't even all that similar to Pujols or Rodriguez. I write this for the benefit of others and to clear myself of your...attempt to demonstrate that I only like "scandal"; I certainly am not writing it for you, as I am well aware that you do not know how to read.

I'm not even sure how this conversation got to where it has gotten. I've written about steroid users belonging in the Hall, and I have very mixed feelings about the legacy of the era or the players. I'm not naive or dishonest -- I won't pretend that they didn't happen, or that it isn't still going on. But somehow this has become a conversation about whether or not Clemens' sponsor stopped sponsoring him because of steroids, child molestation or simply coincidence. What a disgusting man your hero is, and how sad it makes me that you deem it necessary to follow in his shadow.

[Old Sweater]

You shouldn't go around pointing your steroid finger at Mantle and your murdering finger at John Clarkson on a public board without doing research first. All it amounts to is a misinformed lie.

Get off your scandal soap box.


What a disgusting man your hero is, and how sad it makes me that you deem it necessary to follow in his shadow.
Today 06:18 AM


Better then growing up with rat reporters and rat finks as a hero and taking their word at face value. I see your future as being a top reporter for the SF Chronicle when you grow up. Pointing a PED finger at Mantle is the most disgusting thing I have ever read on this board.

BTW/ 99.9% of MLB players are my hero's.

[Gregory Pratt]

Actually, I did do research on Clarkson and all of it on the Internet that I found says what was contradicted by the posters here, so it wasn't as if I found one source and ran with it. Besides, I apologised and thanked the fact-checkers, so for you to continue to drag this on demonstrates your lack of depth and character. Not that the facts matter to you, as you have no respect for journalism and no understanding of truth, decency or integrity, evidenced by your claim that I pointed the steroid finger at Mantle -- I raised a question, and once it was answered I let that speak for itself. I suppose in your Stalinist world it is immoral to answer questions, and anything that says something other than what you dearly wish to believe comes from a "rat" or a scoundrel. I do not believe that Mantle was on steroids or did steroids, and I am not pointing any finger at him, but I also believe that no reasonable person could accuse me of such. Of course, you are not a man who can be reasoned with.

I'm just glad I don't sit around believing that everyone who disagrees with me or points out the terrible deeds of someone else is a "rat" and a horrible human being. That said, I'm not sure why I have allowed you to draw me into this whole lousy exchange. It reminds me of a quote from one of my favorite films: "When it's bad like this, get it over with soon or else you'll be listening to his crap all day." Others seem to understand that and so they avoid you. I haven't, but this is the last time I engage a flat-Earth society wannabe primadonna liar.

And for the record, I'd be thrilled be a "top reporter" at a major American newspaper someday. I happen to respect journalists and journalism.

[Gregory Pratt]

Just for the record -- the President of sports-reference wrote back to my email to sponsor@baseball-reference.com, where I wrote: "I just want to know how long ago he was dumped, and if the old sponsor gave his/her reasoning for dumping him" and the response was: "Jan. 30th. No reason given." This confirms that he was dumped, not quietly expired, and it would appear likely to be a result of all the revelations. Of course, no one not an idiot would've deduced otherwise.

[TheMadDog31]

Guess who else doesn't have a sponsor.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/j/johnsra05.shtml

Quite amazing that no one wants to sponsor him for a bargain like $140! Blasphemy!

[Old Sweater]

mlbdraft.net sponsor(s) this page.
You can sponsor a page.
Page Expires: 2009-05-25 Alert Me!
Who Drafted Roger Clemens? Find out!


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


If it is an annual sponsorship it wasn't even expired for 6 more days.

Pratt just being Pratt trying to dig up more dirt on a player with no proof as usual.