Roger and ‘roids. (Another ho-hum day at the office.)

January 16th, 2007 → 9:33 am @ // 7 Comments

Boston area sports fan have another five days to discuss the immaculate reception which is a good thing…because there ain’t a lot going on in the land of Cochineal Stockings…unless, that is, you consider the not along going on in the J.D. Drew negotiations as actually meaning there’s a lot going on.

One interesting tidbit: the Herald reported the other day that Boston is still interested in Roger, and apparently for reasons other than bringing its payroll in line with New York’s. It certainly would be interesting, and a great coda to Clemens’s career. But it also could be a mess. Buried in a Times story that ran last weekend about sportswriters’ culpability in the steroid scandal, Jim Souhan of the Minneapolis Star Tribune was quoted as saying, “I don’t think we (I) know enough about this generation of players to separate presumptive cheaters from the hundreds who cheated more subtly or intelligently, or who have otherwise avoided scrutiny. Like, oh, aging power pitchers who display tremendous resilience and longevity, not that I’m thinking of anyone in particular, Roger.”

The Times is one of the more prominent outlets that has now printed what reporters and baseball executives alike have been whispering, sotto voce, for years. I have no idea if it’s true. But if it is, and if Roger gets nailed, and if that nailing takes place while he’s wearing a Red Sox cap…well, let’s just say it won’t be pretty.


Post Categories: J.D. Drew & Roger Clemens & Steroids

7 Comments → “Roger and ‘roids. (Another ho-hum day at the office.)”


  1. Brett2108

    10 years ago

    I just hope that if, and when, Clemens (and for that matter, anyone who is openly accused of and/or baselessly thrown in the steroids conversation by the media) is vindicated or cleared (not sure if it’s even possible) that the media goes to these same lengths to congratulate him for doing things the right way. I know I’m in the minority, but does anyone really care about all the speculation anymore? I wish someone would publish allegations of plagiarism (based on “insider’s knowledge” and unnamed sources) about these mediaits…watching them scramble would be entertaining.

    Reply

  2. Mr. Furious

    10 years ago

    The thought of Clemens on PEDs has occured to me over the last couple seasons, particularly after his delayed entry to the season last year…time to clear something from his system?

    At this point in his career, Clemens is obviously playing with house money, and is a lock for the Hall and everything else. For him to tempt fate would be truly foolish. He should continue pitching if he can, naturally, if he can’t, hang it up while the legacy is intact.

    Of course, you could have said the almost the same thing about Palmiero…

    Reply

  3. tinisoli

    10 years ago

    Everyone is a suspect. We can’t just look for swollen jawlines, improved stats, unearthly recuperative powers, or unexpected career longevity, even though it is fun to play armchair detective. Ryan Franklin’s positive test reminded us that not everyone who uses PEDs is good at baseball or particularly strong. Clemens may very well be a ten-year veteran of PED use, but so might Pedro, Johnson, Glavine, and other stringbeans. We don’t know. Some guys seem so obvious about it, like the admitted/outed sluggers like the Brothers Giambi, Sheffield, Palmeiro, Canseco, and Bonds. But for every glaringly obvious juicer there must’ve been a hundred mere mortals who were either not very big, not very good, or not even in the majors.

    Until there’s testing for HGH we might as well assume that every player in MLB is on that stuff. It’s effective, it has the reputation of being safer than anabolic steroids, and urinalysis can’t catch it. Giving Giambi a Comeback Player of the Year award for what was clearly an HGH-fueld resurgence might as well have been MLB’s way of encouraging everyone to cut out the ‘roids and get on HGH.

    As for the nitwittedness of a guy like Clemens possibly gambling with his legacy long after passing the 300 win mark, I think Barry Bonds and others have already shown us that greed and vanity knows no bounds amongst many professional athletes. When you’ve got all the money to set up a family dynasty, and you’ve won all the accolades, why not gun for 800 homers or a no-hitter at 45? Why not keep playing the game you love to play even though you (Julio Franco) are nearly 50 years old?

    Reply

  4. Mr. Furious

    10 years ago

    Look closely. I never said Clemens WASN’T a fool…

    Reply

  5. HFXBOB

    10 years ago

    No one knows if the steroids issue is going to blow up on Clemens next year, and at this point no one knows if he’s guilty. But it’s pretty likely the cloud of suspicion is going to be hanging around him for a while.

    I think even if you set the steroids issue aside, signing Roger for 2007 is a dubious move. Last year Houston paid him $16 million for a total of only 19 starts and 113 innings. The guy is 45 next year, and steroids or not his arm and his body can’t hold up forever. Not only is his physical durability in question, if you look at his recent postseason performances they are not impressive. Why does Roger seem to come up big in ordinary games and ordinary in big games? In the 2005 postseason he had 4 starts and only lasted 16 innings, 4 innings per start, with a 5.63 ERA and 8 K’s. Dismal. In the 2004 NLCS game 7 he was the losing pitcher, and in the 2003 ALCS game 7, well, he damn well should have been the losing pitcher.

    I know it would be kind of cool to see him in a Sox uniform again, and I don’t really want to see the Yankees get him, but all things considered it might be best if he either stays in Houston or hangs it up.

    Reply

  6. Nordberg

    10 years ago

    There have been many mixed messages from MLB and the players regarding performance-enhancing drugs. Baseball didn’t want the ban, or at least didn’t want to fight the union for a ban, until recently. Players don’t deny use, they only say that they haven’t failed tests (Roger). I probably share some blame, too, because I carry around deep suspicion on certain players. I’ll always point at McGwire, Sosa, Bonds, Sheffield, Giambi (both), but not at my favorite players. Does that make me ignorant? Maybe. Naive? Probably.

    Someone asked me after the HOF vote was revealed if McGwire would ever get in. I skirted the issue. I said that no one knows right now (which probably is the truth). We have to consider what the face of PEDs is in 5 and 10 years (i.e., what we know about them then that we don’t now, who we know for a fact took them and what our overall view of use is), who the voters are, and how forgiving we are. It might even hinge somewhat on whether Pete Rose ever gets in.

    Maybe we should suspect everyone. On the other hand, as Gammo often says, there is no real public evidence that anyone knowingly took anything banned or illegal.

    So where are we? Ambivalent? Pretent to care but don’t really? I really wish I could answer that. We think we know, we think we want to know but we really don’t want to know. I guess if we really care, at some point we just turn our backs and just walk away.

    (Seth, I’m sorry if this rambled too far into foul territory. I think what’s happening is that I’m coming to grips with my own inablility to make a sound judgment or offer a sound opinion on this subject.)

    Reply
  7. […] Roger Clemens, through his lawyer, has been sticking with his Casablanca-evoking outrage that he was fingered as a ‘roids user. He shouldn’t be surprised, and neither should anyone else. (Compare this picture of a middle-aged Clemens to this one when he was in Boston. It certainly looks like his body went through a Bonds-like transformation.) I’ve been curious as to why more people weren’t asking questions about Clemens since last January, when Boston was in the hunt for his services. […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: