RogerClemensReport.com

[Pared]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

im not the one claiming that meeting with family attorneys is "witness tampering"

....ok....

[snepp]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

Love how you never directly answer any question someone asks you.

Bonus points for consistency?

[ZB9]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

Who cares if it's Sunday? Have the lawyers meet at her house then. I'm sure lawyers that have their own practice can go in on Sunday. They'd go in on Sunday if they had to.

you are making an issue about something that is completely irrelevant. It doesnt matter if they meet at a law office.

[sbauer318]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

you are making an issue about something that is completely irrelevant. It doesnt matter if they meet at a law office.

Irrelevant to you.

[JayBee74]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

I wonder if ZB9 is actually Roger Clemens.

That's a reach.

CLEMENS

ZB9

[ZB9]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

That's a reach.

CLEMENS

ZB9

ha my bank account proves otherwise

[taylor34]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

This is ridiculous ZB9. Clemens was asked to give her information to Congress, so he calls her and then brings her to his house BEFORE giving them the info. That is really fishy and bordering illegal (and congress said so as well). How can you not see that? Honestly? Everyone on this post see's it, congress sees it, the news sees it. Everyone but you. Seriously.

Taylor34

[ZB9]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

This is ridiculous ZB9. Clemens was asked to give her information to Congress, so he calls her and then brings her to his house BEFORE giving them the info. That is really fishy and bordering illegal (and congress said so as well). How can you not see that? Honestly? Everyone on this post see's it, congress sees it, the news sees it. Everyone but you. Seriously.

Taylor34

they wanted to meet with her and asked Clemens to find her on Friday, which he did. She met with the Clemens attorneys on Sunday and gave her deposition on Monday. There is nothing "fishy" about it. Again, she has the right to meet with attorneys.

The ONLY congressman that made an issue of it was Waxman, and that was quickly shot down. He was upset that his buddy Mitchell's "evidence" was being discredited. She was Waxman's ticket to counter all of the affidavits, witnesses, and old videos coming out discrediting Mitchell's evidence in the BBQ.

[Quint75]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

I dont know if he is innocent. I dont know if he is guilty or not either. Reading all of the depositions certainly doesnt lead to me thinking he is guilty.

it is clear that this thing is a witch hunt (and it's BS how both MLB and congress have handled it, but i digress). Knowing about the people, the motivation, and the situations surrounding the witch hunt...I dont automatically buy everything they are selling. They can cut and paste all they want, but there are way too many discrepencies

So you don't find it odd that his resurgence as a great pitcher in his later 30's and early 40's, is completely unprecedented? And don't bring up the huge report his lawyers brought forth because 3 of the finest statisticians in America's universities have said that it was utter hogwash. They said it is, indeed, unprecedented.

So you're saying that Barry Bonds, who like Clemens got better as he advanced into his late 30's and 40's and is a KNOWN steroid user (though he says it was an accident) and Roger Clemens are two different cases? That Clemens did in fact reach his peak at age 35-41 even though all prior research of human physical fitness and aging shows that that is simply impossible? So you are saying Roger Clemens is an unprecedented freak of nature? Is that it? I just want to be clear here.

Or is it possible that because he is from Texas, pitched for UT and was a Houston Astro that you may in fact be willing to overlook piles upon piles of statistical evidence and say that Andy Pettitte's testimony is false? That McNamee told the truth about Knoblauch and Pettitte but for some reason he decided to make up a bunch of stuff about Roger Clemens? Again, just asking for clarification.

[ZB9]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

So you don't find it odd that his resurgence as a great pitcher in his later 30's and early 40's, is completely unprecedented? And don't bring up the huge report his lawyers brought forth because 3 of the finest statisticians in America's universities have said that it was utter hogwash. They said it is, indeed, unprecedented.

So you're saying that Barry Bonds, who like Clemens got better as he advanced into his late 30's and 40's and is a KNOWN steroid user (though he says it was an accident) and Roger Clemens are two different cases? That Clemens did in fact reach his peak at age 35-41 even though all prior research of human physical fitness and aging shows that that is simply impossible? So you are saying Roger Clemens is an unprecedented freak of nature? Is that it? I just want to be clear here.

Or is it possible that because he is from Texas, pitched for UT and was a Houston Astro that you may in fact be willing to overlook piles upon piles of statistical evidence and say that Andy Pettitte's testimony is false? That McNamee told the truth about Knoblauch and Pettitte but for some reason he decided to make up a bunch of stuff about Roger Clemens? Again, just asking for clarification.

when was there a "resurgence"? The year after the Red Sox FO made the comment about him being in the "twilight of his career", Clemens won the triple crown.

and i guess Schilling, Nolan Ryan, and Randy Johnnson were on PEDs also? Satchel Page must have been on the juice lol. Pitching for a long time doesnt prove anything.

Btw, Clemens didnt get better as he got older. He hasnt been able to pitch past 6 innings consistently for a while now. and his velocity went down quite a bit, so he developed a splitter.

as far as Bonds, you cant compare a hitter to a pitcher. and Bonds changed his game. He became a power hitter. Clemens didnt all of a sudden become a power pitcher. Actually, as he got older he lost velocity and had to become more crafty, a better locator, and develop a wider variety of pitches (again, like the splitter)

another btw, i dont think Pettitte's testimony was necessarily false. Have you read his deposition?

[yvesdereuter]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

]when was there a "resurgence"? The year after the Red Sox FO made the comment about him being in the "twilight of his career", Clemens won the triple crown.[/B]

and i guess Schilling, Nolan Ryan, and Randy Johnnson were on PEDs also? Satchel Page must have been on the juice lol. Pitching for a long time doesnt prove anything.

Btw, Clemens didnt get better as he got older. He hasnt been able to pitch past 6 innings consistently for a while now. and his velocity went down quite a bit, so he developed a splitter.

as far as Bonds, you cant compare a hitter to a pitcher. and Bonds changed his game. He became a power hitter. Clemens didnt all of a sudden become a power pitcher. Actually, as he got older he lost velocity and had to become more crafty, a better locator, and develop a wider variety of pitches (again, like the splitter)

another btw, i dont think Pettitte's testimony was necessarily false. Have you read his deposition?

Exactly. The prior three innings he was logging less and less innings and wasnt doing as well. So suddenly Boston lets him walk and its a wake up call. I actually wouldnt be surprised if he started using in 96 or 97. Look at his innings in the prior three seasons before he went to Toronto.

[ZB9]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

Exactly. The prior three innings he was logging less and less innings and wasnt doing as well. So suddenly Boston lets him walk and its a wake up call. I actually wouldnt be surprised if he started using in 96 or 97. Look at his innings in the prior three seasons before he went to Toronto.

what? His last year in Boston he pitched 242 innings and tied his record for strikeouts in a game. The year previous to that he was injured.

i meant his innings have started dropping as he has gotten older. As he approached 40 and surpassed 40, he has not pitched past 6 innings consistently.

[yvesdereuter]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

what?

i meant his innings have started dropping as he has gotten older. As he approached 40 and surpassed 40, he has not pitched past 6 innings consistently.

His innings didnt drop while he was with Boston

G IP
1993 29 191.7
1994 24 170.7
1995 23 140.4


In the prior 7 years, his lowest IP was 228.


Guess who these stats belong to?
AB HR
1993 84 9
1994 135 9
1995 317 39
1996 423 52

[yvesdereuter]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

what? His last year in Boston he pitched 242 innings and tied his record for strikeouts in a game. The year previous to that he was injured.

i meant his innings have started dropping as he has gotten older. As he approached 40 and surpassed 40, he has not pitched past 6 innings consistently.

And why does Pettitte say he used HGH?

Clemens was also 10-13 his last year in Boston. And in two of the 3 years before his last year his ERA was over 4.00.

[ZB9]

Re: RogerClemensReport.com

And why does Pettitte say he used HGH?

Clemens was also 10-13 his last year in Boston. And in two of the 3 years before his last year his ERA was over 4.00.

nice cut and paste. The two years when his ERA was over 4.00 were the two years he was injured.

last 5 years in Boston
IP ERA
1992 Bos 246.2 2.41
1993 Bos 191.2 4.46 disabled
1994 Bos 170.2 2.85 (strike)
1995 Bos 140.0 4.18 disabled
1996 Bos 242.2 3.63

his innings were high in 96, and they would have been high in 94 if not for the strike.