Baseball Steroid Thread

[Dan Gould]

And from the AP:

Richard Emery, another of McNamee's lawyers, said the committee will be given a description of the evidence that was turned over to prosecutors.

"It does change the nature of the case from a he-said, she-said to something about physical evidence," Emery said.

He said he wouldn't discuss until Thursday why McNamee's legal team waited until after Clemens' deposition to go public with their discussion of physical evidence ...

Emery said McNamee's legal team planned to hold a news conference following their client's deposition in Washington on Thursday and will discuss the evidence in greater detail then.

That's must-see TV.

And its obvious that they did not want to talk about evidence until Roger foolishly appeared before the committee staffers and repeated his denials under oath. Like McNamee's lawyer said after Clemens played the audio tape, "this is war" and being a smart general, he waited until the time was right to mount a full-scale, devastating attack.

[WorldB3]

As ESPN is reporting, if DNA material plus drug residue is recovered from the syringes/gauze pads, investigators may seek a court order for a DNA sample from Clemens. If it matches, Lanny Breur will be eating his words. And Clemens will be heading to jail.

Couldn't happen to a nicer psychopath. Bonds has issues that go way back from when he was growing up but Clemens is scary.

[Dan Gould]

As ESPN is reporting, if DNA material plus drug residue is recovered from the syringes/gauze pads, investigators may seek a court order for a DNA sample from Clemens. If it matches, Lanny Breur will be eating his words. And Clemens will be heading to jail.

Couldn't happen to a nicer psychopath. Bonds has issues that go way back from when he was growing up but Clemens is scary.

Actually I think he's more sociopath than psychopath, but perhaps JazzShrink could favor us with his long distance diagnosis.

[Tim McG]

As ESPN is reporting, if DNA material plus drug residue is recovered from the syringes/gauze pads, investigators may seek a court order for a DNA sample from Clemens. If it matches, Lanny Breur will be eating his words. And Clemens will be heading to jail.

No he won't.

If Oliver North, Linda Tripp, Monica Lewinsky, Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney [ I could go on] got nothing more than a terse "thank you very much" or nasty "what a hero he was" or the obligatory "the Democrats are the evil perpetrators"....Clemens won't see any more jail time than Paris Hilton.

OTOH, if he was a Black HR king, well, just lock the bastard sonofabitch up for all eternity.

It is total bullshit, Guys.

Justice, what justice....?

Edited February 7, 2008 by GoodSpeak

[7/4]

As ESPN is reporting, if DNA material plus drug residue is recovered from the syringes/gauze pads, investigators may seek a court order for a DNA sample from Clemens. If it matches, Lanny Breur will be eating his words. And Clemens will be heading to jail.

No he won't.

If Oliver North, Linda Tripp, Monica Lewinsky, Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney [ I could go on] got nothing more than a terse "thank you very much" or nasty "what a hero he was" or the obligatory "the Democrats are the evil perpetrators"....Clemens won't see any more jail time than Paris Hilton.

OTOH, if he was a Black HR king, well, just lock the bastard sonofabitch up for all eternity.

It is total bullshit, Guys.

Justice, what justice....?

Karl Rove.

[Tim McG]

Good point.

[Dan Gould]

I find it really amusing that Hardin is apparently now saying that they are 'elated' about McNamee turning over the gauze and syringes because it shows that he's a "psycho". Yeah, they'll keep saying that until the blood is proven to be Roger's.

Because let's examine the idea that McNamee "manufactured" this evidence. And since he manufactured it, let's presume that it does indeed show what he needs it to show: Clemens blood - confirmed through a DNA match - and PED on the needle or inside the syringe.

Can we all agree that McNamee has had no access to Clemens' blood for a significant period of time? I mean, let's presume that he did indeed inject B-12 and Lidocaine, in the past. If these syringes and gauze pads were held since 2000-2001, the assertion that McNamee "manufactured" the evidence requires the belief that:

McNamee injected innocuous drugs like B-12 and Lidocaine

that he decided IN 2000-2001 that he would "frame" Clemens at some later date, and while working for him, hanging out with his family, etc., he simply bided his time until the opportunity presented itself.

Compare that, logically, with McNamee's position:

He feared that if an MLB or Federal investigation were undertaken, that Clemens would throw him under the bus to save his own skin - is this not a reasonable expectation given Clemens behavior over many, many years? Remember that this was at the same time that Clemens threw a broken bat at Mike Piazza while giving the nonsensical explanation that he thought it was the baseball.

He felt obligated to implicate Clemens so he told the Feds and Mitchell about it, but did not wish to hurt Clemens anymore than necessary, and therefore withheld the physical evidence that he had kept to protect himself - this makes perfect sense in the context of the taped phone call, in which McNamee appears legitimately broken up over the fact that he had to implicate Clemens due to his plea agreement to tell the truth.

That phone call was the final straw in convincing McNamee that indeed Clemens would attempt to destroy him and led him to provide all the evidence he has regarding Clemens in order to protect himself from Clemens' campaign to destroy him. Just like McNamee's lawyer said after the press conference: This is war.

If you look at it logically, the "manufactured evidence" looks more and more like O.J.'s attorney's response to the devastating blood evidence: They planted it. They took the reference sample from O.J., held it over a weekend, and sprinkled the blood inside the Bronco.

Why did they do it? They had no choice. The evidence was overwhelming and they had to discredit it somehow. Notice that Clemens' lawyers never said "if Mr. McNamee saved the syringes he used to inject Roger with B-12 and Lidocaine, then the scientific evidence will show that Roger's blood is present with syringes bearing traces of these elements, not steroids. Any other conclusion demonstrates that McNamee has mixed Roger's blood with PEDs to falsely implicate him."

But they can't say that because

A) they don't really want to keep asserting "B-12 and Lidocaine" because there's no logical reason for McNamee to inject these drugs

B) they know that if Roger got innocuous injections only back then, no one would have been concerned enough to save the medical waste like this.

Here is my prediction:

At some point next week, Roger Clemens will finally assert his Fifth Amendment privilege. It might happen at the start, or it might happen in the middle of his testimony. But I believe that by the time Roger testifies, we will have heard

That Andy Pettitte testified to a discussion of PEDs with Roger

That Jim Murray testified to a discussion with McNamee of Roger's use of steroids and the possibility that he would test positive when MLB started the testing program. That assumption is the only explanation for Murray spending 3+ hours giving testimony, more even than Pettitte's meeting with the staffers. He had to have things to say to talk that long.

[Aggie87]

As ESPN is reporting, if DNA material plus drug residue is recovered from the syringes/gauze pads, investigators may seek a court order for a DNA sample from Clemens. If it matches, Lanny Breur will be eating his words. And Clemens will be heading to jail.

No he won't.

If Oliver North, Linda Tripp, Monica Lewinsky, Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney [ I could go on] got nothing more than a terse "thank you very much" or nasty "what a hero he was" or the obligatory "the Democrats are the evil perpetrators"....Clemens won't see any more jail time than Paris Hilton.

OTOH, if he was a Black HR king, well, just lock the bastard sonofabitch up for all eternity.

It is total bullshit, Guys.

Justice, what justice....?

Responding, after deleting a bunch of unnecessary blank lines.

Why does everything in your mind go back to Bonds all the time? This is about Clemens.

And since you seem to have forgotten, we have had a black Home Run king for almost 34 years. Why does this continue to be a racial issue for you (and seemingly nobody else), when everyone is clearly ready to give Clemens his due just as much as they are Bonds?

[Dan Gould]

As ESPN is reporting, if DNA material plus drug residue is recovered from the syringes/gauze pads, investigators may seek a court order for a DNA sample from Clemens. If it matches, Lanny Breur will be eating his words. And Clemens will be heading to jail.

No he won't.

If Oliver North, Linda Tripp, Monica Lewinsky, Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney [ I could go on] got nothing more than a terse "thank you very much" or nasty "what a hero he was" or the obligatory "the Democrats are the evil perpetrators"....Clemens won't see any more jail time than Paris Hilton.

OTOH, if he was a Black HR king, well, just lock the bastard sonofabitch up for all eternity.

It is total bullshit, Guys.

Justice, what justice....?

Responding, after deleting a bunch of unnecessary blank lines.

Why does everything in your mind go back to Bonds all the time? This is about Clemens.

And since you seem to have forgotten, we have had a black Home Run king for almost 34 years. Why does this continue to be a racial issue for you (and seemingly nobody else), when everyone is clearly ready to give Clemens his due just as much as they are Bonds?

And beside that, he gives an example - Paris Hilton - of someone who DID ultimately go to jail! Plus three people - Tripp, Lewinsky, Cheney - who have never been charged with crimes, so why would they be examples of "wrongdoers" who don't serve time due to racism?

[Larry Kart]

Roger -- You need a new suit and/or a better tailor:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/07/b...em_n_85581.html

[T.D.]

Whoa. Roger doesn't look good at all. Not just the suit, either. I barely recognized him. Doesn't look like he'll be pitching in '08...

[Eric]

Two points that I keep coming back to:

1. Somebody is lying their ass off. Common sense says it is Clemens. But whoever it is, they are really, really fabricating some serious BS at this point.

2. For me the bototm line is this - there does not appear to be a credible reason for McNamee to lie, emphasis on the word credible. But if he is, he will go down as the most vindictive nutcase in sports. So what seems more credible - that McNamee is a vindictive nutcase or that Clemens used steroids. Again, common sense says McNamee is more credible.

I have always been a huge Clemens fan (even dragged my kids from KC to NY last summer to witness his return). If he did use steroids, the great irony is that his place in history was secure before he did so - just like Bonds.

Common sense also says there is no way the physical evidence will "prove" that Clemens is lying, at least in the "beyond a reasonable doubt" sense.

It will be interesting to see what Congress does. They are being jerked around in a very major way by one of these two guys. It would sure seem they don't appreciate being played for the fool and will go to some length to get to the truth.

One of the more fascinating sports dramas of late.

Edited February 8, 2008 by Eric

[Jazzmoose]

Personally, I think what we've seen so far is just the tip of the iceberg. I caught a pro wrestling show on TV the other day, and frankly, I'm a bit suspicious...

[Dan Gould]

Two points that I keep coming back to:

1. Somebody is lying their ass off. Common sense says it is Clemens. But whoever it is, they are really, really fabricating some serious BS at this point.

2. For me the bototm line is this - there does not appear to be a credible reason for McNamee to lie, emphasis on the word credible. But if he is, he will go down as the most vindictive nutcase in sports. So what seems more credible - that McNamee is a vindictive nutcase or that Clemens used steroids. Again, common sense says McNamee is more credible.

I have always been a huge Clemens fan (even dragged my kids from KC to NY last summer to witness his return). If he did use steroids, the great irony is that his place in history was secure before he did so - just like Bonds.

Common sense also says there is no way the physical evidence will "prove" that Clemens is lying, at least in the "beyond a reasonable doubt" sense.

It will be interesting to see what Congress does. They are being jerked around in a very major way by one of these two guys. It would sure seem they don't appreciate being played for the fool and will go to some length to get to the truth.

One of the more fascinating sports dramas of late.

Agreed on all points except the presumption that the physical evidence "can't" prove that Clemens is lying. Its one thing for Clemens to claim that the evidence was "manufactured" - a desperate ploy that I think I've shown to be highly illogical above - but if Clemens did turn over unused steroids and syringes, how would Clemens explain any fingerprints, should they be recovered? That was the thought I had when I learned exactly how McNamee came to be in possession of it.

What will be crucial though is what Pettitte and Murray have said and will say in public testimony. If they say anything that support McNamee, its game, set, match.

[Dan Gould]

Well, Radomski faced six months in prison, max, but only got 5 years probation. That may seem pretty lenient and it will be when Clemens is sentenced but as I learned in the Game of Shadows book, the penalties for steroid trafficking is very little jail time. Victor Conte, who surely was a more committed drug trafficker than Radomski, and far less cooperative a witness, was looking at two years before he ended up accepting the plea deal.

[zen archer]

All these syringes and gauze will never be entered as evidence in a court of law as Clemens

attorney rightfully stated during the press conference.

He kept the syringes in a beer can ?

[7/4]

All these syringes and gauze will never be entered as evidence in a court of law as Clemens

attorney rightfully stated during the press conference.

He kept the syringes in a beer can ?

Doesn't everybody?

[Dan Gould]

All these syringes and gauze will never be entered as evidence in a court of law as Clemens

attorney rightfully stated during the press conference.

He kept the syringes in a beer can ?

Wrong, on every count.

Two legal analysts at ESPN (Cossack and Munson), and the legal analyst working for SI both say that the evidence would be accepted, with the defense given the opportunity to impeach based on McNamee's handling of the evidence, the length of time in between, the potential for "contamination".

As for the syringes in the beer can, it was McNamee/Clemens method of disposal, and it actually makes sense. You don't want to prick yourself with an exposed needle; the needle fits through the opening and inside the can. And by the way, beer won't effect the results of the DNA tests. Insert Weizen joke here.

As for their bellowing about "manufactured" evidence, doesn't it kinda suggest that they expect a positive result? Its as if they already know what will happen when they provide a DNA sample, so they better start muddying the waters now while they can.

[T.D.]

Holy crap. Check this out.

McNamee: I injected Roger's wife with HGH

[Jazzmoose]

All these syringes and gauze will never be entered as evidence in a court of law as Clemens

attorney rightfully stated during the press conference.

He kept the syringes in a beer can ?

Doesn't everybody?

Certainly not. I have a handcarved ivory syringe box, plus an antique silver spoon for melting my uh....I think I've said enough. Nevermind.

[Dan Gould]

Well now Clemens' side claims to have "proof" that Roger didn't attend a party hosted by Canseco in which, presumably, Clemens discussed steroids with Canseco and shortly thereafter first approached McNamee about steroids and needing help in getting injections. They even have Canseco confirming that Roger wasn't there, and a "greens fee receipt" to prove he golfed on the day in question (of course, a receipt with a date on it doesn't prove he wasn't at Canseco's at some point during the day).

So, bully for them, but ... Canseco is still confirming multiple discussions about steroids with Clemens ... what is the significance of "proof" that he didn't attend a specific party at Canseco's residence when Canseco is still saying that he and Roger talked steroids many times?

I'm guessing that McNamee wanted to give some indication of what led Clemens to start using steroids. He probably should have started simply with the date and location that Clemens asked for help.

[Dan Gould]

Excellent column in the Times about why the Clemens report that tried to establish that his late-career numbers are "in line" with others is a lot of hokum, for the simple statistical problem of "selection bias". By only comparing him to other pitchers with late-career success like Schilling and Ryan, Clemens people have ignored the universe of pitchers with increasingly poor performances.

Keeping Score

Report Backing Clemens Chooses Its Facts Carefully

By ERIC BRADLOW, SHANE JENSEN, JUSTIN WOLFERS and ADI WYNER

Published: February 10, 2008

Last week, Roger Clemens made the rounds on Capitol Hill to rebut charges by Brian McNamee, his former trainer, that he used steroids and human growth hormone late in his career. In addition, Clemens’s agents from Hendricks Sports Management have provided a report loaded with numbers — 45 pages, 18,000 words and 38 charts — to support his position. You can find the report at the Web site www.rogerclemensreport.com.

But the value of evidence is not measured by the weight of a report; when examined carefully, the Clemens report does not make a convincing case for his innocence.

The report hinges on a critical question: Was Clemens’s late-career success highly unusual? If so, an unusual late-career improvement lends credence to the Mitchell report’s assertion that he used performance-enhancing drugs at various times from 1998 onward. The Clemens report tries to dispel this issue by comparing him with Nolan Ryan, who retired in 1993 at 46. In this comparison, Clemens does not look atypical — both enjoyed great success well into their 40s. Similar conclusions can be drawn when comparing Clemens with two contemporaries, Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling.

Yet such comparisons tell an incomplete story. By comparing Clemens only to those who were successful in the second act of their careers, rather than to all pitchers who had a similarly successful first act, the report artificially minimizes the chances that Clemens’s numbers will seem unusual. Statisticians call this problem selection bias.

There is no doubt that Clemens was a great pitcher, but the question is whether he was much better past 36 or 37 (when he is suspected of having taken performance-enhancing drugs) than would have been expected based on his early career.

A better approach to this problem involves comparing the career trajectories of all highly durable starting pitchers. We have analyzed the progress of Clemens as well as all 31 other pitchers since 1968 who started at least 10 games in at least 15 seasons, and pitched at least 3,000 innings. For two common pitching statistics, earned run average and walks-plus-hits per innings pitched, we fitted a smooth curve to all the data from these 31 pitchers and compared it with those for Clemens’s career.

Relative to this larger comparison group, Clemens’s second act is unusual. The other pitchers in this durable group usually improve steadily early in their careers, peaking at around age 30. Then a slow decline sets in as they reach their mid-30s.

Clemens follows a far different path. The arc of Clemens’s career is upside down: his performance declines as he enters his late 20s and improves into his mid-30s and 40s.

The report correctly observes that he is not the only pitcher to excel at a comparatively old age, but it fails to note that he has taken an unusual path to that late-career success.

Another key shortcoming of the Clemens report is that it focuses almost exclusively on his E.R.A. But a pitcher’s E.R.A. is affected by factors, like defense, that have nothing to do with his pitching. It is also affected by other factors, like the order of events — a triple, for instance, can be hit with the bases empty, or the bases loaded. So a pitcher’s E.R.A. tends to bounce around a lot, and these ups and downs can help obscure patterns in career numbers.

Because E.R.A. can be so unreliable, analysts prefer to look at basic building blocks of talent like strikeout, walk, hit and home run rates. Clemens’s walks-plus-hits rate, for instance, follows an even more unusual trajectory late in his career, one that raises some suspicion.

Other measures suggest Clemens performed similarly to his contemporaries. But these comparisons do not provide evidence of his innocence; they simply fail to provide evidence of his guilt.

Our reading is that the available data on Clemens’s career strongly hint that some unusual factors may have been at play in producing his excellent late-career statistics.

In any analysis of his career statistics, it is impossible to say whether this unusual factor was performance-enhancing drugs.

The Clemens report argues that his longevity “was due to his ability to adjust his style of pitching as he got older, incorporating his very effective split-finger fastball to offset the decrease in the speed of his regular fastball caused by aging.” While this may be true, it is also just speculation: there is not a single number in the report quantifying the evolution of Clemens’s pitch selection.

Statistics provide powerful tools for understanding the world around us, but the value of any analysis invariably comes down to choosing a useful statistic and an appropriate comparison group. Statisticians-for-hire have a tendency to choose comparison groups that support their clients. A careful analysis, and a better informed public, are the best defense against such smoke and mirrors.

And here are the accompanying charts:

[T.D.]

Ah, the "selection bias," or as readers of Nassim Nicholas Taleb's two excellent books (Fooled by Randomness and The Black Swan) know it, "survivorship bias" issue...

Actually, that logical fallacy is extremely widespread. So the Team Clemens braintrust could be sophists, or they could merely be dumbasses. At any rate, good catch by the Times, though astute readers would of course have laughed at the original argument.

[Dan Gould]

Ah, the "selection bias," or as readers of Nassim Nicholas Taleb's two excellent books (Fooled by Randomness and The Black Swan) know it, "survivorship bias" issue...

Actually, that logical fallacy is extremely widespread. So the Team Clemens braintrust could be sophists, or they could merely be dumbasses. At any rate, good catch by the Times, though astute readers would of course have laughed at the original argument.

What's good to see is that ESPN.com has picked up on the Times article, so more people will see it than just the readership of the NYT. I like how the article points out that nowhere in the report did they detail changes in his pitch selection, or decline in his fastball. And I really like the comment that unlike most pitchers who peak around 30, Clemens was actually declining - proof that Duquette's comment about the "twilight of his career" was based on his performance. It puts the spike in his career, the steroid part, in proper perspective.

[Dan Gould]

Interesting statement buried in a NYT article about the fact that Bonds "persecutor", agent Novitzki, will be attending Wednesday's hearing:

A lawyer familiar with the matter said that Pettitte had told Congressional investigators about talking with Clemens about H.G.H.

Whether this testimony is of the "Clemens and I discussed HGH and he recommended I get some from Mac" or "I told Roger I thought I should try HGH", its yet another relevant question that Clemens has lied about.

And I like this statement from the blowhard, Hardin:

Rusty Hardin, one of Clemens’s lawyers, said it would be “unbelievable” and “brazen” for Novitzky to attend the Congressional hearing when he could watch it on television or read the written record.

“Is there really any question now about what’s going on?” Hardin said in a telephone interview Saturday night. “Novitzky’s been nibbling around the edges, calling the other people’s lawyers, making sure they’re careful about what they say.

“You know what? He does not have a sacred mission from God to mess up everybody’s life. So I will be delighted to meet him and let him hear from Roger. He’s never attempted to hear from Roger. He’s never contacted us. So he can sit there at the same time and we’d be delighted to hear from him, but it sure does send a message.”

Hardin added, “I can tell you this: If he ever messes with Roger, Roger will eat his lunch.”

Does that not sound like a guy who

A. is not a little concerned that the Feds have Roger in their sights and

B. sounds a little too much like the over-confident shyster Bonds hired who perpetually smeared the witnesses and the investigation and was 100% certain they wouldn't get an indictment, right up until the time they got an indictment?