Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Other Diversions › After Hours Lounge › 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove - Page 9

post #241 of 415
12/23/07 at 11:23pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Using an odd technique, Roger Clemens defends himself against the steroids/HGH allegations by taking to YouTube:

Reply
post #242 of 415
12/25/07 at 3:37pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Well, I don't know what Duquette was ever an idiot - assuming Clemens's late-career dominance was 100% insane workouts, that's still the sort of freakish outlier that's impossible to predict. And what he was saying is something that's pretty relevant for a lot of these long-term contracts; you do end up paying a big price for the twilight of a player's career.
Reply
post #243 of 415
12/25/07 at 5:57pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

For me, the true indication that the people listed in the Mitchell report are guilty is that there have been no lawsuits filed. In our litigation-loving society, no one has sued Jose Canseco (who named names in his book), and no one has sued the accusers in the Mitchell report. I haven't even heard a threat of a lawsuit. When Bonds sued, it wasn't over the accusations -- it was due to the grand jury leak. And he quickly dropped the case.

And it's not as if the accused don't have the means to do file a lawsuit. Clemens earned $17 million this year for basically nothing, and could easily hire a lawyer (he could probably find someone to take the case for nothing). Even if the case went to trial and ended up inconclusive, I would respect him for putting up a fight. Instead, all these guys are letting their silence speak for them.
Reply
post #244 of 415
12/25/07 at 7:02pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Perry
For me, the true indication that the people listed in the Mitchell report are guilty is that there have been no lawsuits filed. In our litigation-loving society, no one has sued Jose Canseco (who named names in his book), and no one has sued the accusers in the Mitchell report. I haven't even heard a threat of a lawsuit. When Bonds sued, it wasn't over the accusations -- it was due to the grand jury leak. And he quickly dropped the case.

And it's not as if the accused don't have the means to do file a lawsuit. Clemens earned $17 million this year for basically nothing, and could easily hire a lawyer (he could probably find someone to take the case for nothing). Even if the case went to trial and ended up inconclusive, I would respect him for putting up a fight. Instead, all these guys are letting their silence speak for them.
His lawyer did mentioned last week that anybody accusing Clemens of using steroids better have a good lawyer so we'll see what this new year will bring in this matter. By the way, such lawsuits are very hard to win for public figures and in most cases are a waste of money, but let's see if Clemens has any avenue to do so against McNamee or Mitchell. I heard the latter will be very difficult to win due to how Mitchell reported his findings in his report.
Reply
post #245 of 415
12/27/07 at 4:12pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

No mention of Mark Prior signing with the Padres? I hope they can make room on the rosterdisabled list for him.
Reply
post #246 of 415
12/27/07 at 7:18pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

And, Darin Erstad goes to the Astros for 1-year, $1-million (plus incentives).

Quote:
Erstad is a two-time All-Star (1998, 2000) who is also the only player in Major League history to win a Rawlings Gold Glove Award as an infielder (first base, 2004) and an outfielder (2000, '02).

Erstad holds the American League record for consecutive errorless fielding chances by an outfielder with 723 from June 30, 2001-Sept. 22, 2002, breaking the previous mark held by Ken Griffey Jr. (573, 1992-93).
Reply
post #247 of 415
12/27/07 at 10:52pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

In today's Tribune, Rick Morrissey raises an interesting point regarding the naming rights of ballparks, and whether Wrigley Field will eventually be renamed when a new owner takes over.

What I hadn't considered is the possibility that the William Wrigley gum company -- for which the field is named -- could decide to buy the rights itself and keep the name the same. The question is whether the company would realize any value from such a transaction, seeing as a) most people will always refer to it as Wrigley anyway, even if it becomes something else and b) even now, people don't necessarily associate the name of the field with the gum company.

I think it would be cool if they did pay to keep it the same, instead of letting it become something such as "Nike Park at Wrigley Field."
Reply
post #248 of 415
12/28/07 at 10:16am

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

I would hope the Cubs have enough revenues that they wouldn't need to stoop to selling the name rights to the park. Wrigley field it needs to be.

I'd like to see the Yankees come up with a new name for their new stadium. It doesn't seem "right" to call the new building "Yankee Stadium." Anything connected to Babe Ruth wouldn't seem right, either. How about McCarthy Park (Get it?! )? Stengel Stadium?
Reply
post #249 of 415
12/28/07 at 11:40am

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Frezon
I would hope the Cubs have enough revenues that they wouldn't need to stoop to selling the name rights to the park. Wrigley field it needs to be.

I'd like to see the Yankees come up with a new name for their new stadium. It doesn't seem "right" to call the new building "Yankee Stadium." Anything connected to Babe Ruth wouldn't seem right, either. How about McCarthy Park (Get it?! )? Stengel Stadium?

The House We Didn't Lose 4 In A Row After Being Up 3 In?
Reply
post #250 of 415
12/28/07 at 11:51am

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Frezon
I would hope the Cubs have enough revenues that they wouldn't need to stoop to selling the name rights to the park. Wrigley field it needs to be.
I don't think it has anything to do with Cubs revenue and everything to do with Zell wanting to generate a few quick bucks before the Trib sells the club.
Reply
post #251 of 415
12/28/07 at 11:58am

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Quote:
The House We Didn't Lose 4 In A Row After Being Up 3 In?
The House that 26 world series titles built?
Reply
post #252 of 415
12/28/07 at 12:11pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

I'm thinking along the lines of the other former ballparks that have left the landscape...Griffith Stadium, Schibe Park, Ebbets Field, Polo Grounds, Forbes Field, Crosley Field, Candlestick Park, Tiger Stadium, etc.

None of the replacements carried the old names.

I don't suppose the new centerfield will be 490 feet?
Reply
post #253 of 415
12/28/07 at 1:08pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shane Martin
The House that 26 world series titles built?

You call it what you like and I'll call it what I like!
Reply
post #254 of 415
12/28/07 at 4:27pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Jim Leyritz charged with DUI manslaughter in Florida.
Reply
post #255 of 415
12/28/07 at 5:16pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

That's awful.
Reply
post #256 of 415
1/3/08 at 1:15pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Quote:
For me, the true indication that the people listed in the Mitchell report are guilty is that there have been no lawsuits filed.

In a twist of irony, Brian McNamee (the person who claims to have injected Clemens with steroids and HGH) says that if Clemens denies it in his 60 Minutes interview on Sunday, McNamee will sue Clemens for slander. I would die laughing if all of a sudden the airing of the interview is canceled (or if we hear it was edited).
Reply
post #257 of 415
1/3/08 at 5:05pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

That 60 Minutes interview was a joke from the beginning, regardless of whether McNamee threatened to sue or not. Clemens and his attorneys wouldn't have agreed to the interview if they couldn't approve of the questions ahead of time. They're all going to be softballs/questions that Clemens can honestly answer without incriminating himself.

Here's an article about the interview. In it, Clemens admitted that McNamee injected him with "Lidocaine and [vitamin] B-12." Roger is supposed to hold a press conference on Monday - that should be more interesting than the 60 Minutes thing.

And in case you're wondering why Clemens wanted Wallace to do the interview:
Quote:
And so it comes to this: An 89-year-old "correspondent emeritus" who adores the New York Yankees, spends quality time in owner George Steinbrenner's stadium suite and considers latest interviewee Roger Clemens "my friend," becomes our best hope to arm wrestle the truth out of the accused pitcher.
Link
Reply
post #258 of 415
1/3/08 at 6:44pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

I am curious as all-get-out about the Wallace/Clemens interview. I have heard all about their "friendship"...but this is Mike Wallace...and he's got his own legacy to think about protecting--just as much as Clemens.

I can't think he wants what-might-be one of his last great interviews to go down in the books as some fluff piece in which he let his subject wriggle off the hook. I'm hoping Wallace goes at him hard (high and tight)...just like Wojciechowski proposes in the ESPN piece.
Reply
post #259 of 415
1/3/08 at 7:35pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

I thought Lidocaine was a local anesthetic, used by doctors/dentists seeking to numb a specific area. I don't know what injecting it into his butt cheek would accomplish.
Reply
post #260 of 415
1/3/08 at 9:46pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Perry
I thought Lidocaine was a local anesthetic, used by doctors/dentists seeking to numb a specific area. I don't know what injecting it into his butt cheek would accomplish.

Preventative medicine...just for the outside chance that one of Mike Piazza's bats might break and come flying towards his butt?

Some TV news report on the Mitchell report/Clemens talked about how steroids can cause "rage" in its users while--at the same time--showing video from the Piazza/Clemens incident in Game 2 of the 2000 World Series. It was very effective (and, of course, potentially misleading). But I hadn't put those two thoughts together myself.
Reply
post #261 of 415
1/4/08 at 4:56pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Congress has asked Clemens and McNamee (among others, including Pettitte) to testify, under oath, Jan. 16. Clemens' lawyer, Rusty Hardin, issued a statement:
Quote:
Roger is willing to answer questions, including those posed to him while under oath. We hope to determine shortly if schedules and other commitments can accommodate the committee on that date.
Apparently, they're concerned it may conflict with a golf game he has scheduled.

If Clemens somehow avoids testifying before Congress, I think that would be pretty damning evidence against him.

Quote:
I am curious as all-get-out about the Wallace/Clemens interview. I have heard all about their "friendship"...but this is Mike Wallace...and he's got his own legacy to think about protecting--just as much as Clemens.
That is true about Wallace, but I don't think Clemens' team would agree to the interview if they didn't have some say over the questions asked and/or the final edit that'll air on Sunday. Call it cynicism if you must, but I'm skeptical.
Reply
post #262 of 415
1/4/08 at 7:13pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Scott: I would find it highly doubtful that Wallace would EVER give any control over his finalized piece to his subject. I understand a lot about how the media works...working in it myself...and while there can be all kinds of accusations about Wallace slanting the piece, asking softball questions, et cetera...it would kill his entire career if it was found out he did that. He wouldn't risk it. It would call into question anything else he had ever done.

Clemens can only control what comes out of his own mouth...and, I would think, whatever gets shot in his a$$. And, for most people, that is enough.

The talking heads on ESPN radio were piling on today about Clemens "ever-changing" story and especially the Lidocaine and B-12 angle.
Reply
post #263 of 415
1/6/08 at 8:00pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

So what did anyone think of the Clemens interview on 60 Minutes?



I was surprised he didn't have better answers.

The question I thought he needed an answer to was , "why would MacNamee have to gain by saying these things about you...or why would he say them?"

And, frankly, I thought Clemens' response to the lie detector question was evasive. He kept answering the question "would you take one?" with his own questions like "would it help me?" and "would it do any good?" without saying definitively yes or no.

I was also surprised when Clemens brought up the idea of law suits (suing MacNamee for lying) to hear him say that he had a problem with spending the money to defend himself.

I expected Clemens to make a much better case against the allegations then "that never happened."

I was also unimpressed with his opening volley that his 25 seasons in baseball should somehow earn him the benefit of the doubt.

I guess Roger will now have to make the trip to Washington to testify under oath to Congress, eh? That would likely go a long way towards defending his honor.
Reply
post #264 of 415
1/6/08 at 8:51pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Quote:
I guess Roger will now have to make the trip to Washington to testify under oath to Congress, eh? That would likely go a long way towards defending his honor.
just like Rafael Palmeiro
Reply
post #265 of 415
1/6/08 at 9:11pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

I think the interview was damaging to him.

He essentially said he wouldn't bother taking a lie detector test, wouldn't sue McNamee because it would be a hassle and unnecessary spending, couldn't offer any reason/motivation McNamee had to lie, and didn't think that Pettitte's admission of getting injected with HGH was relevant.

His straw-man defense seemed to be along the lines of "why would I take those drugs?", and Wallace suggested the obvious answer -- to prolong a career that brought fame and fortune. Clemens argued that steroids and HGH automatically make you brittle, less flexible, more injury prone, etc., and thus would be unappealing to him. He boasted of taking painkillers to perform before big games (yet that wouldn't preclude using other drugs).

If he somehow avoids testifying in front of Congress, there will be no doubt of his guilt in my mind.
Reply
post #266 of 415
1/6/08 at 9:27pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Perry
If he somehow avoids testifying in front of Congress, there will be no doubt of his guilt in my mind.

He's GOT to go to Washington now. Got to.

And, frankly, he'd be smart to accept the invitiation before he gets subpoenaed.

He has a press conference tomorrow at 5pm ET.
Reply
post #267 of 415
1/7/08 at 5:09am

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Clemens has now filed a defamation suit against McNamee. I think it will be his way to avoid answering any questions before Congress ("I cannot answer based on advice of my counsel...") and I think the suit will be quietly withdrawn at a later date.
Reply
post #268 of 415
1/7/08 at 3:46pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

After watching the 60 Minutes interview and most of today's press conference, I don't believe Clemens. Nothing I have heard from him the past two days has detailed HOW McNamee's claims are untrue. All he says is "it never happened." He hasn't provided anything to prove his claim that it never happened. It's his word against McNamee's and with how defensive Roger's been (especially if you saw how he ended the press conference), I don't think he's telling the truth.

Even the tape of the Clemens-McNamee phone conversation Clemens played today didn't seem to disprove any of McNamee's claims.

Personally I think if he testifies before Congress, it'll be another Palmiero/McGwire/Sosa situation where he doesn't actually answer any of the questions. Do you think Congress would believe Clemens doesn't speak English?
Reply
post #269 of 415
1/7/08 at 4:23pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott_J
Do you think Congress would believe Clemens doesn't speak English?

Clemens speaks english? Could have fooled me.
Reply
post #270 of 415
1/7/08 at 6:26pm

Re: 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove

Darn it! I missed the press conference. Many of the accounts seem to say it was "unusual."

HERE'S an interesting summary of Clemen's "logic" by Gene Wojciechowski of ESPN.com.

===============

EDIT** Wow. Just watched extensive clips on ESPN.com. It's hard to say...but he doesn't seem convincing.

ASND SI.com has THIS story--an exclusive interview with MacNamee--in which he reiterates his original claims.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: After Hours Lounge
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Other Diversions › After Hours Lounge › 2007-2008 MLB Hot Stove