...Nolan Ryan? Hey, he pitched until he was 46! He must have used PED's.
:rolleyes:
Printable View
...Nolan Ryan? Hey, he pitched until he was 46! He must have used PED's.
:rolleyes:
Well, I don't think he was talking about longevity. He was talking more about a player being really great, then, in his words, having a string of brutal years (which, Clemens didn't, Clemens went from really great, to a string of 3 years where he went from slightly above average to great to slightly above average, and then went back to being really great), and then going back to being really great. Ryan was always pretty much an inconsistent pitcher, going from good to great to average to good a lot.
Look at his ERA+'s and there's like no correlation. From 1976 to 1981 he went from 99 to 141 to 98 to 113 to 98 to 194. He was never really consistently great, with a string of "bad" years, and then back to being consistently great.
(And again, Clemens wasn't either. He was consistently great with some less than great, but still above average, years thrown in. I mean, in 1999, a year after he allegedly took steroids, he had what is statistically the worse year of his career.)
Nice story about good old roger
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/colum...1&sportCat=mlb
:eek: Oh PEDS....all this time I was trying to figure out what everyone had against PEZ! I love those little dispensers. :p ;)
The candy is pretty good too.Quote:
I love those little dispensers.
Well yes.
I've never been a real big fan of Clemens, anyway, because he comes off as an entitled whiner, so this has hardly changed my opinion of him.
Personally I think we have to be careful about the assumptions we make with steroid allegations.
If we get too carried away Roger Maris sure looks like a cheater and Nolan Ryan throwing harder than everyone for so long starts to look mighty suspicious.
As does Davey Johnson jumping from 5 to 43 home runs.
And Hank Aaron having his best season at age 37.
And countless other fluke seasons, or "freaks of nature" like Nolan Ryan.
That is why it is silly to start accusing players based on their statistics. Statistical flukes have happened since baseball became a game, and sometimes, they're just that - flukes.
That's why I have such a big problem with what's going.
It's not that I don't think players cheated. I have little doubt they did.
My bigger problem is that this "great case" essentially comes down to NY area "witnesses" who have little proof other than their word and what they said under the threat of jail time.
Unless the report had more substantial proof (and I use the standard of a case being able to hold up in court), I think it is VERY dangerous to go down this kind of road.
Forgetting for a minute that these are high profile people, imagine if this was acceptable in your own line of work. I work in Public Relations and if my reputation could be shot down by two reporters I've worked with, I'd never be able to stay in my profession.