Slog
News & ArtsThursday, July 14, 2011
Crime / Sports Judge Declares Mistrial in Roger Clemens Perjury Case After Prosecutors Throw Wild Pitch
Posted by Goldy on Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 9:10 AM
U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton declared a mistrial today in the perjury trial of former New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox ace Roger Clemens, after prosecutors twice violated his orders not to reveal certain evidence to jurors.
"I don't see how I un-ring the bell," Judge Walton said after prosecutors played a video tape referencing an inadmissible conversation Clemen's fellow Yankee pitcher Andy Pettitte allegedly had with his wife. Clemens is accused of lying to Congress in testimony in which he denied the use of human growth hormone, steroids and other performance enhancing drugs.
Huh. Looks like I got my lede for next week's Sports Blotter.
1
The lesson: when a prosecutor brags about their conviction rate, ask them about the their actual trial conviction rate.
3
Unbelievable. I'd like to know what the fuck they were thinking.
No, check that. Unfortunately, I know exactly what they were thinking. Something along the lines of "we're the government, so the rules don't apply to us."
Assholes.
No, check that. Unfortunately, I know exactly what they were thinking. Something along the lines of "we're the government, so the rules don't apply to us."
Assholes.
5
One almost wonders if they threw the case so they don't have to put themselves in the position of nailing a sports hero. And Clemens, for all his faults, is a sports hero -- the greatest pitcher since WWII, only Big Unit and Pedro Martinez challenging him for that honor. I don't give a damn what he took or what he said. The reincarnation of Lefty Grove. I'm glad I saw him pitch.
8
Yeah, he's a "sports hero" alright. Too bad it was the steroids doing the pitching and not him. However this turns out, the only way he's going to get in the Hall of Fame is if he buys a ticket.
9
@ 8's right.
I guess we'll see what happens when more steroid guys make it to the ballot, but McGwire's showing isn't encouraging for any of them.
I guess we'll see what happens when more steroid guys make it to the ballot, but McGwire's showing isn't encouraging for any of them.
10
@8, steroids can't pitch. Steroids can't make you pitch better. There is no proven performance enhancement from steroids for a pitcher (and precious little for a batter). Pitching isn't about being strong. The biggest advantage he got was most likely quicker recovery time, especially as he aged. But it was still him pitching; you could pump you or me, or even his peers in MLB, so full of steroids our eyes were dripping with them and we couldn't get major league hitters out like him -- especially major league hitters who themselves were all jacked to the gills. Performance-enhancing drugs have ALWAYS been a part of baseball, and always will be.
11
@ 10, steroid CAN make your arm go a little faster. Yes, no official study* shows this but the anecdotal evidence is not to be dismissed for it. Anyone who watched baseball in the 90s knows this.
What other PED's are you thinking of? Greenies didn't E anyone's P.
*No official study exists because MLB and other sports don't want it to.
What other PED's are you thinking of? Greenies didn't E anyone's P.
*No official study exists because MLB and other sports don't want it to.
15
@13, any study using WHIP is automatically rejectable. WHIP doesn't mean anything. They need to do something with FIP or something like that. Also, no one is denying that there is "something unusual" about Clemens; being the best pitcher in the history of baseball (since Lefty Grove, at least) is pretty damned unusual. And need I say "correlation is not causation" -- an unusual curve in his career performance (which those graphs are not proven to be) hardly proves that it's because of steroids or anything else. Bad science -- TERRIBLE science.
@11, I'm not sure I believe that "steroids make your arm go a little faster", and even if I did pitching has little to do with making your arm go faster. Clemens had mind-bogglingly great mechanics from Day One -- he, like most great pitchers, pitched mostly with his ass, not just his arm.
Like I said, the biggest benefit of steroids for a pitcher is recovery from injury, which is important, because pitching IS injury -- when a pitcher is "warming up", what he's doing is breaking lots and lots of capillaries in his arm, allowing the muscle to fill with blood and become much more supple. A big-league pitcher's arm after a game is a hideous sight -- although you will rarely see one, because it will be covered end to end with ice.
Greenies absolutely ARE performance-enhancing -- they're speed. You think speed doesn't improve your get-up-and-go? They used to eat them out of a bowl on the training table. Vitamin shots are performance-enhancing, or should I say "vitamin" shots -- no one really knows what in the hell was in the pharmaceutical cocktails that used to be commonplace (and not just in sports; JFK received constant massive injections of a wide variety of drugs all through his presidency). The players used to joke about "horse tranquilizers". Early steroidal preparations go back to the 60s.
Of course, the most prevalent PE drug was always alcohol, though how much enhancement players, who frequently took the field drunk, were getting. Certainly kept you loose!
I would argue that diet is the biggest performance enhancer of all. And fitness routines, which are infinitely more involved now than just pumping more more more iron. Using science to enhance the performance of particular kinds of muscle-firing isn't any different than taking a substance, really. And Kale is a "substance".
Sports have always been a doper's paradise. And today, they have the magic of stuff that can't be detected at all; the authorities have to rely on mysterious measures like the ratio of different kinds of "natural" hormones in the body, which theoretically should be within certain ranges (as Lance Armstrong). Newer things can't even be detected that way. You think players don't take advantage of that? With the fitness regimens they pursue now?
More...
@11, I'm not sure I believe that "steroids make your arm go a little faster", and even if I did pitching has little to do with making your arm go faster. Clemens had mind-bogglingly great mechanics from Day One -- he, like most great pitchers, pitched mostly with his ass, not just his arm.
Like I said, the biggest benefit of steroids for a pitcher is recovery from injury, which is important, because pitching IS injury -- when a pitcher is "warming up", what he's doing is breaking lots and lots of capillaries in his arm, allowing the muscle to fill with blood and become much more supple. A big-league pitcher's arm after a game is a hideous sight -- although you will rarely see one, because it will be covered end to end with ice.
Greenies absolutely ARE performance-enhancing -- they're speed. You think speed doesn't improve your get-up-and-go? They used to eat them out of a bowl on the training table. Vitamin shots are performance-enhancing, or should I say "vitamin" shots -- no one really knows what in the hell was in the pharmaceutical cocktails that used to be commonplace (and not just in sports; JFK received constant massive injections of a wide variety of drugs all through his presidency). The players used to joke about "horse tranquilizers". Early steroidal preparations go back to the 60s.
Of course, the most prevalent PE drug was always alcohol, though how much enhancement players, who frequently took the field drunk, were getting. Certainly kept you loose!
I would argue that diet is the biggest performance enhancer of all. And fitness routines, which are infinitely more involved now than just pumping more more more iron. Using science to enhance the performance of particular kinds of muscle-firing isn't any different than taking a substance, really. And Kale is a "substance".
Sports have always been a doper's paradise. And today, they have the magic of stuff that can't be detected at all; the authorities have to rely on mysterious measures like the ratio of different kinds of "natural" hormones in the body, which theoretically should be within certain ranges (as Lance Armstrong). Newer things can't even be detected that way. You think players don't take advantage of that? With the fitness regimens they pursue now?
16
Does Jeopardy attach since it's prosecutorial misconduct? I would think based on my limited understanding of the law that this can't be retried.
17
@10 Partial Credit.
Steroids help you work out longer and more frequently, but you actually have to work out! That extra effort is rewarded with more lean muscle, which will of course result in increased performance. Clemens was famous in the second half of his career for his strenuous workout regimen, yet always looked super bloated. Combine that with super outlier performance, and it's pretty much case closed on steroid (Deca) use, if you know anything about gear.
Steroids do not help you study film or devise strategies or increase concentration during actual performance. Barry Bonds hit homers 500 ft because of steroids, but he made perfect contact on strikes because of film study and practice.
This is why the beatification of Griffey for not juicing is hilarious: he was the laziest HOF talent ever. Being able to work out more was never on his agenda.
And the lack of published studies is directly related to the fact that the most popular steroids were created in the 50's & 60's and are therefore not profitable for Big Pharma. But to say there is no proof of effectiveness is simply ridiculous. The proof is all around you: millions of men in the past 30+ years have used them safely and gained lean muscle mass they would not have otherwise developed.
/soapbox
Steroids help you work out longer and more frequently, but you actually have to work out! That extra effort is rewarded with more lean muscle, which will of course result in increased performance. Clemens was famous in the second half of his career for his strenuous workout regimen, yet always looked super bloated. Combine that with super outlier performance, and it's pretty much case closed on steroid (Deca) use, if you know anything about gear.
Steroids do not help you study film or devise strategies or increase concentration during actual performance. Barry Bonds hit homers 500 ft because of steroids, but he made perfect contact on strikes because of film study and practice.
This is why the beatification of Griffey for not juicing is hilarious: he was the laziest HOF talent ever. Being able to work out more was never on his agenda.
And the lack of published studies is directly related to the fact that the most popular steroids were created in the 50's & 60's and are therefore not profitable for Big Pharma. But to say there is no proof of effectiveness is simply ridiculous. The proof is all around you: millions of men in the past 30+ years have used them safely and gained lean muscle mass they would not have otherwise developed.
/soapbox
19
@8 yes, but this isn't a pun. a pun is when you make up a word to fit, where it has two meanings, but isn't an actual word. for instance, whenever my mom heard a pun, she'd comment, "oh, you're so punny!" (and i think puns are aweful, though they can have a place.)
a "play on words" occurs when you use an actual word that has two meanings. such as, in the movie, "wit," where the king requests a joke me made about him, and the reply is, "but the king is not a subject."
i'm not sure this headline is a pun or a play on words, though. i'm only commenting because this is one of the few things i actually know. and, to be honest, i'm not entirely sure i'm right.
a "play on words" occurs when you use an actual word that has two meanings. such as, in the movie, "wit," where the king requests a joke me made about him, and the reply is, "but the king is not a subject."
i'm not sure this headline is a pun or a play on words, though. i'm only commenting because this is one of the few things i actually know. and, to be honest, i'm not entirely sure i'm right.
20
PED's improve your mechanics because they build your muscles.. Why do you think, after they got steroids out of the game, that 40 HRs in a season became an impressive number again?
Speed doesn't do that. It doesn't enhance your muscles in any way. It doesn't improve your stamina. It just ensures you won't fall asleep on the job.
You're absolutely right as far as natural ability, training, work ethic, and all the other things that make a great athlete great. But cheating is cheating. Taking PED's - real PED's - are a form of cheating.
Speed doesn't do that. It doesn't enhance your muscles in any way. It doesn't improve your stamina. It just ensures you won't fall asleep on the job.
You're absolutely right as far as natural ability, training, work ethic, and all the other things that make a great athlete great. But cheating is cheating. Taking PED's - real PED's - are a form of cheating.
21
@ 16, they can't try someone a second time when a trial has been completed and a verdict rendered. A mistrial doesn't render a verdict, so as 5280 says, the prosecution is free to make as many further attempts as they want until a jury comes to a unanimous decision.
22
BTW, Fnarf, there was a lot more on that link than WHIP (and way to be old fashioned - you're not going to find a credible GM who agrees with your assessment of that stat). I mostly presented it because of the raw data - all the other improvements. If I can find something showing that his fastball started getting faster, which was what I was looking for when I found that, I'll throw it out there.
24
@21 Perhaps, but then why are they having a hearing in September about whether the judge is going to allow a retrial? It would seem to imply that in federal court if the prosecution screws the pooch badly enough, the case can get permanently tossed if a judge says so. Maybe that's not the case, but why the hearing?
@23 Clemens is indeed a dick. Although I was often impressed with his pitching, I never liked him, always thought he was one of the biggest maroons to ever achieve his level of accomplishment. I'm not sure what would be served by sending him to jail, though. He's in no danger of repeating his juiced career, he wasn't any sort of ringleader, and jail won't make him any smarter.
@23 Clemens is indeed a dick. Although I was often impressed with his pitching, I never liked him, always thought he was one of the biggest maroons to ever achieve his level of accomplishment. I'm not sure what would be served by sending him to jail, though. He's in no danger of repeating his juiced career, he wasn't any sort of ringleader, and jail won't make him any smarter.
25
@ 24, I believe it's because they have to refile the case, but I'm not sure. 5280 is a lawyer, so if he says they can do it as much as they like, I believe him.
Anyway, the only reason I support the decision to prosecute Clemens is because people who break the law should be prosecuted, no matter who they are. That's not to day that the government isn't mostly motivated by the publicity and the boosts to the investigators' and attorneys' careers, though.
Anyway, the only reason I support the decision to prosecute Clemens is because people who break the law should be prosecuted, no matter who they are. That's not to day that the government isn't mostly motivated by the publicity and the boosts to the investigators' and attorneys' careers, though.
26
@22, his fastball WASN'T faster, it was slower. One of the remarkable things about Clemens is that he was able to maintain his effectiveness after his fastest pitch was gone. He was famous for his fastball when he was first coming into the league. But speed isn't everything; movement and placement is.
Another example: when Randy Johnson was at his fastest, he wasn't that great a pitcher; when he was at his performance peak, he was no longer a 100+ wildman. He learned how to PITCH. Likewise: Nolan Ryan was a better pitcher after he lost some of his famous speed (not BECAUSE of it, mind you).
And I'm not interested in what GMs think, though you're wrong about some of the smart ones. The fact is WHIP is last-century thinking. Since BABIP (batting average on balls in play) is pretty much random, or fielding-dependent, especially for pitchers, and the occurrence of hits is too, the H portion of WHIP is worthless. Pitchers excel by controlling the things they have a hand in, i.e., (a) not giving up walks, (b) not giving up home runs (and to a lesser extent extra bases), and (c) inducing ground balls.
Please read up on FIP and DIP before calling me "old-fashinoed". The fact is, individual pitchers do not have the ability to affect the rate of hits on balls in play, other than keeping them on the ground (which is better measured directly).
Pure power has very little to do with pitching success. What pure power does indicate, early in a pitcher's career, is an increased likelihood of longevity, providing his workload isn't too high when he's young and his mechanics are solid.
Another example: when Randy Johnson was at his fastest, he wasn't that great a pitcher; when he was at his performance peak, he was no longer a 100+ wildman. He learned how to PITCH. Likewise: Nolan Ryan was a better pitcher after he lost some of his famous speed (not BECAUSE of it, mind you).
And I'm not interested in what GMs think, though you're wrong about some of the smart ones. The fact is WHIP is last-century thinking. Since BABIP (batting average on balls in play) is pretty much random, or fielding-dependent, especially for pitchers, and the occurrence of hits is too, the H portion of WHIP is worthless. Pitchers excel by controlling the things they have a hand in, i.e., (a) not giving up walks, (b) not giving up home runs (and to a lesser extent extra bases), and (c) inducing ground balls.
Please read up on FIP and DIP before calling me "old-fashinoed". The fact is, individual pitchers do not have the ability to affect the rate of hits on balls in play, other than keeping them on the ground (which is better measured directly).
Pure power has very little to do with pitching success. What pure power does indicate, early in a pitcher's career, is an increased likelihood of longevity, providing his workload isn't too high when he's young and his mechanics are solid.
27
@24, it gets complicated. While a mistrial is never a bar to re-trying a case, the judge can impose sanctions on a party whose attorneys fuck up badly enough, up to and including complete dismissal of the case. I wasn't there in the courtroom, so I can't say for sure that's what's happening here, but it could happen.
Now, will it happen is another thing altogether. Probably not. Almost certainly not, in fact. That's a mighty heavy-duty sanction, and is almost never imposed.
Now, will it happen is another thing altogether. Probably not. Almost certainly not, in fact. That's a mighty heavy-duty sanction, and is almost never imposed.
28
Got a link for that (his fastball speed)? That's something that would tend to favor your position if true, and something that needs to be considered.
And thanks for being a bit patronizing - I'm a baseball fan, too, and know that the best pitchers have a mix of them. I lived in Seattle when Randy was pitching, in case you've forgotten.
As far as WHIP, you're a bit off there. While the quality of fielders undoubtedly has an impact, I'd wager it's negligible. You can't assume that some fielders could make the play better than other fielders, and most hits are balls that no one could catch because the batter found that spot that couldn't be covered. So, calling it "worthless" is extreme. Again, you're not going to find anyone in the game who will discount it.
Now, "wins" might be a worthless stat these days...
And thanks for being a bit patronizing - I'm a baseball fan, too, and know that the best pitchers have a mix of them. I lived in Seattle when Randy was pitching, in case you've forgotten.
As far as WHIP, you're a bit off there. While the quality of fielders undoubtedly has an impact, I'd wager it's negligible. You can't assume that some fielders could make the play better than other fielders, and most hits are balls that no one could catch because the batter found that spot that couldn't be covered. So, calling it "worthless" is extreme. Again, you're not going to find anyone in the game who will discount it.
Now, "wins" might be a worthless stat these days...
29
@25 I agree with you in principle. For example, I would desperately like to see John Yoo and George Bush tried for their crimes against humanity. I'd love to see a few Republican senators and governors tried for their misdeeds, too. That doesn't seem to be happening, though. For shmegeges like Clemens, who was at the bottom, not the top, of the steroid foodchain, and was little more than a user in the scheme of things, and has the intellect of a 10-year-old, it just doesn't seem as pressing.
@27 Thanks for the clarification.
@27 Thanks for the clarification.
30
@29, huh? "You can't assume that some fielders could make the play better than other fielders"? You most definitely can. The quality of fielders varies ENORMOUSLY. So does the random distribution of the location of batted balls.
I'll say it again: pitchers have no control over which fair batted balls are hits or not. Aside from the ground ball effect, which is mostly because a ground ball can't fly over the fence. Pitchers have no control over whether their fly balls go over the fence or not.
I'm not being condescending; I'm simply correcting your misapprehensions about the state of baseball statistics, which is at least a decade old. WHIP simply isn't interesting. Whether most GMs think so or not, I think you would be surprised at the extent to which stat analysts employed by MLB clubs do, in fact, care more about FIP or its equivalents than WHIP.
I could also point out that the Freakonomics data doesn't adjust for park or league (Clemens moved to the NL, which is and was a much worse-hitting league). This is an adjustment with a pedigree going back at least 35 years.
Don't believe me? Look up "Voros McCracken" and go from there. This was all the rage in the stathead community a decade ago, and is commonly accepted now.
Start here: http://www.ussmariner.com/2006/08/29/eva…
I'll say it again: pitchers have no control over which fair batted balls are hits or not. Aside from the ground ball effect, which is mostly because a ground ball can't fly over the fence. Pitchers have no control over whether their fly balls go over the fence or not.
I'm not being condescending; I'm simply correcting your misapprehensions about the state of baseball statistics, which is at least a decade old. WHIP simply isn't interesting. Whether most GMs think so or not, I think you would be surprised at the extent to which stat analysts employed by MLB clubs do, in fact, care more about FIP or its equivalents than WHIP.
I could also point out that the Freakonomics data doesn't adjust for park or league (Clemens moved to the NL, which is and was a much worse-hitting league). This is an adjustment with a pedigree going back at least 35 years.
Don't believe me? Look up "Voros McCracken" and go from there. This was all the rage in the stathead community a decade ago, and is commonly accepted now.
Start here: http://www.ussmariner.com/2006/08/29/eva…
31
@26 -
Agree with you on the 'learning to pitch' angle. Experienced pitchers = better pitchers. However, I find your initial statement on steriods somewhat confusing in that light.
Steroids and HGH both allow pitchers to gain strength and recover faster. The net effect with a talented pitcher is that they can extend their career, and continue to gain experience instead of being sidelined by repetive use injury.
So, steriods do benefit a subset of pitchers - those with talent and a work ethic - by enhancing their ability to stay in the league longer.
Agree with you on the 'learning to pitch' angle. Experienced pitchers = better pitchers. However, I find your initial statement on steriods somewhat confusing in that light.
Steroids and HGH both allow pitchers to gain strength and recover faster. The net effect with a talented pitcher is that they can extend their career, and continue to gain experience instead of being sidelined by repetive use injury.
So, steriods do benefit a subset of pitchers - those with talent and a work ethic - by enhancing their ability to stay in the league longer.
32
@ 30, we'll have to agree to disagree on the quality of fielders. And I do know about how much more sabermetrics are valued these days; but just because WHIP isn't sexy anymore, doesn't mean its invalid.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
All You Motherfuckers Complaining That aPodments Are Too Small at 200 Square Feet by Dominic Holden
-
SL Letter of the Day: Did You Think I Was Going To Tell You Not To Come Out? (PLUS: Help Free Kate!) by Dan Savage
-
Rightwing Anti-Gay French Activist Commits Suicide at Notre Dame Cathedral by Dan Savage
-
Spoiled Rotten: Star Trek Into Darkness by Paul Constant
-
There Are No Atheists In Foxholes by Dan Savage
-
America's Epidemic of Toddler-on-Toddler Gun Violence Continues by Goldy
-
Well-Regulated Beaverton Militia Accidentally Fires Shot into Neighbor's Bedroom by Goldy
-
Saint Genet Re-Creates "Shoot" by Brendan Kiley
-
Dutch Artist Turns Dead Cat into Remote-Controlled Helicopter by Bethany Jean Clement
-
Puggle: Love It or Shove It by Grant Brissey
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (33) RSS