In the process of reporting this story in today's Newsday, Astros owner Drayton McLane told me that he and team president Tal Smith met with Roger Clemens and his agents, Alan and Randy Hendricks, last December, following the release of the Mitchell Report.
The issue about Clemens pitching in 2008 came up. "They were totally undecided," McLane said. "They said they'd let us know when they were ready to talk."
That meeting took place before Clemens' case snowballed into the monster it is now, of course. At that time, it seemed feasible that Clemens could make a go at another half-season, especially back in the National League, after his 2007 with the Yankees left some people disappointed. And hey, there are Mitchell Report perpetrators all over the major leagues. The Astros shortstop, Miguel Tejada, is being investigated by the U.S. Department of Justice for perjury, just like Clemens.
Now, however, you can probably bet against such a comeback. A person close to Clemens told me that a fifth "unretirement" seems very unlikely, since Clemens is battling multiple battles with the DOJ investigation, the defamation lawsuit against Brian McNamee and the reports dealing with his infidelitities.
Gotta run right now. I'll try to check in later with more...
UPDATE, 12:54 p.m.: Very sorry about that. I intended to start this blog last night, after the Mets game, but I fell asleep around the fifth inning. So I didn't have enough time this morning, and I had to take my son to school and run a few errands...yada yada yada. Here I am.
Back to Clemens, it sounds like it's for the best that he's retiring. The Yankees can't take him back, not after they were hurt more than anyone else by the Mitchell Report, and not with Andy Pettitte in their clubhouse. As for the Astros, McLane wouldn't rule out bringing back Clemens, but it sounded like a longshot.
"I think a lot needs to develop, in my opinion," McLane said. "I think there's got to be a lot of questions answered."
When asked, in a follow-up e-mail, what those questions would be, McLane responded, "1) Does Roger want to pitch again; 2) What will result from the congressional investigation; 3) What are the Houston Astros’ needs, etc."
The answer to number 1 appears to be "No." Number 2 could take years to answer. As for number 3, the Astros would certainly be a better team with Clemens taking the ball every fifth day. But it appears to be a moot issue.
I was chatting with one of Newsday's copy editors, Greg Gutes, yesterday, and we were wondering how much better off Clemens would've been if, the day the Mitchell Report was released, he put out a statement confirming the illegal PED usage, with something like, "As a competitor, I couldn't handle not being the best anymore, so I bought into the culture at the time. I wish I could do it all over again."
Greg thinks that Clemens would be in dramatically better shape. I think that he would still be in pretty bad shape. Obviously, Clemens' family wouldn't have been dragged into this, but his Hall of Fame candidacy, and his status as one of the best pitchers of all-time, would be shattered nonetheless. Thoughts?
Agent: Tell you what, sir. From now on, you'll be, uh, Homer Thompson
at Terror Lake. Let's just practice a bit, hmm? When I say,
"Hello, Mr. Thompson," you'll say, "Hi."
Homer: Check.
Agent: Hello, Mr. Thompson.
Homer: [stares blankly]
Agent: Remember now, your name is Homer Thompson.
Homer: I gotcha.
Agent: Hello, Mr. Thompson.
Homer: [stares blankly]
[A long time later]
Agent: [sighs in frustration] Now, when I say, "Hello, Mr. Thompson,"
and press down on your foot, you smile and nod.
Homer: No problem.
Agent: Hello, Mr. Thompson! [stomps on Homer's foot a few times]
Homer: [stares blankly]
[to other agent] I think he's talking to _you_.
Any team that signs Perez to a long-term contract this winter is out of its mind.
Comments (16)
Up to "Day 9" on the tabloid of record's frint page.
Do they think this is the Iranian hostage crisis?
Breaking News on CNN: Roger Clemens was just seen buying decaf coffee and an "everything" bagel before leaving the store alone and departing in an SUV.
Maybe it's a good thing that newspapers are folding around the country. Evidently there isn't enough real news to keep them in business.
It's funny to imagine these owners looking at the cover of the Mitchell report and then immediately chucking it like it was a telephone book from seven years ago.
Or maybe flipping through it looking only at the handwritten notes and cancelled checks, then chucking it.
Anon:
They tossed the Mitchell Report aside because they knew exactly what was in it or had their suspicions of its content.
--
Jim:
I have contacted the Why-team and given them examples of lawyers that say the sexcapades cannot be admitted in court. They responded by saying they have professors who say it can. Let's see if they fairly report by citing both sides or simply created a hit piece that fits their story line.
They also failed to respond to my question of whether a current players' extramarital activity or if they are gay are appropriate areas to cover in an interview.
I am convinced that the Lords of Baseball (sometimes I miss Dick Young) and front office executives knew all about PED use by players years ago and looked the other way. The Mitchell Report was all about PR and getting Congress off the backs of the owners. Why else appoint George Mitchell?
The Mets had no idea what was going on in their own clubhouse? The Giants had no idea what Bonds was up to? The Yankees didn't know what Giambi was doing, especially when he asked for the removal of a crucial clause from a draft contract the team had prepared? I can go on and on.
No need to go into all of Clemens' shortcomings, which have been discussed ad naseum. The problem is making harmful accusations without much proof, if any. This two week long character assassination and airing of private matters is over the top. I'll bet there are plenty of worried pro athletes that are now worried the moral police are snooping on them. Unfortunately, adultery isn't limited to athletes, but it extends into front offices, the media, etc.
Personally, I would have liked Clemens to win a blockbuster award against McNamee because I like McNamee even less than Clemens.
I'll say it again: Clemens will drop the suit within two weeks and make peace with McNamee, using his concern for McNamee's family and his own as the reason.
Giambi asking for the steroids clause to be removed from his contract certainly should've raised a red flag with the Yankees, however, it had very little meaning. It was by no means a crucial clause.
There's a clause in all player contracts giving the team the right to void it for doing illegal things, including illegal drug use. And there's another clause detailing specific things they can void the contract for, including using steroids. There's a lot of things in that clause, such as playing other sports, motorcycle riding, and various other risky things.
It's *really* common for that list of banned things to be written during negotiations. Sometimes they'll just strike out a thing or two (for example, Mike Mussina's contract allows him to play basketball, whereas most don't). Other times they'll essentially rewrite the list. I'm assuming Giambi's agent rewrote the list and only included the important items.
Anyway, the Yankees didn't care that he didn't include steroid use in the list of banned things because illegal drug use is already explicitly banned. Steroids would only become an issue if the government decided to make steroids legal during the term of Giambi contract.
I wonder if Tejada and Roger would share their juice with each other? McLane is absolutely clueless.
Hey Ken.
LOL on the Simpson reference. I remember the episode and Home appeared to be 'deaf.'
Seems like Perez got the memo from Randolph & Peterson: 'Don't walk anyone.' Unfortunately, so did the Dodgers and they smacked Perez' pitches like they were gently placed on a tee.
Following up on yesterday's blog (complaining), I can't stomach watching Castillo. He's a slap hitter, a punch & judy victim from the '70's. Whenever we need a fly ball, he takes that check swing and grounds out. Release his as*.
~H
Love the Simpson reference, dead on. The look on Peterson's face is priceless. I wonder how OP would do with an Chicago style manager.
Clemens should drop the suit, he can't win.
Regarding:
"Personally, I would have liked Clemens to win a blockbuster award against McNamee because I like McNamee even less than Clemens."
I understand the sentiment, although I find Clemens loathesome trash. That said, he cannot win, MCNamee got the DOJ stamp of approval re truthfulness. That does not mean he is telling the truth, just that there's enough there to clear any civil libel hurdle. Roger is tilting at windmills, with predictable results.
One of the funniest Simpsons moments ever.
Ken I am supremely bored of this steroids stuff. It happened, they did it and I would rather read about baseball. Of course Clemens has handled it as bad as he possibly could. I mean you dont have to be in PR to realize that.
But if he wants to pitch and a team wants him to pitch for them, I see no reason why he should retire.
Well Mr. Burns had done it. The power plant had won it,
with Roger Clemens clucking all the while.
Mile Scioscia's tragic illness made us smile.
While Wade Boggs lay unconscious on the bar room tile.
We're talkin softball, from Maine to SanDiego.
Talkin' softball: Mattingly and Conseco.
Ken Griffey's grotesquely swollen jaw;
Steve Sax and his run-ins with the law.
Were talkin Homer, Ozzie and the Straw
The clause in Giambi's contract was crucial from the standpoint it would have given them a legal justification to try and void the contract. The team's attorney's believed the other clause wouldn't have done it and thus they have been saddled with the contract. Or, could it be the team was fearful that Giambi would have claimed in court that the Yankees knew exactly what he had been doing and thus had some complicity? It's a mystery, although many of us think the front offices of every team in both leagues knew exactly what was going in.
I'm sick of the steroids thing, too and even more sick of Clemens. I don't care if he plays or not.
I am anxious to see how Igawa handles the Tigers Friday night. They have a very good hitting lineup but it's a pitcher's park.
Howard! Where've you been? Hope all is well with you and the fam.
Jim, the Yankees would have to have been mind-numbingly stupid to not realize what Giambi was doing back in December of '01. I'm sure if, issued truth serum, they'd tell you that they hoped Giambi kept taking steroids, in order to maintain his production.
Ken, you confirmed my point. For a while, I thought I was a lone voice crying out in the wilderness. But, the Yankees were no different than any other team. I don't think any of them are "innocent."
It will be interesting to see how Kennedy does in his start at SWB.
If Giambi keeps stinking up the place, do the Yankees ever get to the point where they release him? Can they keep a .150 hitter on the team the entire season based only on the hope that he might start hitting or will pop some HRs from time to time? What do you think Ken? Obviously there is no slam-dunk replacement for him. Do they hang in there with him through the year and then make a run at Mark Teixeira for 2009?
Jim, I think that, as I type this, I'm sitting in the Yankee Stadium press box, and I'm intending to write a Giambi column for tomorrow. Just don't tell any of the competing media folk ;)
Speaking of competing media folk, I thought Joel Sherman made an excellent point on his blog recently. How can the Yankees make a run at Teixeira when they might need to keep first base open for Jeter and/or Posada?
Ken the Yankees are made of money so it would be no problem going after Texeria (who will be a major bust if he comes to the Yanks).
And Posada is a very good hitting catcher, but probably would be average as a 1B. Jeter has at least 4 years left at Short.