Col Hogan wrote:JoltinJoe wrote:
According to the Mitchell Report:
Stanton started in 2003 while a Met.
Pettitte used HGH two to four times after 2002.
Knobloch first started using in 2001 as his career was on the downturn. Funny. The suffy didn't help him.
No one on the 1998 Yankees has ever been named.
The only Yankee on the 1999 team named as a user prior to 1999 was Clemens. And the Mitchell Report says he was off the stuff in 1999 (which seems confirmed by his miserable season).
joe, normally, your logic is nearly flawless....this time around, you seem to be playing the part of the scummy defense attorney who knows his client is guilty, but can't admit it...
Other's in this thread have shown that enough Yankees going well back into the 90's most likely were dirty...and their Championships are just a dirty as you imply the 04 and 07 Red Sox WS titles are...
I'm not going to defend the Sox because I now believe Jose Conseco's claims...he's been proven correct time after time after time...and I accept that ALL WS titles from, say, 91 to the present are tainted by 'roids...
So, joe, comes on over from the dark side....accept the truth...
I think you have to read the Mitchell Report. Yes, I completely and honestly believe that the 1998 Yankees were clean.
As the Mitchell Report concludes, steroids became introduced in the Yankee clubhouse when the Yankees traded David Wells to Toronto for Roger Clemens during Spring Training in 1999, but even then not right away.
Clemens met Brian McNamee in Toronto. And four so-so seasons to close his career in Boston, Clemens had absolutely two amazing seasons with Toronto, winning back-to-back Cy Youngs. The Yankees then traded David Wells and other for Clemens, ironically motivated by Clemens' reputation for hard workouts, which contrasted with Wells' reputation for being lazy.
In 1999, without McNamee, Clemens was no better than he had been with Boston in 1996. Yankee fans recall that Clemens' first WS ring was a gift. So I think I can also claim the '99 team was clean.
At Roger's urging, the Yankees hired McNamee as a trainer in mid-2000. Clemens had another unspectacular first half of the season in 2000. McNamee himself says Roger approached him in May or June and said he needed to get back on the juice. Thereafter, Clemens became the pitcher he had been in Toronto. He had a lights out second half of the year.
You hear so much about "Yankees" who were named in the Mitchell Report, but again the report plainly states that most of them started using steroids after their Yankee tenure.
Stanton started in 2003 with the Mets, supplied by Kirk Radomski. McNamee
denied ever supplying Stanton. McNamee further said Knobloch was not a juicer, but became aware McNamee could supply steroids and asked to start in 2001, as his career was heading downward. McNamee also says Pettitte never used steroids, and had limited use of HGH after 2003.
So soberly assessed there really is no evidence to indict the 1998 Yankees; and the evidence is weak against the 1999 Yankees, except for Clemens' involvement. But even McNamee says Clemens was not juicing in 1999.
In 2000, Clemens was juicing the second half of the season, but he was pretty much the only key contributor on the juice. As noted, Canseco was added late in the season as a role player. Other members of the 2000 Yankees who juiced in 2000 or earlier were also minor players and were added as the season progressed: Denny Neagle, Glen Allen Hill; and Jason Grimsley.
Other members of the 2000 Yankees named in the Mitchell Report also started using PED after 2000, according to McNamee: Knobloch (limited use in 2001); David Justice (limited use in 2001; denied by Justice and McNamee has sort of backed away from this accusation); Pettitte and Stanton (previously discussed).
So, if you are looking for a candid answer, probably the 2000 title is "tainted" under this standard, but not the 1998 or 1999 titles.
Now, before you accuse me of being a homer, I will note that I actually believe that what happened with Ramirez really doesn't taint the Red Sox titles. I think it is quite plausible that Manny started steroids in recent memory as his numbers began deteriorating, which might explain his remarkable second half of the 2008 season. In other words, what happened yesterday is not clear evidence to me that Manny was juicing in 2004 or 2007. Anything you read here to the contrary is intended to bust Travis, who hopefully has not read this far.
I do suspect strongly that members of the 2004 and 2007 Sox were juicing, but those are suspicisions, not fact. Ironically, I still think it is far more likely that one certain member of the Sox, someone other than Ramirez, was juicing in 2004 and 2007.
In fact, if you were to tell me -- for sure -- that one member of the Sox was juicing in 2004 and 2007, and I had to guess which one, I would still pick this player as the one, even after what we learned about Manny yesterday.
