tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17539316.post114959158619376169..comments2023-11-05T04:11:01.411-05:00Comments on Vinny and the Hornless Rhino: Captains v. ClemensHornless Rhinohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04358963520899550238noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17539316.post-1149629009797489302006-06-06T17:23:00.000-04:002006-06-06T17:23:00.000-04:00This is what Pup had to say, and my response:Hey r...This is what Pup had to say, and my response:<BR/><BR/>Hey rhinoass, that piece is a crock of shit. First Clemens was not traded to Toronto. The Red Sox chose to not sign him. Then had the nerve to say he was in the twilight of his career. So after working his ass off, as he has his entire life, he came back to prove Boston wrong. <BR/><BR/>From 1993 to 1996, Clemens was 40-39. His ERA was 3.78 in those years. The AL ERA was over 5 in that same stretch, so I guess he was still pretty good. Over those 4 years, Clemens pitched 743 innings and struck out 717 batters. Pretty solid numbers if you ask me. In his last year in Boston, he went 10-13, but that was probably not his fault. In 34 starts, he threw 6 complete games and 2 shutouts. He threw 242 innings and struck out 257. Obviously washed up. <BR/><BR/>Did he battle through some injuries in that time? Yes he did, and that is why he did not strike out over 200 guys during those 3 years. <BR/><BR/>His last season in Boston, he struck out 257. His first year in Toronto he struck out 292, not the 226 you incorrectly stated. <BR/><BR/>In 2 of those years, 1994 and 1996, he finished 2nd and 7th in the AL in ERA. <BR/>1994 he allowed the fewest hits per inning in the AL. In '96, he was second. <BR/>1994, he finished 2nd in k's/9 innings <BR/>1996, he was first in k's/9 innings. <BR/>1994 finished 2nd in total strikeouts. <BR/>1996 finished first. <BR/>If you are really going to write something like that, please use the proper facts.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Response:<BR/><BR/>You are absolutely right about the strikeout numbers and the circumstances under which he joined the Blue Jays. No excuses--"rhino-ass" it is. You are right, and I am wrong. I will post your comments on my site so that everybody knows that. <BR/><BR/>Now, you cite several stats to make the point that Clemens was better than the average pitcher during the mid-1990s. I would hope so. I mean, when you start out as Roger Clemens, do you have to fall to the level of a guy like Rich Yett before people can say that your "career appeared to be on a downward path?" <BR/><BR/>You do seem to grudgingly acknowledge that Clemens' productivity was down in comparison to his prior accomplishments during the mid-1990s, although you attribute that mostly to injuries. That's okay with me--as players age, they get hurt, and it affects their performance. <BR/><BR/>It's what happened next that bothers me. Even though he was already in his mid 30s and had a lot of mileage on him, Clemens overcame his injuries to pitch not only effectively, but often brilliantly, into his 40s. Sorry, but after the events of the last several years, I'm a little suspicious about a player who seems to age like fine wine. <BR/><BR/>I agree that I'm "rhino-ass" for getting some of the stats wrong in my piece, but if you don't like hearing people voice suspicions about how Roger Clemens has been able to defy the effects of time, I've got a feeling you're in for a long summer.Hornless Rhinohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04358963520899550238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17539316.post-1149620455629094042006-06-06T15:00:00.000-04:002006-06-06T15:00:00.000-04:00Come on over to swerbsblurbs message board so I ca...Come on over to swerbsblurbs message board so I can rip you a new a$$hole about Clemens!<BR/><BR/>PupAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com