Thumper

I'll take anyone's word who's actually admitted to using steroids over those still denying for the most part. Maybe not 100% but Canseco sure has been right most of the time when pointing out the juicers. He's got nothing to lose so he may as well take others down.

I still believe the "The bigger the lie, the more people will believe it." However, if Clemens DOES indeed prove himself innocent I'll be the first one to apologize for not believing him. However, I still say he's a lying cheating bastard who's lied his way to Congress.

I watched it. I laughed. Congress is gonna burn a hole into Clemens's legacy.

Clemen's journey to conviction of perjury begins. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080104/ap_on_sp_ba_ne/bbo_congress_clemens

After seing 2003 Beckett, I thought it would be great to have him on the team. His 2006 stuff wasn't bad, but wasn't what I had hoped for, this year he came back as the Ace. And I agree with Jacko, Blanton won't be no Ace or star pitcher, but he'll keep the game going. He's got the stuff to stay in the game long enough and still do some damage. And like I said before, John Farrell is a great pitching coash, I think if he and Blanton worked together and did some fine tuning, he'll come back even more so decent in a Red Sox uniform.

It's an unofficial rumor, this Blanton deal. Regardless it's a good deal because look, in the past, most big stars we aquired either went to s*** or didn't perform well. Matsuzaka, highly overanticipated, did good, but not like we thought he would. Eric Gagne, was suppose to be another beast of a reliever and ended up costing us about 3 games when it counted, AND decided to give us all heart attacks in Game 4 when he stood up in the bullpen. Where as you look at a not so anticipated, Beckett, who came in last year with good stuff with the exception of the ERA and a higher loss record, he improved and now look at him. This is why I feel if we got Santana, it would flop, where as if we get Blanton, he may not start out great (but I don't see him as a flop loser) but I think in a season's time he could possible be worked like Beckett and come back stronger.

See that's why I think if Blanton comes to Boston and work with Farrell, he'll turn his carrer in for the better.

I compared Blanton to Beckett for 2007 for my own health and from what I saw, what one did poor in, the other was better at. Blanton had a better ERA at home, Beckett had a better ERA away. Blanton had a lower ERA this season against the Yankees. Beckett had an all around better ERA, but let's also think back to the 2006 5.01 ERA Beckett. I think of Blanton as a pre-2007 Beckett. I feel if they gave Blanton that same talk they had with Beckett and worked with him, we'd have ourselves a decent player. Not an Ace, but with John Farrell as the pitching coach I think we'd have ourselves a good pitcher that could deliver. I'll take Blanton over Santana, Blanton has room to improve, he's not at that point where he's locked in on his way of pitching, he can be taught. That and he won't cost us another pitcher and/or a bat. Crisp, who's not bad himself, is worth giving up over with prospects for this pitcher. I really hope Theo jumps on this offer. EDIT: Now what would be a nice set up is not only taking this deal, but giving up Lester and a prospect for Santana. 1. Beckett 2. Schilling 3. Santana 4. Blanton 5. Buccholz Now that's a rotation.

Maybe he wants to flip him gay? Oh wait that's Billy Bean. I don't know why they would want Coco personally, but if it gets us a decent pitcher, Theo would make it happen, and I agree bosoxnation07, this is a Theo sort of trade.

Clemens swore! He MUST be telling the truth!

It would definitely save us from losing Ellsbury (Oh yeah, I went there) or Lester. Crisp is good, but I do think he's expendable plus a prospect or two for Joe Blanton is a steal. Now Blanton isn't as good as Santana, in my own opinion, but he's younger and has time to get better, like Beckett did when he came to Boston. I'd take this deal over Santana at the fact it wouldn't cost as much and we still come out on top.

Oh don't get me wrong, you're entitled to those thoughts and feeling by all means. I'm just not one for morbid things. Atheltes or not.

That stuff's too morbid for me. I wouldn't make fun of a dead person like that. Especially Ted Williams. I don't see how people CAN find humor in it? Like Letterman's bit on Ted after his death bugged me. It's not right.

Well no need to get detailed. It's simple, you cause an accident and no one dies, you go to jail for life. You kill someone, you die. I would say eye for an eye but then you'd get too many liberals bitching about how inhumane it is. And back to the topic, as far as celebrities are concerned, f*** them they're people to, punish them like people. I don't care if Tom Hanks is my favorite actor, if he decides he's gonna go party and drink while he's zooming down Hollywood Blvd and kills someone in a collision, behind the bars he goes. For good.

Or in the eyes of a Yankees fan, Mitchell hid the goods on Ortiz, Ramirez, Nixon, Garciaparra, Varitek, Beckett, and others. Because they had to have juiced! Good stats there Bill.

Well like I said before, as much as I'd hate to see it, unless players are proven to have used, not alleged, have no reason not to be in, whether it's Bonds or Gonzalez. And as much as you "know" they juiced, they just weren't proven. And yeah it would suck to see that happen. The only time I'd call an arguement would be if someone was found guilty of using steroids and still inducted, even if it was a 1 time failed test, you still did it. You can't pick and choose a degree of how bad someone did it and whether or not that determines their punishment. It's all or none, I choose all. I don't think any federal charges would be needed, but loss of Hall of Fame bid, if applicable, and erasing of any records, awards, and numbers achieved during the time found of using. Another thing, I know Rose was banned, and I know there's not much that can be done, but the day a guilty juicer is inducted is the day Pete Rose better get unbanned.

Well the thing is it's that whole "innocent until proven guilty thing." Now common sense does prevail in me in that Bonds, Clemens, and any others who obviously juiced but haven't admitted to it should be disallowed entry into the Hall of Fame. But legal technicalities, they haven't been "proven" guilty of the crime. Therefore you'd have a big ol ordeal if you don't allow them in if they weren't proven to have used. And I know it's not the court judge's job to induct members, but hopefully the BBWAA or Veterans Committee have enough common sense to not induct obvious juicers.

The way I see it, unless they are proven guilty of, or admit to using, they should be allowed in. Should they admit to it or be found guilty after induction, it should be revoked. In addition I feel all numbers put up during the time of their using should be erased.

I went with a third option, Dodgers fan.

I'm in the same boat here with 26 to 6, I've never heard of this. If that's the case then why hasn't it be more publicized? Then if it comes out that he was using it during his time of play, well then he's just screwed himself.

Hey, let's do a little word association. I'll say a word, you then say the first word that comes to mind... Ready? TOMMY LASORDA.

Because if he was using PEDs then he'd have a lot less hits and a lot more home runs. Anyone with a good eye and a quick swing can get a hit, it's the juice that'll turn you into a power hitter.