An op-ed in the Times today reports statistics that may disappoint juicing ball players:
But in a complex team sport like baseball, do the drugs make a difference sufficient to be detected in the players’ performance records? An examination of the data on the players featured in the Mitchell report suggests that in most cases the drugs had either little or a negative effect.
Specifically about Clemens, the op-ed authors, Jonathan R. Cole and Stephen M. Stigler, write:
Roger Clemens is a case in point: a great pitcher before 1998, a great (if increasingly fragile) pitcher after he is supposed to have received treatment. But when we compared Clemens’s E.R.A. through 1997 with his E.R.A. from 1998 on, it was worse by 0.32 in the later period.
Oh that sucks; sticking a needle in your buttocks and getting no return.