Despite Roger's denials, McNamee still says Clemens was at Canseco's party

And University of Penn professors contradict the Hendricks brothers' analysis of Clemens' career stats(at bottom of post).

But first about the party, from Newsday:

Roger Clemens' former trainer, Brian McNamee, is prepared to tell a congressional hearing Wednesday that he has a "vivid recollection" of the pitcher describing a scene at a party in Miami in 1998 that McNamee says he and Clemens attended. Clemens, however, has denied being at the party.

The sources say McNamee's recollection involves Clemens' wife, Debbie, and Jessica Canseco, who at the time was the wife of Jose Canseco, Clemens' teammate. Although McNamee was not in the room at the time, he says Clemens later told him about how the two women were comparing their own physiques, discussing who had the better build, the sources say.

In an effort to undermine the credibility of McNamee -- who has said he injected Clemens with steroids and human growth hormone -- Clemens' attorney, Rusty Hardin, has said his client never attended the party at the Cansecos' home.

You knew it was coming, every time one side says something, the other side comes back and says "no you're lying." All I know is somebody is going to jail for perjury.

Here is a great picture Newsday posted, well not great for Roger. Canseco (cheater), Vaughn (cheater), and Clemens (cheater?)

- ESPN also had a story about several professors from the University of Pennsylvania who analyzed the report released last month by Clemens' agent to try to explain how a pitcher could improve when most of his contemporaries were slowing down. Their conclusion was that the report was all "smoke and mirrors."

University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School professors Eric Bradlow, Shane Jensen, Justin Wolfers and Adi Wyner wrote their opinions of Clemens' report in Sunday's editions of The New York Times. The group said that while Clemens accurately used examples of pitchers such as Nolan Ryan, Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling who pitched well late in their careers, Clemens' report "artificially minimizes the chances that Clemens' numbers will seem unusual. Statisticians call this problem selection bias."

The professors also suggested something was amiss with Clemens' statistics.

"Our reading is that the available data on Clemens' career strongly hint that some unusual factors may have been at play in producing his excellent late-career statistics."

Wolfers elaborated on that point to ESPN.com's Lester Munson.

"What [the Clemens camp] said in their report is indefensible as a matter of statistics," Wolfers said. "The statistics do not point to innocence. We are not saying that the numbers show guilt, but we are saying that the statistics show that something unusual happened in Clemens' career as he entered his 30s."

Hendricks Sports Management, which represents Clemens, responded to the Times story on Sunday.

"The purpose of the report is to provide the statistical background of Roger Clemens' career and to correct misconceptions about his career in the public forum," Hendricks said in a statement.

- Then there was this from the AP, about Brain McNamee's lawyer saying that he expects there to be a probe of Clemens.

"I think there will be a criminal prosecution after Wednesday, and that means there will be grand jury proceedings and subsequent proceedings," Richard Emery, one of McNamee's attorneys, said Sunday. "I don't see there's any possibility that Brian has any jeopardy. I only see the possibility of Clemens getting investigated by Justice, whether or not Congress refers it."

Told of Emery's comments, Rusty Hardin, Clemens' lead lawyer, said: "They have consistently acted and indicated that they have a pipeline to agents of the Department of Justice. Whether they do or not, it certainly raises a lot of questions of whether what's going on here is proper. So I'm not going to express any predictions of what will or will not happen."