beautox

Was the second pitch of that last sequence to young his change up or screwball (i realize he rarely throws it anymore)?

I think the sox should hold onto De Aza and move him to LF where his defense plays up as + since June 1st he has put up this line .290/.360/.434 - .794 with 4 HR and 5SB. He is 29 and under control through the remainder of his "prime" he could very well be a 20/20 threat at the top of the order. Keep him.

Nice start by Danks, I don't understand certain sox fans thinking when they want to get rid of him and his contract, If he is healthy i think we will see a couple more 3 and 4WAR seasons before its all said and done.

I like this trade. Matt Thornton was a great reliever with us and is now no more than an effective LOOGY getting a prospect from a very deep boston system that would've ranked between 5-8 in our system coming into this year with high potential and high bust is ok with me. Eventually one of these football players we continue to target is going to break through, hopefully this is the one. I look forward to him in LF down at AA shading Thompson in CF and maybe, they'll make the push to AAA together.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 04:28 PM) This is all assuming Beckham has the range to play SS. I personally do not believe he does and that this will all be a moot point. If the Hahn green lights moving Alexei, I think we see the sox go forward with the experiment. If beckham can be league average to slightly below defensively at SS and he has turned the corner(two big ifs) then we need to lock him up. Also in a league that has Cabrera, Lowrie, Aybar and Peralta at the position, I think Beckham turns out ok.

Yeah its becoming a trend in baseball that talented light hitting 3B move across the diamond to 2B. Gillasipe has shown (albeit in a small sample size) great defensive ability at 3B, moving him to 2B and the potential to hit 15-20 HR along with his plate discipline is like having Tadahito Iguchi back in our line up.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 02:24 PM) If the Gallardo for Skaggs rumor is true then the Sox should be able to get more than Delgado....I'd be pushing for Delgado and Owings/Davidson or perhaps for Bradley and some lower level guys if the Sox have another deal lined up for a hitter. Agreed If we're going to match up and trade with D-Backs i would like to see a package of Eaton, Davidson and Trahan or Perez, that gives us two piece to plug into our line up right away. Going into '14 DH - Dunn or Morales C - Phegley 1B - Viciedo 2B - Gillaspie SS - Beckham 3B - Davidson LF - De Aza CF - Eaton RF - Prospect from Rios or Ramirez move

Sox shouldn't be looking at Delgado they've got enough pitching and Erik Johnson is nearly ready. They should be looking at Adam Eaton or Pollock, 3B Matt Davidson and SS Chris Owings. Sox need near ML ready bats.

Phegley!!!1

QUOTE (danman31 @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 07:33 PM) Semien's performance is very average to me. He has nice peripheral stats, but overall it's not a dominant season or anything. I'm still a bit skeptical about him. Personally he strikes me as a player Jeff Luhnow would've targeted in the Cards organization. He doesn't appear to have a stand out tool but he appears average to above in everything he does, I can only hope he turns out like one of the cards unheralded prospects that just know how to play the game and take a walk.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 11, 2013 -> 12:11 PM) I think a Danks trade does a couple of things. It balances the rotation as more righthanded, and it could bring us back a much needed hitter. Is handiness really that big of an issue? it feels like such a dogmatic way of thinking; if you have 4 well above average pitchers that just so happen to pitch with their left hand does it matter?

Sox would need to get an amount that no team within their right mind would provide for sale. In terms of his contracts value it is near identical to the likes of Evan Longoria. It has been said time and time again the sox have a great young cheap pitching core going forward and they're shedding a ton of payroll this off season. Caulfield12 why are you so adamant about trading Danks and his contract when it will not hamstring the future of the sox? With all the money coming off the books next year after the trades this deadline or offseason they should lock up Santiago, Quintana and Beckham and look to sign FAs like Morales.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 07:22 PM) From a pure cosmetic point of view, it would be nice to see Gillaspie get to 15 HR this year I think the kid has it in him, he was robbed of one earlier this year. I still think he winds up a mirror image of Cuddyer.

Does Alexei make sense for Detroit for Castellanos? I say this because as it stands Detroit isn't going to get Castellanos' bat in their line up any time soon as well as a few other reasons: 1.) Peralta is going to get a 50 game suspension soon enough and is a FA after this, there is a dearth of SS in the FA market next season 2.) Miggy and Fielder aren't moving off their current positions for the foreseeable future 3.) the platoon of Dirks and Tuiasosopo is providing adequate defense and offensive production, while Castellanos' defense in the outfield leaves a lot to be desired and Avisail Garcia isn't going to learn anything more at AAA and needs to take his lumps at the major league level.

QUOTE (PolishPrince34 @ Jul 10, 2013 -> 06:00 AM) Glasnow might make the biggest jump of all starting pitchers in the minors. Would love to get him in a deal. Has a chance become a #1 or #2 starter. Would love the Sox to target a player like that. Yeah he moved up the pirates org quickly, I love seeing a high school arm with projectability actually do it. If Rios keeps his hot hitting up after this 6/6 and the ban hammer comes down after the ASB, maybe Rios can bring home a package of Hanson, Glasnow and Bell

Santiago is going to be a part of the next competitive sox team, and as it stands right now his career is a mix between Liriano and Santana, you do not give up that kind of potential. Pitching wins championships and the sox have it in spades, we just need a competent line up. edit: grammer

QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 7, 2013 -> 04:41 PM) There are reasons to move Danks based on the likeliness of him being a good value for his contract, but moving his contract for payroll flexibility is not a good argument because we already have that. When we enter the bidding for Cano and add on Morales and Hunter Pence, then we can start stressing about Danks' contract. Agreed there is no reason to move Danks or his contract because of "payroll flexibility". The sox need to lock up Santiago and Quintana this offseason and decide what to do with Beckham seeing how he will be a free agent after '16 and it appears we can move him over to SS, baseball reference lists Rickie Weeks as a comparable hitter to Beckham and if thats the case we could have a few wRC+ years of 120 or more.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 6, 2013 -> 08:53 PM) I'm happy to send them Peavy if they want to give us Kolten Wong or Matt Adams Agreed, the sox need a good mix of near mlb ready talent and depth. Adams immediately becomes our first basemen and Wong pushes Beckham to SS while giving Sanchez another year down at AAA while still being very age appropriate.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jul 6, 2013 -> 08:28 AM) heyyyy we DO all agree more or less. I'm a big believer in Paleo/Primal/Mark Sisson's stuff, and I agree that 100-150 carbs a day is a great thing to shoot for, but I've always felt that going lower than that is a slippery slope. So many people take the low carb thing to the illogical extreme and turn it into NO carb or Mark has still never convinced me on the IF and Keto front, and nothing I've read has either. To me, it makes much more logical sense to eat as many fruits, veggies, lean meats, fish, nuts, seeds and eggs as you want, regardless of carb intake. Because the dirty little secret no one seems to understand is if you eat the above foods, it's almost impossible to get fat, and it's impossible NOT to lose weight, regardless of calorie counting. I personally think once an individual is at a healthy body fat % or their weight loss goal that 100g of carbs(+/-30) is fine. I would agree that many people take low carb and ketogenic to an extreme of no carb; but having said that the body is equipped with a process to change protein into glycogen via gluconeogenesis so while its very hard not to eat carbs even healthy ones its entirely possible to cut them out of your diet and not skip a beat. I think ketosis is the first order natural process our bodies developed a long time ago. The reason I say that is because after your body's stores of glycogen reserves have been used up(usually about 500g or 2000c) the body will then go to using ketones for energy. Furthermore grains and fruits were not readily available through out the course of human history and our metabolic pathways originated off of eating fat and protein with a very limited exposure to carbs. As for it being a defense mechanism the Inuit and Masai people were constantly in a state of ketosis due to their high fat diets. Lastly, "starvation mode" only takes place when the body has 5% or less body fat(“Minnesota Starvation Experiment" 1944/1945), while our ancestors were surely lean, I doubt they were that lean. As for "eat as many fruits, veggies, lean meats, fish, nuts, seeds and eggs as you want" i agree to an extent, simply because when we eat those foods we actually get satiated.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 6, 2013 -> 12:42 AM) I think we're pretty much on the same wavelength beautox. I'll look for those PDFs shortly and PM you, you should really enjoy his schemes and insights. thanks, i'm looking forward to it.

I would love to see the battery of Ax and Flowers delt

QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 5, 2013 -> 09:09 PM) You can go keto in 3-4 days. I don't know what makes you think it takes so long to adapt to. That is exactly how and why cyclic keto diets work. Agreed its very easy for ones body to enter ketosis in 3 days; best way to do that from my experience is the following: Don't eat anything after 6pm on day one, day two wake up and perform some weight training or cardio on an empty stomach start your diet with 0-2% of cal attributed to carbs, day three wake up and perform some weight training or cardio on an empty stomach eat 5% of your intake attributed to carbs source also here is a great article about keto adaptation, Volek and Phinney go into greater detail in their book "The Art and Science of Low Carbohydrate Living". I would agree i consider a keto based diet 50g of carbs and less depending on the individuals tolerance to carbs. I consider low carb 100g or less. I feel this image describes it well. I agree keto isn't for everyone but I would say low carb should be and yes i would love those ebooks, thank you in advance. I can agree with that to an extent but our "overconsumption" comes from the fact that we drink and eat so much sugar that the leptin in our stomachs tell us to continue to eat instead of getting satiated. Profesor Robert Lustig goes into great detail about that in , specifically how we are getting plenty of calories but we're nutritionally bankrupt.

No I am not diabetic; but i would venture to say the fashion that i had been eating for the last 27 years of my life was bringing me closer to being a diabetic. I personally believe its completely a long term solution if you take the time to stock your pantry with the staples you need: almond flour, coconut oil, flax, low glycemic load fruits and vegitables and natural sugar substitutes. On all the research I've done(I'll gladly site sources as well) low carb eating is a great way to avoid , get your , , cancer recovery and increased energy and many other benefits. Let me just say I don't have a problem with good healthy carbs, avocado, jalpenos, onions, strawberries, black berries and all that other good low glycemic load natural fruits and vegetables. It is very easy on a ketogenic diet to get all the vitamins and minerals you need. Side note what would you consider a "balanced diet". If people are truly active they might consider a Targeted Ketogenic Diet or Cyclic Ketogenic diet aka carb cycling, it can be great if your goal is to recomp your body. As for only sticking with it a month, thats not good advice, on average it takes 3-4 weeks for ones body to fully become keto adapted and move through the side effects that come with transitioning your body from a carb based energy source and a fat based energy source and during the first few weeks is when weight loss is the most dramatic from water and sodium stores so if stop after a brief period of time your body will find itself in a quagmire with its metabolic functions. Lastly the obesity epidemic thats destroying the western world and costing all of us unforeseen expenses is a direct result of our high carb, medium protein low fat diet that was purposed by the USDA back in the eighties and the scare of cholesterol and fat being directly related to heart disease, when in reality eating a high fat diet will produce the good LDL cholesterol the light fluffy version aka pattern A. Carbs and sugar produce the bad LDL which is the tiny version thats attaches it self between cells and reeks havoc on our respective bodies. Good discusion so far.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jul 4, 2013 -> 05:40 PM) Ugh... don't get me started on keto. Fruit carbs are perfectly healthy. I'll post a full response to this tonight or tomorrow when I'm at a computer. anticipating this lively discusion and the impacts on insulin

Personally I've found eating in a ketogenic fashion has worked amazingly for me i went from nearly 300 lbs to 235 over the course 4 months with the C25k program as well. Carbs no matter if they're from fruit or HFCS will be the premature death of the western world. My macros look like this 1351c , 83g of fat, 30g of carb, 121g of protein.