Article: Boston Red Sox Arbitration Decisions & Projections: Connor Wong

[notin]

12 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Yes, it is, and it wasn't even status quo, IMO.

Expecting a returning Bregman to do as well as the 2025 Bregman plus 2 months of Devers is not equal to status quo. (Bregman+Devers= 830 PAs.)

Bell may do as well as Lowe.

Upgrading Catcher might add, but Narvaez was not a weakness, last year, and who knows if the guy you like will do better than the 2026 Wong. We could see 2025 Wong D with 2024 Wong O and do better with status quo, there.

Losing Gio and expecting Belo to repeat 2025 is a lot to ask for Joe Ryan to make up, and he showed worse and longer issues than Bello to end 2025.

I'm fine with expecting the kids to pick up some slack. I'm a believer in thinking age progression is likely, and we have far more pre-prime and early-mid prime players than post prime ones, so that may help us step up, IN SOMEAREAS,  from status quo without outside additions, but we need some high quality over an excess of decent depth.

I really believe we need to focus our resources and pinpointing 2-3 highest need areas and go for broke on 2-3, rather than continuing the spread the wealth plan of adding 5-7 promises and hoping 4-5 do well.

We can roll the dice with in-house options at one questionable slot:

1B: (Lowe) Casas/Campbell/Romy

3B: Mayer, Romy/Eaton/Sogard

2B: Mayer, Romy/DHam/Sogard

SP2: We have 9-11 number 4/5 slot pitchers.

(One might include DH)

But, we need to upgrade with some serious quality at 2-3 and stay even with the one we don't address.

Bregman is barely staying even at one. Okay, go with Mayer at 2B, but then go mega size at 1B and SP2.

Go with Mayer at 3B, but then go large at 2B (Polanco, Bichette, Castro, KMarte) and 1B (Alonso, Suarez) and SP (Ryan, Lodolo or maybe Keller.)

Mega large at 2 or large at 3 is my idea of the best plan.

Again, I seriously doubt JH & Co. move from their established trend on no large and longs. I'm not even sure they go to $45M AAV on 4-5 short deals, this winter.

The large is in doubt.

The long is likely a pipe dream.

 

So you think thw way to improve is to adda 34yo player who posted a 107 OPS+ with a negative dWAR from 2021 to 2024? 

 

Suarez just isn't much outside any more of Arizona.    Based on StatCast profiles, I'd take Bell over Suarez...

[moonslav59]

13 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

His bat is too pathetic to carry as a 3rd catcher on a MLB roster. If they were stashing him in AAA it wouldn't be a problem. 

He has an option left, and maybe his bat is not totally pathetic, just because it was for most of 2025.

His career .680 OPS is just 20 points below the league catcher OPS in '25. He played hurt in '25 and was .374 first 33 games and .627 last 30 games.

.667 last 16 is nothing to celebrate, but it is not as pathetic as the start of the season. I do think 2024 was not sustainable. His last 10 games: .500, so it's not like he ended on a high.

AAA would be great, but at $1.4M, maybe not.

[Malcolm White]

21 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

I'd be fine with some sort of upgrade, and just because I don't see it as a major need, doesn't mean we shouldn't do it.

I think I'm more okay with Wong than others. I don't think his bat is as bad as it looked, this year. His defense and results with with pitchers improved a lot in 2025. I guess I'd have to see who we'd need to give up for a promising catcher. I also have seen many highly regarded catching prospects fizzle out and moderately considered prospects, like Narvaez, shine.

Given the other needs, this isn't a tough call.  Wong just had an awful start to the season and never recovered, but look around.......not many teams have better backups.

[mvp 78]

18 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

He has an option left, and maybe his bat is not totally pathetic, just because it was for most of 2025.

His career .680 OPS is just 20 points below the league catcher OPS in '25. He played hurt in '25 and was .374 first 33 games and .627 last 30 games.

.667 last 16 is nothing to celebrate, but it is not as pathetic as the start of the season. I do think 2024 was not sustainable. His last 10 games: .500, so it's not like he ended on a high.

AAA would be great, but at $1.4M, maybe not.

It's pathetic if you're carrying him as a UTIL/C guy IMO. 

[moonslav59]

26 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

It's pathetic if you're carrying him as a UTIL/C guy IMO. 

What's your position?

You say this, but also gave a thumbs up to this:

Given the other needs, this isn't a tough call.  Wong just had an awful start to the season and never recovered, but look around.......not many teams have better backups.

[mvp 78]

7 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

What's your position?

You say this, but also gave a thumbs up to this:

Given the other needs, this isn't a tough call.  Wong just had an awful start to the season and never recovered, but look around.......not many teams have better backups.

If he's brought in as the backup, he's fine. I don't want him as the third catcher/UTIL guy as notin suggested. 

I don't see the Sox making an effort in fixing the catcher position as they have a lot of work to do elsewhere. 

[drewski6]

23 hours ago, notin said:

Susac was a first round pick 3 years ago.  He's more likely the heir to catcher for the Athletics than he is blocked by the arbitration-eligible Langeliers. 

Of the two, the A's probably prefer to move Langeliers, although they could also move him to DH....

The A's have an elite DH

[drewski6]

Wong will get tendered and prob he here at least to start the season. If anything, I see him getting flipped once the trend of washed catchers getting asked to pick up the mitt again to save the roster spot increases. But I worry about getting Schwarber hurt.

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

If he's brought in as the backup, he's fine. I don't want him as the third catcher/UTIL guy as notin suggested. 

I don't see the Sox making an effort in fixing the catcher position as they have a lot of work to do elsewhere. 

3rd C/UT in AAA is fine, but rather expensive for that role.

[mvp 78]

17 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

3rd C/UT in AAA is fine, but rather expensive for that role.

In AAA, it's whatever. I think notin was believing he'd be on the bench in BOS. 

[moonslav59]

7 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

In AAA, it's whatever. I think notin was believing he'd be on the bench in BOS. 

I'm okay with him as our #2 catcher, but not as #3/UT on the MLB roster.

[drewski6]

The only ways I can see them not having wong next year is if either for some reason they expect major regression from nav and he becomes the #2

Or if they get a big bat do DH/C (and no im not talking about sean freaking murphy) and they think that dude can be fine enough as backup c. A couple dudes last year caught for the first time in years because playing your best 9 bats is in right now.

[moonslav59]

32 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

The only ways I can see them not having wong next year is if either for some reason they expect major regression from nav and he becomes the #2

Or if they get a big bat do DH/C (and no im not talking about sean freaking murphy) and they think that dude can be fine enough as backup c. A couple dudes last year caught for the first time in years because playing your best 9 bats is in right now.

I think notin suggested Hicks for Murphy, but I don't think they take even Jh Garcia and Hicks for him.

[notin]

3 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

It's pathetic if you're carrying him as a UTIL/C guy IMO. 

Why?  Need to keep that bench spot open for Nate Eaton?

[notin]

9 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I think notin suggested Hicks for Murphy, but I don't think they take even Jh Garcia and Hicks for him.

I think Atlanta would be insane to turn down a BA Top 100 prospect while saving $20mill on a deal for their backup catcher.  And if they can turn Hicks back into a 105mph dealing machine, icing on the proverbial cake…

[moonslav59]

3 minutes ago, notin said:

Why?  Need to keep that bench spot open for Nate Eaton?

I'd prefer him over Wong as a C3/UT. Plus, we will likely add 2 infielders, so we'll have C2, OF4, Romy and then I'd select Sogard as UT ov er Wong and Eaton. Maybe even DHam. Yes, I said that out loud. We might also go with 5 OF'ers (Bring Ref back? Campbell? Garcia?) if we use one to DH, often enough.

[moonslav59]

3 minutes ago, notin said:

I think Atlanta would be insane to turn down a BA Top 100 prospect while saving $20mill on a deal for their backup catcher.  And if they can turn Hicks back into a 105mph dealing machine, icing on the proverbial cake…

Murphy still caught 633 innings in '25. That was still top 30 in MLB.

His bat is not what it used to be, for a couple years, now, so you might be right.

Maybe Hicks and Sandlin?

Hicks and Cespedes/Bleis/Castro/Mullins....

[notin]

2 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I'd prefer him over Wong as a C3/UT. Plus, we will likely add 2 infielders, so we'll have C2, OF4, Romy and then I'd select Sogard as UT ov er Wong and Eaton. Maybe even DHam. Yes, I said that out loud. We might also go with 5 OF'ers (Bring Ref back? Campbell? Garcia?) if we use one to DH, often enough.

Eaton is coming off a career best year; Wong is coming off a career worst.  But Wong has always been the better player if you’re not overly influenced by recency…

[moonslav59]

Just now, notin said:

Eaton is coming off a career best year; Wong is coming off a career worst.  But Wong has always been the better player if you’re not overly influenced by recency…

Eaton can play 3B, something we need, and OF. He can also PR. It's not a clear choice, but I don't see Wong as being useful at 2B or 1B. His value is working well with pitchers as a catcher.

[drewski6]

20 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I think notin suggested Hicks for Murphy, but I don't think they take even Jh Garcia and Hicks for him.

And Im talking about Schwarber

[drewski6]

I dont want sean murphy

[drewski6]

4 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Murphy still caught 633 innings in '25. That was still top 30 in MLB.

His bat is not what it used to be, for a couple years, now, so you might be right.

Maybe Hicks and Sandlin?

Hicks and Cespedes/Bleis/Castro/Mullins....

Why do you get so focused on specific players?

[drewski6]

4 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Eaton can play 3B, something we need, and OF. He can also PR. It's not a clear choice, but I don't see Wong as being useful at 2B or 1B. His value is working well with pitchers as a catcher.

Wong can pinch run too. Hes not as fast but there is a lot of feel and smahts that go into stealing bags and some dudes who are fast cant do it and some dudes who even after giving up significant speed vs typical base stealers are still elite at it

Eaton has proven to me that he doesnt have the "feel" but he did get hot at the end.

They are both fine bench players. ANd so is Hamilton.  These guys are fine as your bench as long as you have someone in the minors who can come in if there is a significant injury because I dont mind hamilton/wong/dham in a bench role, but I dont see them as fill-ins if there is a significant injury

This is why Im in no rush to promote prospects, even if they are ready or close to ready, because they make for amazing depth that you can park in minor leagues and with all the attrition we see every year in mlb , i think there is a lot of value in this.

[moonslav59]

5 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Why do you get so focused on specific players?

I focus on players I think are available and the JH might pay for.

I have changed my focus from highly specific positions, as you have moved me away from that, but I get channeled in on a select few.

As for guys I offer in trade, I think they have value to other teams more than to ours.

[mvp 78]

30 minutes ago, notin said:

Why?  Need to keep that bench spot open for Nate Eaton?

I'd rather have Eaton on the Bench than Wong as a third Catcher, yes. 

[mvp 78]

22 minutes ago, notin said:

Eaton is coming off a career best year; Wong is coming off a career worst.  But Wong has always been the better player if you’re not overly influenced by recency…

Eaton's 2022 was very similar to his 2025. Wong should be better, but it's more likely his bat is like '23 than it is like '24. There was a whole article on here about how lucky his numbers were in '24 prior to this season. We saw the regression in '25. 

[moonslav59]

26 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

I dont want sean murphy

I don't want Hicks.

Schwarber and Murphy?