What Will Minnesota Twins Do with Matt Wallner?

[Vanimal46]

Just now, Parfigliano said:

Last years popular opinion projected TC to have a top bullpen.  We all know they definitely did not. 

This years consensus opinion seems to be for a bullpen that sucks on toast.  Maybe they can buck popular opinion again.

That would be pretty cool. It would take an insane amount of luck, but I’m rooting for it. 

[Brandon]

Let him hit next year and see what a full season of AB does for him.  He is still in the learning phase of his game.  He hits the ball pretty hard.  Like top 5 in the league if I remember correctly.  If you’re thinking of selling your stock because it dropped a little, I will gladly pay you Pennie’s on the dollar because of your fear of loss.  
 

if Walner gets worse and even bad we have 3 starting OF prospects starting in AAA who have all been top 100 prospects at one time.  
 

 

[ashbury]

41 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

Matt Wallner costs the league minimum next year. Is he worth that? Look, you bring up good points about how he can and should improve, but what are we talking about? Power bats costs $$$$ in Yelp restaurant terms. 

I didn't actually get around to saying what I'd do with him, which boils down to "it depends."  This is an off-season more than most where the FO should listen regarding any player.  Weighing against that is, when you fire the manager, then there's an assumption that the players' performance were held back in some cases. Wallner seems like someone to bank on improving in a new environment - which I did indicate.

Now, the reasons I outlined in my post could be taken as why not to expect much in terms of offers - someone else suggested swapping him for a good young catcher and I wonder if the situation were reversed whether many of us would swap a young Mauer to grab someone else's failed lefty power hitter.  (OK, Mauer's an exaggeration, but I don't want to get bogged down arguing who in Twins' history was at one time a "good young catcher.") 

My best guess is he'll be on the roster next spring, and if the FO feels that Larnach and he are filling similar roles, Larnach is the one who'll go. The article asks what the team will do, not what I'd do.  I don't know what I'd do, whereas the team has to make a choice and live with it.

With regard to Yelp reviews, I will note that we got 2-star performance for his current 1-dollar-sign price, and that isn't really competitive with nearby cities that boast 4-stars for not much greater cost.  But trading away the Wallner Cafe isn't likely the route to bringing one of those higher-rated restaurants to our town, either.  Maybe the new manager will figure out how to shoo the cockroaches out of the kitchen.

 

22 minutes ago, Brandon said:

He is still in the learning phase of his game.  

One should keep learning at every age.  But Wallner turns 28 before Christmas this year.  If you feel he's still on the upward curve, he's starting to risk being labeled a slow learner.  🙃

[Vanimal46]

12 minutes ago, ashbury said:

I didn't actually get around to saying what I'd do with him, which boils down to "it depends."  This is an off-season more than most where the FO should listen regarding any player.  Weighing against that is, when you fire the manager, then there's an assumption that the players' performance were held back in some cases. Wallner seems like someone to bank on improving in a new environment - which I did indicate.

 

[SteveLV]

I think it is at best 50-50 that Larnach is with the Twins in Spring Training next year.  He may be traded, and he may otherwise be non-tendered.  I think he is a decent player, but does not elevate the team.

Wallner had a poor year--like the rest of the roster besides Buxton.  He should get another shot, but if he continues to struggle he may not be around in 2027.

[DJL44]

1 hour ago, FlyingFinn said:

Mendez will not be added to the 40 man roster this winter. He's not playing any 1B in the AFL and thus is behind so many lh hitting corner OF's plus he doesn't have much power and hasn't played a single game at AAA yet.

$20 says you're wrong

[Parfigliano]

14 minutes ago, SteveLV said:

I think it is at best 50-50 that Larnach is with the Twins in Spring Training next year.  He may be traded, and he may otherwise be non-tendered.  I think he is a decent player, but does not elevate the team.

Wallner had a poor year--like the rest of the roster besides Buxton.  He should get another shot, but if he continues to struggle he may not be around in 2027.

Baseball probably won't be around for a full 162 game season in 2027.

[Vanimal46]

38 minutes ago, ashbury said:

I didn't actually get around to saying what I'd do with him, which boils down to "it depends."  This is an off-season more than most where the FO should listen regarding any player.  Weighing against that is, when you fire the manager, then there's an assumption that the players' performance were held back in some cases. Wallner seems like someone to bank on improving in a new environment - which I did indicate.

Now, the reasons I outlined in my post could be taken as why not to expect much in terms of offers - someone else suggested swapping him for a good young catcher and I wonder if the situation were reversed whether many of us would swap a young Mauer to grab someone else's failed lefty power hitter.  (OK, Mauer's an exaggeration, but I don't want to get bogged down arguing who in Twins' history was at one time a "good young catcher.") 

My best guess is he'll be on the roster next spring, and if the FO feels that Larnach and he are filling similar roles, Larnach is the one who'll go. The article asks what the team will do, not what I'd do.  I don't know what I'd do, whereas the team has to make a choice and live with it.

With regard to Yelp reviews, I will note that we got 2-star performance for his current 1-dollar-sign price, and that isn't really competitive with nearby cities that boast 4-stars for not much greater cost.  But trading away the Wallner Cafe isn't likely the route to bringing one of those higher-rated restaurants to our town, either.  Maybe the new manager will figure out how to shoo the cockroaches out of the kitchen.

Revolutionary take to assume keeping a player with 1.043 MLB service time, making MLB minimum, who has shown power and glimpses of success with MLB pitching, unless you have a trade offer that you can't refuse. My best guess is he'll be on the roster next spring too. 

[ashbury]

3 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

Revolutionary take to assume keeping a player with 1.043 MLB service time who has shown power and glimpses of success with MLB pitching unless you have a trade offer that you can't refuse. My best guess is he'll be on the roster next spring too. 

That's probably why I opted to not lengthen my first response post with my revolutionary take, perhaps thinking it was even obvious.  I already don't remember for sure. 😁  I just thought the data was pretty interesting. 

[ashbury]

28 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

Revolutionary take to assume keeping a player with 1.043 MLB service time, 

I kinda slid over this detail on first reading but it's the type I find myself compelled to double check if I come for a second look at things.  It sounded low, and it turns out that this was his service time last January, per bb-ref.com.  He had a few games at St Paul in 2025, but was he ever optioned there or were those rehab?  Not that it really matters, but his service time has to be near 2 if not actually 2.043 now.

He's got 972 PA - nearly the number that Tom Kelly keeps getting quoted as being important.  You can't rack that much up in a year and six weeks or so.

Does this change either of our points of view?  No.  He's still not arbitration-eligible.  So, unimportant, but there we are. 🙃 

 

/ Good lord what a rabbit hole TD can be.

[USAFChief]

Wallner isn't getting released, nor should he.

But he certainly should be someone the FO is willing to trade in the right deal.

Wallner was awful this year. We need to stop pretending that an OPS driven solely by SLG is a good measure of offensive value.

The man drove in 18 runners the entire 2025 sesson. He has 3 Sac Flies in his career. He has little defensive value. He turns 28 this winter. 

And he absolutely was part of the problem with the 2025 offense. Not the biggest problem. He certainly might be better in the future, he was in part time roles in 2023 and 2024.

 But let's not pretend he was any kind of asset in 2025.

[h2oface]

,

[DocBauer]

I always attempt to take a long view. Wallner climbed up the MILB fairly quickly, and impressively. He struggled a bit at first, quickly adjusted, and then moved up again.

He had a solid rookie debut. And then his 2023 and 2024 seasons provided a combined .885 OPS! Read that number again!

What's always confused me, frustrated me, and frankly pissed me off is the way the FO has treated Wallner. Look, I can understand if a young prospect goes through a slump and you want to send him down for a few weeks to get straight. It happens. I get it. But in both 2023 and 2024, the FO decided for ridiculous reasons to IGNORE what Wallner was doing at AAA and stubbornly stick with poor veterans why? How many teams in MLB would have a top prospect and not let them play through a struggle? OR, how many MLB teams would send a kid down for a few weeks, see him RAKE, and wait another month plus before bringing him back up?

.709 OPS as a rookie. A combined .885 OPS the next 2 seasons but they can't find room for a highly productive bat because they can't deal with some slumps here and there? This one of the areas where I've been frustrated and angry with how Falvey has handled the roster.

Now, I get frustration and concern about 2025. I'm still confused about Wallner's sudden decline defensively...where he was at least average previously...and his sudden dip in HITTING. Did his hamstring injury continue to bother him all year? Did he lose confidence? Did the injury and some poor production after get in his head? I have no idea.

 

 

But he STILL produced a  .776 OPS which was well above average. His OPS+ of 110 still meant he was 10% above league average. Arguing his HR totals should have produced more RBI is a bit silly. What about opportunity? It's a BS argument, but shouldn't Buxton's 35HR have produced more than 83 RBI?

Again, I understand it's a BS argument because context is always involved from everything including BABIP to runners on base, etc. 

For ME, I can't ignore Wallner's MILB career, his decent rookie debut, and a pair of excellent 2 seasons before a weird but still OK 2025 season. And there's no question we were expecting and hoping for more last season. I dare say we were COUNTING on him having a good '25 to help lead the offense. 

I believe he's an OK OF, despite regression last season, with an arm that's a weapon. IDEALLY,  going forward, he's the primary DH...even against some LHP as he's shown growth there...and a part time corner OF.

That's what SHOULD happen. And he might just return to his .800+ OPS level with 20-30HR. 

But what DOES happen?

IMO, it depends a lot on Em Rodriguez. He's already burned 2 of his options. Buck is in CF. Larnach is gone. Martin and Roden just might form a solid LF combo to begin the season. Frankly, it's TIME for Rodriguez to have a good winter, and a good ST, and be given a starting spot. Live with some struggles, if they happen, and enjoy good defense and some power and excitement. Wallner is the primary DH. Jenkins comes up a little later. Gonzalez forces his way up a little later in the season.

Where everyone actually hits in the lineup is TBD. But that's how it SHOULD go opening day.

[the_brute_squad]

"it seems counterproductive to trade away one of their few above-average hitters." 

Just because someone has a slightly higher OPS does not make him an above-average hitter. .202 BA with 40 RBI in over 500 AB's shows a well below average hitter.

OPS is not the only batting metric. 

[Doctor Wu]

9 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

I mean Buxton clearly has that potential, but otherwise I fully agree.

And it's possible we COULD add Royce Lewis to that list. The potential is still there. 

[Doctor Wu]

8 hours ago, SteveLV said:

I think it is at best 50-50 that Larnach is with the Twins in Spring Training next year.  He may be traded, and he may otherwise be non-tendered.  I think he is a decent player, but does not elevate the team.

Wallner had a poor year--like the rest of the roster besides Buxton.  He should get another shot, but if he continues to struggle he may not be around in 2027.

Sure, Wallner deserves another shot next season. I don't see any real benefit in trying to trade him after his disappointing 2025 season. And I don't think Larnach has much trade value either. Certainly not for any players that will help the Twins this coming season. 

[old nurse]

12 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

You can't trade a bunch of nobodies and two real players for better players. That's not how it works. 

Look up a lot of the trades Miami has made, the 5 for 1 trades

[dxpavelka]

50 / 50 chance they keep him.  If they do, 50 / 50 chance he continues to trend downward allowing the fans to say they have no clue what they are doing.  If they move him, 75% chance he goes the Rooker route allowing fans to say they have no idea what they are doing.  100% chance that if it goes south the fan base will say they don't know what they are doing.  Even the ones who totally agree with whatever they decide to do at the time they do it.

[dxpavelka]

59 minutes ago, Doctor Wu said:

Sure, Wallner deserves another shot next season. I don't see any real benefit in trying to trade him after his disappointing 2025 season. And I don't think Larnach has much trade value either. Certainly not for any players that will help the Twins this coming season. 

The benefit is not in trading him but in having better players to replace him.  If guys like Jenkins, Rodriguez, Gonzeles, Mendez or Rosario don't ultimately end up being better than him, whatever incremental improvements they get out of him will prove to be of little consolation.  Same goes for Larnach.  Larnach is far enough along in his career where he shouldn't be 15th on your team in WAR.  Wallner is dangerously close to being in the same boat.  Somebody got an oar?

[Hubie29]

10 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

@RpRjust gonna get out ahead of this. No one has said he should play defense which is your specialty. There’s this special position in MLB called the designated hitter, which the Twins do not have anyone in mind to put in that crazy spot. Perhaps that is Matt Wallner. 

In the term "designated hitter" is the word "hitter" which Wallner is clearly not. If he could do something other than hit .200 with meaningless power once in awhile, then he would be slightly more valuable. He is another Joey Gallo as has been pointed out a few times here. 

[MinnInPa]

trade him for a good dugout mascot dog...nice Bernese Mountain dog maybe?

[Old Crow]

14 hours ago, Nshore said:

Wallner starts with an extremely wide open stance and then kind of dives into the ball.  It seems like a good hitting coach could work with him on some improvement.

Someone like James Rowsen

[TwinsDr2021]

To me it seems pretty obvious, if some team comes calling for Wallner, and you like the trade, you do it. Otherwise he starts off the year as the left handed DH and depth in RF, if who ever ends up playing there stumbles or gets hurt (fingers crossed that is Erod or Jenkins) 

He turns 28 in December so he is closer to the end of his prime than the beginning, so if things start out slow and the Twins are actually decent you move on to the next player, if they aren't decent you give him a chance to improve while putting him in situations to secede. 

As for last year, I don't care what his OPS or SLG was it was one of the hollowest I have ever seen by a Twins. He beat up bad pitchers at times (most) when it didn't matter. Congrats!

[bean5302]

12 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

Evidently there are a few Wallner haters here. Who else on the current roster has the potential to hit 30 HRs? Power wins out in this league. If the Twins trade him he’ll be the next Brent Rooker 

I'm pretty confident Wallner is the next Rooker. He was better with runners on than bases empty last year, and pitchers absolutely pitched around him because most of the Twins lineup was useless. Wallner will rebound.

The level of hate for Wallner on this site reminds me a lot of the negative comments about Rooker back in the day... and the complete unwillingness for the haters to accept they were absolutely dead wrong after that. Being right on the internet is critically important to the ego, you know, haha.

[Trov]

I think the question is was his season something to expect going forward, or is it just a part of an average over his career?  What I mean is players have up and down years, and some seasons look worse overall but does not mean it will be their trend. If this is not his trend and just had some rough spots, then you roll with him, but if you think he will be Joey Gallo you see if you can get anything for him going forward.

[DJL44]

If Wallner can stay off the injured list next season he'll be fine.

[Patzky]

11 hours ago, Parfigliano said:

Baseball probably won't be around for a full 162 game season in 2027.

The 🐘 in the room that isn't from Oakland.

[David Maro]

The FO needs to have a meeting with him and tell him to lose his mite. Then tell him he is the DH. After that Wallner needs to call Kyle Schwarber and see if he can meet with him. They could sit down and talk hitting. If he only has to work on hitting and not fielding he could have value. Being a good DH is a better option than a part time player.

[stringer bell]

Wallner's 2025 season was at least a disappointment, if not a disaster. It is hard to fathom a less productive 22 homer season. For now, I think he will stay on the team and be the primary DH, but he probably has less than half a season to find his '23-'24 form before he is cast aside.

I don't think a player should be traded when his value is at a low ebb, so I think the Twins should hang on to him this off-season.

27 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

The level of hate for Wallner on this site reminds me a lot of the negative comments about Rooker back in the day... and the complete unwillingness for the haters to accept they were absolutely dead wrong after that. Being right on the internet is critically important to the ego, you know, haha.

I will admit to being wrong on Rooker. I didn't ever think he would hit like he has with the A's. I also think that he, like Wallner, needs to be considerably above average as a hitter to be a team asset. 

[Riverbrian]

If other teams have interest in Wallner.

The Twins (a team searching for major league talent) should also have interest in Wallner.

If other teams don't have an interest in Wallner. That's a different story.