What Will Minnesota Twins Do with Matt Wallner?

[Bodie]

On 10/21/2025 at 7:27 PM, ashbury said:

I'm ordinarily leery of slicing and dicing data and then taking it very seriously.  Small Sample Size is always lurking.  Still, Wallner's 2025 splits contain something I find at least interesting.

OPS  PA     Game Situation

.708  322   Within 4 runs

1.113    70    > 4 runs

That first line is a very inadequate offensive contribution from a corner outfielder.  70 PA, on the other hand, is a splendid example of a Small Sample.  And yet, what "saves" his season and gives him his seemingly productive .776 overall OPS is exactly during those 70 times when a home run here or there was arguably least likely to affect the game outcome. He was a monster at the plate once the game was more or less decided.

The opposing pitchers have some say in this too, and they obviously pitch every batter differently depending on a variety of factors.  Somehow, Wallner seems to have been more susceptible hitting well only in the cases where the pitcher says, "okay big boy, here it comes, try and hit it, the manager has me in here to eat some innings - I'll be in AAA tomorrow whatever you do."

Which reminds me to look up Joey Gallo's 2023 season, which I have pigeonholed as similar to Wallner's 2025.  Not quite.  With him it was more to do with which team was ahead:

OPS  PA     Game Situation

.598  75    Tie game

.572  120   Behind

.983  137   Ahead

Two very different ways these guys had, to put up overall OPS that seemed better than the situational eye test would have told you.  Already got the lead? Joey was your man that year.

You know the advanced stat that matched up with that eye test for both?  Win Probability Added.  Gallo's WPA in 2023 was -1.2, despite an offensive WAR that was above 1. Wallner's 2025 WPA was -0.5 despite an offensive WAR that was also above 1.  Both players dragged their team down with their negative offense, despite raw numbers that would lead you to think they had contributed positively.  WAR, built on the same components as OPS and more, treats every plate appearance as equal.

Every slugger hits a meaningless dinger now and then - it's the nature of the game - these guys found subtly different ways to maximize those. There's more than one way to suck during a season.

What's a player supposed to do when the game is out of reach or his team is already ahead, not try?  No, I'm not saying that.  And I'm not calling either player a "selfish hitter," whatever that means in baseball, either.  Just this: stats need to be examined carefully if results aren't matching up to what you think you're seeing.  (And it may still turn out you're "seeing" things the wrong way and the aggregate stats are more or less right.)

I don't question Wallner's toughness, mentally or physically - I always fall back on remembering him take an inside pitch on the chin and yet he was back in the lineup a couple days later.  And this situational stuff seems like an area where a new manager or batting coach might be able to help, more than with his mechanics or whatnot - indeed if injury wasn't an issue then perhaps his uniformly lousy September could have been due to trying to correct the situational problem and somehow only making things worse overall.  New personnel in the dugout could represent a fresh start mentally.

Here's hoping Matt turns things around in a way that shows up in wins rather than only the OPS he racks up.

 

The next time I see Wallner make any adjustment, it will be the first!

What, no one notices that he is the slowest OF in releasing the ball?  Supposedly superior arm strength that grades out as the least usable arm in the majors.  Overhauling that would be a snap compared to a ground up rebuild of his batting stance, swing and overall approach at the plate. 

 

Yet, we have seen zero change in either.  So, don't hold your breath waiting for any change for the better. He obviously has it all figured out - in his "mind".

[TwinsDr2021]

11 hours ago, TopGunn#22 said:

We have depth there, with guys that play the same position as Wallner (and play it much better).  They're younger and more athletic.  Having Wallner exclusively DH might be a good plan.  Rooker showed absolutely no capability of becoming the player he has.  He was 27 when we traded him to the A's and he did very little to show he should have been kept.  Wallner will be 29 this next season.  How much do those 2 years factor in?

Just to clarify Wallner will be 28 next season, and the Twins traded Rooker before his age 27 season, and was an all star for the A's at age 28. 

Wallner is way more of an established player than Rooker ever was, so they really aren't comparable unless you are comparing defense and strikeouts. 

Last year Wallner was missing hit-able pitches and then would get visibly frustrated and most of those at bats ended up badly, can he reverse that this year is the question I have for him.

[Riverbrian]

22 hours ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

The biggest difference between Rooker and Wallner.

OPS vs RHP - .881

OPS vs LHP - .641

 

OPS vs RHP - .820

OPS vs LHP - .853

I'm just going to quote your accurate career numbers... and add some stuff. 

This player is Wallner

OPS vs RHP - .881 767 PA's

OPS vs LHP - .641 205 PA's

79% of all PA's vs RH - 21% vs LH

This player is Rooker

OPS vs RHP - .820 1528 PA's

OPS vs LHP - .853 581 PA's

72% of all PA's vs RH - 28% vs RH

Applying Rooker''s 72/28% to both because I assume it has less platoon attached to it. 

Wallner

,881 x 72 = 63.342

.641 X 28 = 17.948

Total: 81.29

Rooker

.820 x 72 = 59.04

.853 X 28 - 23.884

Total: 82.92

Wallner is already producing better OPS vs 3 out of the 4 pitchers that take the mound and it's not like Rooker out distances Wallner by leaps and bounds when lefties get factored in to drag Wallner down a little. 

 

[TwinsDr2021]

36 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

I'm just going to quote your accurate career numbers... and add some stuff. 

This player is Rooker

OPS vs RHP - .881 767 PA's

OPS vs LHP - .641 205 PA's

79% of all PA's vs RH - 21% vs LH

 

OPS vs RHP - .820 1528 PA's

OPS vs LHP - .853 581 PA's

72% of all PA's vs RH - 28% vs RH

Applying Rooker''s 72/28% to both because I assume it has less platoon attached to it. 

Wallner

,881 x 72 = 63.342

.641 X 28 = 17.948

Total: 81.29

Rooker

.820 x 72 = 59.04

8.53 X 28 - 23.884

Total: 82.92

Wallner is already producing better OPS vs 3 out of the 4 pitchers that take the mound and it's not like Rooker out distances Wallner by leaps and bounds when lefties get factored in to drag Wallner down a little. 

 

what you are missing here is in the last three years there has been 486 major league games played by each team.  

Rooker has played in 444 (91% of the games) and zero minor league games, and Wallner 255 (52% of the games) and 140 minor league games. 

So it isn't 3 out of 4 pitchers that take the mound, because Wallner's OPS or any numbers are 0 for 48% of the games compared to 9% for Rooker. 

In those three years Rooker has 1939 plate appearances compared to Wallner's 907, and yes that is leap and bounds. If you want to say (and I would as well) when Wallner has been put in position to succeed (or been healthy)he is basically the same hitter as Rooker I would agree, but there is a reason Wallner has played in darn near 200 less games over the last three years and that has to be part of the conversation. 

People have been using projections for how good Wallner has been, and projections only work on what might happen going forward, not what happened in the past, the past is the past. So IMO comparing a player that has averaged 148 games the last three years to somebody that averaged 85 is kind of silly.

I mean there is a reason that over that time Rooker has a WAR of 9.9 and Wallner's is 4.9 (which is pretty great for a part time player) 

And that is why I posted their splits in the first place; Rooker has always (in the last three years) been a much better than average hitter against both right and left handed pitchers, were Wallner was close to unplayable in his two great yet limited years against left handed pitchers. 

[Riverbrian]

1 minute ago, TwinsDr2021 said:

what you are missing here is in the last three years there has been 486 major league games played by each team.  

Rooker has played in 444 (91% of the games) and zero minor league games, and Wallner 255 (52% of the games) and 140 minor league games. 

So it isn't 3 out of 4 pitchers that take the mound, because Wallner's OPS or any numbers are 0 for 48% of the games compared to 9% for Rooker. 

In those three years Rooker has 1939 plate appearances compared to Wallner's 907, and yes that is leap and bounds. If you want to say (and I would as well) when Wallner has been put in position to succeed (or been healthy)he is basically the same hitter as Rooker I would agree, but there is a reason Wallner has played in darn near 200 less games over the last three years and that has to be part of the conversation. 

People have been using projections for how good Wallner has been, and projections only work on what might happen going forward, not what happened in the past, the past is the past. So IMO comparing a player that has averaged 148 games the last three years to somebody that averaged 85 is kind of silly.

I mean there is a reason that over that time Rooker has a WAR of 9.9 and Wallner's is 4.9 (which is pretty great for a part time player) 

And that is why I posted their splits in the first place; Rooker has always (in the last three years) been a much better than average hitter against both right and left handed pitchers, were Wallner was close to unplayable in his two great yet limited years against left handed pitchers. 

I'm not missing it. I was just working with the numbers that you provided. Anything can be added to the conversation. I added the percentages of AB's because I wish people would stop fixating on the left vs left advantage and strongly consider the left vs right advantage since the 3 out of 4 pitchers are right handed.  

Utilization/Health can certainly be added for everyone's consideration and you have now introduced that. 

So it isn't 3 out of 4 pitchers that take the mound, because Wallner's OPS or any numbers are 0 for 48% of the games compared to 9% for Rooker.   

Wallner missed a few games this year with injuries in2025. Rooker did not. Wallner missed 37 games with a hamstring, 10 at the end of the year with back spasms and 3 games maternity for a total of 50. Rooker played in 162 games. Wallner played in 104 out of 112 games he was available to play. Manager decision. Myself personally. I'm not going to call Wallner injury prone because of one season and I won't project future injuries for either Wallner or Rooker going forward.  

In 2024 and 2023... Wallner spent a chunk of time in the minors but to my knowledge was basically healthy.  That is a front office decision. Wallner doesn't control his utilization much like Rooker didn't control his utilization when he was with the Twins. Rooker was 25, 26 and 27 years old over his first three years. Wallner was 24, 25 and 26 years old during his first three years. Rooker had 270 AB's his first three years of bouncing back and forth with the Twins for two years along with that Padres/Royals season. 71 games over 486 games possible. 14% of games. Wallner played 34% of games over his first three years of bouncing back and forth with the Twins. 

As bad as some feel Wallner was this year. If we cherry pick home runs. I know there are other stats to consider so I admit to cherry picking. Just using home runs in regards to utilization. Rooker hit 30 dingers over the 699 AB's last year. Wallner hit 22 over 392 AB's. If Wallner gets 699 AB's like Rooker did. He would have hit 39.22 Home Runs. Wallner wasn't healthy enough this year to reach 699. How will Wallner's health be in 2026... I don't know. I also don't know about Rooker's 2026 health. 

If you want to say (and I would as well) when Wallner has been put in position to succeed (or been healthy)he is basically the same hitter as Rooker I would agree

It's not exactly what I'm trying to say but close enough. ... but I'm trying my best to ignore the "put in position to succeed" part. I'm saying that Rooker is good hitter and Wallner's numbers are comparable and I'd rather not fixate on the left vs left because the 3 out of 4 pitchers being right handed matters if you want to play the platoon split the way it should be played. Wallner's .881 vs Right Handed pitching is also a platoon advantage that you can play 3 out of 4 times. It matters. That is a bigger platoon advantage than whatever splits you can produce for 1 out of 4 times. 

People have been using projections for how good Wallner has been, and projections only work on what might happen going forward, not what happened in the past, the past is the past. So IMO comparing a player that has averaged 148 games the last three years to somebody that averaged 85 is kind of silly.

 I agree... The past is the past and I could care less about projections since they are TBD. Going forward is what matters and going forward is TBD. What were the projections of Royce Lewis and George Springer going into 2025. Royce was supposed to outslug Springer .470 to .416. Springer won that battle .560 to .388. I cherry picked those two right off the top of my head.

I'm not sure what makes 148 games to 85 games comparison silly. . It's all we have to work with due to... health and Front Office/Manager decisions creating the numbers. I won't penalize Wallner for getting hurt, I won't penalize Wallner for the front office keeping him in St. Paul for 3 months while Margot is on the 26 man roster . And everybody should know by know... I will not under any circumstance... penalize Wallner for the front office searching for right handed hitting OF'ers every damn year so Wallner's complete development can be compromised just to avoid a 1 out of 4 time platoon advantage.    

I mean there is a reason that over that time Rooker has a WAR of 9.9 and Wallner's is 4.9 (which is pretty great for a part time player)

I know you know this but for everyone else WAR is a cumulative stat. The more you play... the bigger the number you can accumulate. Health and Utilization (Manager Decision, Internal competition of the teams they play for) isn't something any player should be penalized for.  

Wallner was close to unplayable in his two great yet limited years against left handed pitchers. 

You will never convince me of this. If he was unplayable in 2023 and 2024. We certainly made sure that he would remain unplayable by keeping him distanced from left handed pitching. He was predetermined to be unplayable. 46 PA's in 2023 against lefties due to manager decision doesn't say a thing other than the manager played the short side of a platoon advantage and compromised his development in the process. 44 PA's in 2024 due to manager decision doesn't say a thing other than the manager played the short side of a platoon advantage and compromised his development in the process. 

97 PA's due to health primarily in 2025 is better but it would have been nice to see a larger sample with better health. Regardless it produced a .791 OPS. But... Yeah... The Past is the past. Let's see what 2026 brings. 

If the front office is so fixated on the left vs left pitcher advantage that they are willing to compromise every developing left handed hitter in favor of low dollar specialists and therefore limit the number of left handed hitters on your roster. They screwed up since the true advantage is on the other side of the platoon 3 out of 4 times.  

If the front office is willing to continue to look for right handed hitters despite 8 of them already on the roster... just to address this fixation or overweighting the significance of a short side 1 out of 4 pitchers that the team will face in a given season. They screwed up. 

If the front office favors right handed hitters because they typically have more neutral splits. They are focusing on the 1 out of 4 and ignoring the 3 out of 4 advantage and they screwed up. 

More left handed hitters in the lineup allows you to play the platoon split advantage 3 out of 4 times. Yes you take a disadvantage 1 out of 4 times but 3 out of 4 is bigger than 1 out of 4. The Twins screwed up. 3 out 4 compared to 1 out of 4... Is actually a plus in support of Wallner over Rooker. If you want to display their splits for the purpose of comparison.   

I won't penalize Wallner or any of our developing left handed hitters by what the Twins did to them because they comprehensively over weighted a stat and deployed it.

After watching the Twins since Falvey hit town. I'm not going to penalize Wallner because the Oakland Front Office decided to play Rooker every day. Especially if you factor in that Rooker was utilized even less than Wallner was utilized in their first two years with the Twins.

Development Years... Development years. The future... sustained competitiveness. Budget space,  Development. Development, Development.  

The Twins screwed up because they chose to Frankenstein a roster together with spare parts instead of developing the players who will be around in 2025 and 2026 and 2027.

The bill has come due.   

   

 

    

[ashbury]

On 10/23/2025 at 3:50 AM, Bodie said:

The next time I see Wallner make any adjustment, it will be the first!

What, no one notices that he is the slowest OF in releasing the ball?  Supposedly superior arm strength that grades out as the least usable arm in the majors.  Overhauling that would be a snap compared to a ground up rebuild of his batting stance, swing and overall approach at the plate. 

 

Yet, we have seen zero change in either.  So, don't hold your breath waiting for any change for the better. He obviously has it all figured out - in his "mind".

I appreciate the response but I can't quite click Like.  That's a pretty pessimistic take on the man, and you may be right but I hope not.

Here's the problem for Wallner.  There are guys, such as Buxton, about whom people say admiringly, "he can beat you in so many ways."  When he had a tough day at the plate, prime Buxton could still stop a rally with a stellar catch that an opposing player probably wouldn't have been  capable of - or if he lucks out and finds himself on first base he can still take a base that doesn't belong to him at some point thereafter. 

That's not Wallner.  He can beat the other team precisely one way unless something flukish happens on the diamond.  And the stats I summarized suggest that, in 2025, he wasn't even beating teams in that one way.  People tout Wallner's arm as a second way he can beat an opponent, but I'm hard pressed to recall one instance of a game-saving throw from him.  Most people probably remember Eddie Rosario's throw in Boston nailing Devers in the ninth, instance.  A Google search for Wallner throws merely turns up a case of him getting thrown out at home, LOL.

I don't advocate trading Wallner away (mostly because I doubt he'd actually bring back very much), but his career is at a crossroads at the moment.  He needs to get better, in terms of winning, at the one thing he does.

[stringer bell]

On 10/22/2025 at 7:52 PM, Riverbrian said:

Here's what I'd like the Twins to do with Wallner. 

Simplify his swing and stance. It has too many moving parts to it. 

(Disclaimer): I am not qualified to rework anybody's swing and I'm 89% sure that a batter must be comfortable. If he is actually comfortable looking uncomfortable to us viewers with his current set up... who am I to... you know. 

OK... after that disclaimer. 

I'd like to see him try taking the junk out of his swing... at least excess junk. He's got good rotation... he doesn't need to lean back into the umpire before releasing like a tightly coiled spring using every molecule of every fiber of his being. 

That high pull back leg lift from that open of a stance creates more inconsistency or junk. That powerful of a load and release from someone who is already Godzilla powerful enough is producing that top of the league exit velocity. It's like he's trying to win a long drive contest with a 5-Iron on every single swing. Maybe reduce it to... umm... trying to win a long drive contest with an actual driver.  Just lessen it. 

If you lift and load that much. You really gotta time that thing... I mean... you gotta time that thing like Levon Helm. I see him leaking quite a bit when he mistimes it as he tries to just maintain it. That leak will make it hard to catch up with fastballs up in the zone.

Now... when he times it right... my goodness... hide the women and children! If he struggles with timing... Twinsdaily wants to trade him.  

Simplify it. Lessen it. Just a normal stance and swing. Matt is strong enough that he doesn't need that big of a load. He can calm that thing down. 

 

 

I agree with your swing and stance analysis FWIW. Of course my opinion isn’t worth much. I say the same thing about Royce Lewis—way too many moving parts, hence ongoing timing issues.

Making adjustments isn’t easy. Watch any amateur golfer. When one issue is fixed, two others come to the surface.

IMHO, for some reason Wallner was getting beat with both velocity and location, so there is a lot to fix, but the bat speed and exit velocity can’t be sacrificed by whatever adjustments he makes. 

[bean5302]

On 10/22/2025 at 10:08 AM, TwinsDr2021 said:

The biggest difference between Rooker and Wallner.

OPS vs RHP - .881

OPS vs LHP - .641

 

OPS vs RHP - .820

OPS vs LHP - .853

 

I agree some have been over the top on Wallner, but pointing out how bad Wallner was last year isn't hate, it is just pointing out the obvious. IMO he likely will get back to 23 and 24 stats (even though those two years were very limited (only 254 and 261 PS), I also think to start the year he should be protected from facing too many left handed pitchers)

 

Rooker only got 200 PA with the Twins, and 85% of pitcher innings are against RHP. The only season Rooker got a significant look with Minnesota was 2021.
vs. RHP - .684 OPS
vs. LHP - .695 OPS

Like Rooker, it's not about Wallner's numbers. It's about how he got his results, and identifying major weaknesses in his game. Like Rooker, Wallner does not have a consistent weakness to certain pitches which can be exploited. You know, 2strikes = slider, guaranteed strike 3 (Sano). Wallner also covers the plate well enough despite the seemingly consistent criticism on the site. There are very few hitters in MLB who don't have 3 below average sectors in the 9 sector strike zone.

Wallner is not Eduoard Julien or Miguel Sano. I also feel it's odd to see the criticism of Rooker and Wallner while I'm far less likely to read the same kind of feelings towards Larnach. Larnach's career year was 2024, and in that career year (only season he's generated more than 0.7 fWAR, he produced 1.4 fWAR to tie Matt Wallner's 2025...)

[USAFChief]

2 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Rooker only got 200 PA with the Twins, and 85% of pitcher innings are against RHP. The only season Rooker got a significant look with Minnesota was 2021.
vs. RHP - .684 OPS
vs. LHP - .695 OPS

Like Rooker, it's not about Wallner's numbers. It's about how he got his results, and identifying major weaknesses in his game. Like Rooker, Wallner does not have a consistent weakness to certain pitches which can be exploited. You know, 2strikes = slider, guaranteed strike 3 (Sano). Wallner also covers the plate well enough despite the seemingly consistent criticism on the site. There are very few hitters in MLB who don't have 3 below average sectors in the 9 sector strike zone.

Wallner is not Eduoard Julien or Miguel Sano. I also feel it's odd to see the criticism of Rooker and Wallner while I'm far less likely to read the same kind of feelings towards Larnach. Larnach's career year was 2024, and in that career year (only season he's generated more than 0.7 fWAR, he produced 1.4 fWAR to tie Matt Wallner's 2025...)

?

Pretty sure those were career splits for Rooker and Wallner, and meant to show Rooker doesnt have a major platoon weakness, while Wallner has struggled against LH pitching. 

Also...LH pitching amounts to roughly 28% of all MLB innings pitched, not 15%.

[SteveLV]

I think several of us do not think Larnach will be with the hometown 9 come Spring '26.  Either traded or non-tendered.....I don't think anyone is suggesting Wallner will be let go, only possibly traded.

[Vanimal46]

On 10/21/2025 at 11:48 PM, USAFChief said:

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.

And what sort of player are you expecting to receive with that description of the player you're trading? My guess is someone who isn't better than Wallner. 

[tony&rodney]

22 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

And what sort of player are you expecting to receive with that description of the player you're trading? My guess is someone who isn't better than Wallner. 

That seems like a job for Falvey and his crew. Sometimes a team needs to take a gamble or two and returning the same roster isn't a sound idea. Who goes and who stays is totally up in the air but opportunities will be available.