The Matt Wallner Dilemma: Real Progress or More of the Same?

[soyouresayingtheresachance]

I think with experience, he will improve. He has less than, what, 900 ABs at this point? I would attribute last season to maybe a sophomore slump?  Now we need to find out if he can adjust or not. The tools are there. The power is there. Just need to put it all together now. 

[KirbyDome89]

5 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Wallner had his highest walk rate with high leverage.

Wallner had his lowest K rate with high leverage.

Wallner had his highest hard hit rate with high leverage.

He also owned a .000 BABIP in the whopping 27 at bats he had with "high leverage" last year. 

 

What's the excuse for his lack of production in medium leverage? 

[MGX]

6 hours ago, NYCTK said:

That low of a sample, I am basically going to ignore the first part of your reply then. To your point though, I don't know why I didn't include those peripherals in that breakdown, so here are those numbers with K and BB rates included: 

 

	PA	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS	wOBA	BB%	K%
Low Leverage	507	0.267	0.367	0.591	0.958	0.403	11.40%	31.20%
Med/High Leverage	465	0.191	0.318	0.369	0.687	0.308	9.90%	33.58%

So it's not like he falls apart. Those declines are what we should kind of expect to see for any player. But there's no denying that he's essentially been a low leverage stat padder in his career THUSFAR, and that while it is a cause for a concern, it's not necessarily predictive. 

For his career he has 109 PA's with 2 outs & RISP. He's produced a 1.020 OPS in those situations.

If you like all RISP situations regardless of outs, he's produced an .897 OPS in 222 PA's.

If you like anytime there are runners on base, he's produced an 885 OPS 392 PA's.

Any way you slice it he produces. Saying he's a stat padder is just inaccurate.

[Pat]

Too many moving parts in his approach-big leg kick, long stride, etc.- to be consistent.  When everything works it's great. Just doesn't happen that often.

[miller761]

He certainly deserves this season before making any judgements. Give him 1200 AB's. In baseball you have to make adjustments and work to strengthen your weak areas. Am always excited to see if there any positive results to those players who work on that in off season. You can call me a "homer" but I am looking forward to see what Brooks Lee, Matt Wallner and Royce Lewis can accomplish this year. 

[bean5302]

1 hour ago, Danchat said:

When you strike out a lot and walk a lot, it makes sense that he doesn't hit in runners when they are on base. I think we sometimes prioritize OBP over batting average when hitting a single with runners on base is much more likely to get RBIs when a walk can only get you a RBI when the bases are loaded.

You want to talk batting average? How about we take it up a notch and use SLG? His SLG was .452. 

5 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

Is wRC+ the only stat that matters?    As others have mentioned he's essentially racked up his numbers in low leverage situations.  

I think Wallner is fine.  I don't get the desire to either turn him into the worst player in Twins history or an MVP candidate though.  Not every player needs to be a superstar.   He's a 1 tool player, but it's a valuable tool.  Put some high OBP guys in front of him in the lineup and let him swing away.

I doubt "every single team in baseball" is frantically coming up with trades to find room for Matt Wallner and his 0.6 WAR in the lineup though.  

Every. Single. Team. Every single team in baseball would want Matt Wallner over one of their corner outfield or DH options right now. They may not be frantically coming up with trade offers, but every team would prefer Wallner at least by a small margin over what they have.

Dodgers? Yep. They'd happily trade Teoscar to get Wallner.
Yankees? Yep. They'd gladly trade Stanton and eat salary to get Wallner.
Mets? Yep. All day the RF starter.
Red Sox? Absolutely over Yoshida.

Even straight up contract neutral at least 20 teams would start Wallner over another player on their roster.

[Cris E]

7 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Wallner had his highest walk rate with high leverage.

Wallner had his lowest K rate with high leverage.

Wallner had his highest hard hit rate with high leverage.

He also owned a .000 BABIP in the whopping 27 at bats he had with "high leverage" last year. 

 

 

6 hours ago, NYCTK said:

That low of a sample, I am basically going to ignore the first part of your reply then. To your point though, I don't know why I didn't include those peripherals in that breakdown, so here are those numbers with K and BB rates included: 

 

	PA	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS	wOBA	BB%	K%
Low Leverage	507	0.267	0.367	0.591	0.958	0.403	11.40%	31.20%
Med/High Leverage	465	0.191	0.318	0.369	0.687	0.308	9.90%	33.58%

So it's not like he falls apart. Those declines are what we should kind of expect to see for any player. But there's no denying that he's essentially been a low leverage stat padder in his career THUSFAR, and that while it is a cause for a concern, it's not necessarily predictive. 

@NYCTKis playing a game here with Low leverage, so let me play the same game to look at the High.

Look at the data in that first post and then consider those rate stats if you combine Low/Medium and let High stand alone.  The BB and K rates are wrecked by the Medium  performance, but it's hidden behind that stupendously bad BABIP.  The Av/Ob/Sl numbers are still garbage, but the rate stats sparkle. There's room in there for better luck to turn a lot of this around in the ways @DocBauerwas discussing above.

[NYCTK]

7 minutes ago, Cris E said:

 

@NYCTKis playing a game here with Low leverage, so let me play the same game to look at the High.

Look at the data in that first post and then consider those rate stats if you combine Low/Medium and let High stand alone.  The BB and K rates are wrecked by the Medium  performance, but it's hidden behind that stupendously bad BABIP.  The Av/Ob/Sl numbers are still garbage, but the rate stats sparkle. There's room in there for better luck to turn a lot of this around in the ways @DocBauerwas discussing above.

Well then you're looking at something like 10% of his plate appearances and it becomes a lot more noisy than a near 50/50 split.

I'm even granting the possibility of it being bad luck, but you can't lie and say those splits don't concern you one bit. 

 

[NYCTK]

4 hours ago, DocBauer said:

So why is everyone so down on him following a single bad year where his OPS was still slightly above league average?

Well I for one was down on him last season. I called to trade him last January. 

[Maybe Next Year]

OMG- Wallner sucks, Lee sucks, Lewis sucks, Buxton sucks, everybody on the roster sucks! Enough of this nonsense! Enough of all the stats and analyzing things to death.  Before we toss everybody into the trash let’s see what a new manager with a new perspective and vision can do to get the most out of these players. Lord knows Baldelli hadn’t a clue how to develop players. Maybe, just maybe Shelton does. 

[RaoulDuke]

This is the year for him to prove it or not.

He has the Gallo profile (minus the glove).  If he can bang 35 hrs and take walks  you live with the strikeouts and lack of average and defense. 

If he isn't mashing his value is low.

 

 

 

[Mahoning]

You win with stars. The Twins need Matt Wallner to be a star and I hope it happens. All the stat-heads prefer Wallner to Larnach, but if you have a runner at second and need an RBI, Larnach is better.

[Danchat]

To be clear, the right move is to play Wallner every day and expect a rebound after what happened in 2025. This is absolutely not the time to trade low on him. 

1 hour ago, Maybe Next Year said:

Maybe, just maybe Shelton does. 

Maybe? Shelton has been a manager for over 5 seasons, he already has an established track record. He may not be the exact same person he was in Pittsburgh, but I'm confused why I'm seeing some talk of Shelton being an unknown quantity. 

[MGX]

6 hours ago, Mahoning said:

You win with stars. The Twins need Matt Wallner to be a star and I hope it happens. All the stat-heads prefer Wallner to Larnach, but if you have a runner at second and need an RBI, Larnach is better.

Career numbers - Matt Wallner & Trevor Larnach

2 outs, RISP - Wallner - 109 PA's - .281/.413/.607 - 1.020 OPS Larnach - 196 PA's - .275/.383/.419 - .802 OPS
any outs, RISP - Wallner 222 PA's - .260/.383/.514 - .897 OPS Larnach - 435 PA's - .255/.343/.401 - .744 OPS
runners on base - Wallner 392 PA's - .264/.372/.512 - .885 OPS Larnach - 742 PA's - .255/.331/.413 - .743 OPS

Wallner is a more productive hitter in any situation with runners on base.

I think Larnach is a solid hitter, but so far in their careers Wallner has been better.

[awmonahan]

You have to at least give him the start of the season. His profile has such potential. I think his 2025 is exacerbated by Larnach and his continued mediocrity. I'll never understand the Twins extending Lsrnach a 2026 contract. 

[DJL44]

16 hours ago, old nurse said:

Carlos Mendoza and Minnie Mendoza batted .182 each for their major league career. Mario Mendoza batted .220 for his career and was the inspiration for the term Mendoza Line.  So are people ignoring history or has hitting gotten so poor for average that they do not want to rightfully embarrass players?

League batting average is around .240 now. It was .270 thirty years ago.

[Riverbrian]

Y'all can focus on negatives until the cows come home. Knock yourself out. All players have negatives. The ones who don't have negatives are signing 400 million dollar deals with one of the 7 teams who will actually offer a 400 million dollar contract. 

There is no future when you eat your young. 

If ownership/front office doesn't have the stomach or patience to develop.  The future will require at least 200 million in payroll just to fill the multiple open spaces left behind by that development failure. 

If you can't outbid the Phillies or Dodgers for that free agent with no negatives. You'll have to outbid the Rangers for the next guy with a negative or two.

If you can't do that just to maintain this lifestyle. You will need to trade your young in order to acquire players with no negatives. It's harder to trade your young when they have no trade value because you failed to develop trade value. 

When it all comes crashing down. The rebuild will be snail like because you have no trade value to hasten it. 

If the fans don't have the stomach or patience to develop. Good Luck. 

 

 

 

[Cris E]

7 hours ago, Danchat said:

Maybe? Shelton has been a manager for over 5 seasons, he already has an established track record. He may not be the exact same person he was in Pittsburgh, but I'm confused why I'm seeing some talk of Shelton being an unknown quantity. 

The mystery is how he will choose to interact with each guy.  People around here complained about coddling or not listening or whatever, so Shelton gets a chance to have a better relationship with some guys. It might be worse with others, but depending on each individual there could be some playing better or some feeling lost. Even when you talk about a distant, top-down control guy like Showalter who more or less treats everyone the same, you can't predict how it might affect each man in the room .  Royce Lewis, for example,  was making all sorts of sounds along these lines at the time of hiring, so we have to wait and see if Derek's new team connects better with him.

[Sjoski]

19 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Hard to hit multi-run home runs when nobody is on base. 

Twins should play somebody more often then. Bench nobody. 😀

[Cris E]

8 hours ago, Mahoning said:

You win with stars. The Twins need Matt Wallner to be a star and I hope it happens. All the stat-heads prefer Wallner to Larnach, but if you have a runner at second and need an RBI, Larnach is better.

1 hour ago, MGX said:

Career numbers - Matt Wallner & Trevor Larnach

2 outs, RISP - Wallner - 109 PA's - .281/.413/.607 - 1.020 OPS Larnach - 196 PA's - .275/.383/.419 - .802 OPS
any outs, RISP - Wallner 222 PA's - .260/.383/.514 - .897 OPS Larnach - 435 PA's - .255/.343/.401 - .744 OPS
runners on base - Wallner 392 PA's - .264/.372/.512 - .885 OPS Larnach - 742 PA's - .255/.331/.413 - .743 OPS

Wallner is a more productive hitter in any situation with runners on base.

I think Larnach is a solid hitter, but so far in their careers Wallner has been better.

@Mahoning Here's the deal: players don't exist in a vacuum and there's no extra points awarded when the High Leverage light is on. You know where RISP situations come from? Some guys, any guys, getting on base ahead of the next guys. Not the right guys, not the ones that play Designated RISP Hitter, but any time the lineup gets something going then the job is keeping things rolling. 

There's no hitting situation where I prefer Larnach to Wallner. He doesn't set the table and he doesn't cash in when things are there. If you want to judge Wallner by one year rather than his career go ahead, but I think you;re making a mistake.

 

[jmlease1]

15 hours ago, DocBauer said:

So why is everyone so down on him following a single bad year where his OPS was still slightly above league average? He's definitely got something to prove, or re-prove in 2026.

But why so much vitriol and downcasting for a guy who's been really good before? 

It's stylistic. There are some people who despise K's and any hitter who generates a lot of them. They'd rather have a guy put the ball in play a lot even if they never walk, slapping singles around and hitting into easy outs, than a player like Wallner, who swings very hard but also whiffs a lot. And for the people that hate that style of play, they want the Wallners of this team gone, and the easiest way to get rid of them is to have them actually stink. If Wallner is actually terrible, they get to point fingers and say "see! I told you he was bad and this kind of player was useless!"

Keep in mind, there's a fair number of people who refuse to believe that Wallner was actually really good in 2023 or 2024 as well.

[TJSweens]

I look at Wallner in terms that he is the same age as Rooker when the Twins gave up on him. The biggest difference is that Wallner has been a whole lot more productive than Rooker was during his Twins tenure. Does this mean Wallner is destined to be a multi time all star and a silver slugger winner? No. I do think it's too soon to write Wallner off or to say he can't make the next step.

[stringer bell]

Matt Wallner had a bad year last year and a satisfactory OPS number can't hide that. The cause of his bad year might be an early injury or it might be something else, but producing 40 RBI is historic and not in a good sense.

Can he come back this year and be a force in the lineup? I think so, mostly because of how hard he hits the ball and that he isn't prone to hitting a lot of ground balls. 

Much has been written here and in other threads about his defense. I just checked BBRef again and in '23 and '24 he was essentially neutral as a defender, actually slightly above. I don't know what happened in 2025, but the numbers were much worse. I also know that his sprint speed went from slightly above average to bottom third in MLB. Wallner turned 28 in the off-season so he's not slowing because of age. Could it be injury? If so, maybe he comes back this year and is a far better defender. TBH, I thought Wallner looked indecisive and slow in the outfield last year. There's a lot to improve on and I think he has the tools to be far better in the field. Michael Taylor Jr. would earn his pay if he helped The Moose to be an above average defender. It goes without saying that Wallner is more valuable if he is a competent outfielder to go with his hitting profile.

This is a crucial year for Wallner. Rodriguez and Jenkins (and Gonzalez) aren't far away and there's not room for all those guys on the outfield corners. I'm not sure what will happen, but it should be interesting.

 

[old nurse]

56 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

League batting average is around .240 now. It was .270 thirty years ago.

So

[terrydactyls]

19 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Wallner has been the subject of rough takes on this site for a while now. It's not a "make or break" year for a guy who has a career batting line of wRC+ 131 and had a bad year last year but was still wRC+ 114. He's made it. 

If he declines, he declines, but pretty much every single team in baseball would want him in the lineup.

Then trade him for something the Twins need (which is too lengthy to list).

[Woof Bronzer]

12 hours ago, bean5302 said:

You want to talk batting average? How about we take it up a notch and use SLG? His SLG was .452. 

Every. Single. Team. Every single team in baseball would want Matt Wallner over one of their corner outfield or DH options right now. They may not be frantically coming up with trade offers, but every team would prefer Wallner at least by a small margin over what they have.

Dodgers? Yep. They'd happily trade Teoscar to get Wallner.
Yankees? Yep. They'd gladly trade Stanton and eat salary to get Wallner.
Mets? Yep. All day the RF starter.
Red Sox? Absolutely over Yoshida.

Even straight up contract neutral at least 20 teams would start Wallner over another player on their roster.

Hahaha sure, sure, the Dodgers are one Matt Wallner away from competing lol and they'd gladly dump their one of their World Series heroes for a guy whose value to date is derived by hitting solo home runs in 6-1 losses when the team is out of the race by June.  Brilliant.  

Why aren't any of these teams knocking down the Twins' door trying to get him then?  

Again, Wallner last year was barely replacement level.  I appreciate that you like him, but just because you say dramatic things like "Every. Single. Team" doesn't make them true.  

 

[Twins_Fan_in_NJ]

Seems like 'more of the same' is a recurring theme not just with Wallner but several young Twins' hitters and in the case of players like Julien and Miranda, you get worse than that. Payroll issues are what they are but a team like the Twins can't compete when player development is lacking as much as it has been over the last several years.

[Twins_Fan_in_NJ]

12 hours ago, bean5302 said:

You want to talk batting average? How about we take it up a notch and use SLG? His SLG was .452. 

Every. Single. Team. Every single team in baseball would want Matt Wallner over one of their corner outfield or DH options right now. They may not be frantically coming up with trade offers, but every team would prefer Wallner at least by a small margin over what they have.

Dodgers? Yep. They'd happily trade Teoscar to get Wallner.
Yankees? Yep. They'd gladly trade Stanton and eat salary to get Wallner.
Mets? Yep. All day the RF starter.
Red Sox? Absolutely over Yoshida.

Even straight up contract neutral at least 20 teams would start Wallner over another player on their roster.

Bean,

This is an interesting post. 

And I'm curious as to what you're basing these trade scenarios on...

The Dodgers would trade Hernandez for Wallner? Why? 

The Yankees have been trying to dump Stanton for the last 3+ years so that isn't necessarily an endorsement of Wallner as much an indictment on Stanton.

The Mets and Red Sox might have the two worst RF situations in baseball, so again, I'm not finding that to be a glowing endorsement of Wallner.

 

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, stringer bell said:

Matt Wallner had a bad year last year and a satisfactory OPS number can't hide that. The cause of his bad year might be an early injury or it might be something else, but producing 40 RBI is historic and not in a good sense.

Can he come back this year and be a force in the lineup? I think so, mostly because of hard hard he hits the ball and that he isn't prone to hitting a lot of ground balls. 

Much has been written here and in other threads about his defense. I just checked BBRef again and in '23 and '24 he was essentially neutral as a defender, actually slightly above. I don't know what happened in 2025, but the numbers were much worse. I also know that his sprint speed went from slightly above average to bottom third in MLB. Wallner turned 28 in the off-season so he's not slowing because of age. Could it be injury? If so, maybe he comes back this year and is a far better defender. TBH, I thought Wallner looked indecisive and slow in the outfield last year. There's a lot to improve on and I think he has the tools to be far better in the field. Michael Taylor Jr. would earn his pay if he helped The Moose to be an above average defender. It goes without saying that Wallner is more valuable if he is a competent outfielder to go with his hitting profile.

This is a crucial year for Wallner. Rodriguez and Jenkins (and Gonzalez) aren't far away and there's not room for all those guys on the outfield corners. I'm not sure what will happen, but it should be interesting.

 

Great post, Stringer. Spot on.

[NYCTK]

1 hour ago, Riverbrian said:

The future will require at least 200 million in payroll just to fill the multiple open spaces left behind by that development failure. 

 

The thing is, $200 million is not a ridiculous payroll. In a few years, that will be the median payroll and the Twins, when trying to be competitive should be sitting around that median. And occasionally, when wanting to actually contend for a title, going up to the 10th highest payroll. 

In an alternate reality, where the Twins made good decisions after the 2023 season, they are sitting with about a $230 million this season. Maybe that means Sonny Gray is here with Pete Alonso, Duran, Jax, and Carlos Correa are still around, and maybe someone like Harrison Bader still around. I still don't know if that is a very good team, but it's probably good enough to win the AL Central. 

Anyways, my point is, fans need to EXPECT a $200 Million payroll, not fear it. Not in a year like this, when there's no effort to compete, instead resetting the roster and seeing what sticks, but on a typical year in which they hope to win the AL Central.