Minnesota Twins 2026 Position Analysis: Right Field

[RpR]

1 hour ago, KirbyDome89 said:

What is the narrative? 

IF, Wallner had a glove as good as Kepler, or even Gallo, he would not be getting the negative he is now getting , but he does not and his glove is Not getting better.

[Vanimal46]

Wallner is one of the very few power threats the Twins have. So I am a little more patient with him because of that lone fact. Defensively, an OF of Larnach - Buxton - Wallner in 2026 is going to stink. Bottom 5 in baseball frankly. We will find out quickly this year if Wallner figures it out, or goes full Miguel Sano striking out way too much and batting below the Uecker level. 

[Wedman13]

Check his career vs Sano thru the same age.? They just came from different places.

hey, I tuned in when both of them come/came to the plate.  Light tower power is fun.  But it doesn't win games..

4 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

Wallner is one of the very few power threats the Twins have. So I am a little more patient with him because of that lone fact. Defensively, an OF of Larnach - Buxton - Wallner in 2026 is going to stink. Bottom 5 in baseball frankly. We will find out quickly this year if Wallner figures it out, or goes full Miguel Sano striking out way too much and batting below the Uecker level. 

 

[Greglw3]

9 hours ago, mikelink45 said:

This is a tough one because I want Wallner to succeed, but I do not want us to make up stats and stories to overlook his failures.  22 HRs 40 RBIs see my comment to Linus.  He was 8th among Twins in RBIs. 

I did not see the normal listing of player - backups - prospects, but I too would like to see Gonzales get an opportunity.  However, I had to laugh at this quote about Gonzales because it reflects on the fact that Wallner is a bad fielder.  

And then I read

That is not true - it is what we want him to be, it is what he was before last year.  I always look forward to these position evaluations, but this one just does not ring true.

The fact is that if Matt Wallner’s .202 batting average weren’t bad enough, he had the fewest RBIs of any player that hit 22 HR in about 100 years since they started keeping track of RBIs.

Think about it this way - I always hear from the stats revolution advocates that you can’y give up ut, you only have 27 of them so don’t bunt or steal much or at all. But with Wallner, 8 times out of 10, you’re giving away an out, those precious 27 outs.

And evaluating him as league average or better ignores the fact that .OPS and OPS+ are biased heavily toward power hitters. I makes no sense to compare apples to oranges and use that same number to compare Wallner’s OPS+ to a Luis Arraez or other leadoff hitter who is helping th team a lot by setting the table. You have to look at the role of a guy on the team.

A better way would be to gather up all the true power hitters in baseball, put them in one bucket and see where Wallner ranks there. I’d bet near the bottom. There’s also that Wallner failed to come up big in the clutch with his 22 HR like Clemens did with his 19. Anyone that watches all the games knows that Clemens had a special knack for rising to the occasion and hitting big HR. And Wallner had 10 RBIs resulting from non-HR. I wonder if all the strikeouts that don’t move baserunners and can’t cause a sacrifice fly had something to do with it???

I want Wallner to do well but I just think it’s a big risk to run back a guy who had a hole in his swing as big as the Grand Canyon and had trouble catching up to just 95 MPH fastballs. Especially with uber talented guys like G Gonzalez and Rodriguez looking ready and probably Jenkins not far behind. I really think if Wallner would cut down on that violent, big swing and try to put the ball in play to the opposite field more often, he’d be a better hitter.

[Vanimal46]

1 hour ago, Wedman13 said:

Check his career vs Sano thru the same age.? They just came from different places.

https://www.sports-reference.com/stathead/tiny/131BS

That link is your wish thru the same age. If he continues on as Sano did, he's a replacement player or worse the rest of his MLB career...

[ashbury]

1 hour ago, Greglw3 said:

with Wallner, 8 times out of 10, you’re giving away an out, those precious 27 outs.

In a world where walks didn't happen, that math might check out.  But because walks are an important part of his game, Wallner made outs 7 out of 10 times in 2025, and for his career he's been closer to 6.5.

Quote

OPS and OPS+ are biased heavily toward power hitters.

You know what else are biased heavily toward power hitters?  Runs and (especially) RBIs.  None of the top ten RBI producers in the majors in 2025 had fewer than 30 HR.  Among the top ten Run scorers only Tatis had as few as 25 HR.

Personally I appreciate a stat that correlates well with run scoring. 

And, as I keep repeating, I hate that Wallner's power was so out of keeping and resulted in such little run production..

Quote

compare Wallner’s OPS+ to a Luis Arraez or other leadoff hitter who is helping th team a lot by setting the table. 

Are you really going to drag Arraez into a thread where he doesn't belong?  Try comparing Arraez to other guys on his own team.  He finished behind both Tatis and Machado in Runs Scored, who batted 1st and 3rd respectively sandwiching Arraez.  Weird that they both somehow set the table better than Luis.

If you prorated Wallner's run scoring to the same number of plate appearances as Arraez had, you'd be looking at 81 runs compared to 66.  Maybe Wallner should be viewed as filling a table setter role - and doing it a bit better than Luis (but less well than Luis's two teammates). 😁  This is no defense of Wallner, but to illustrate how utterly average Arraez is at scoring runs.

Instead of sorting players into arbitrary buckets - roles that can change their meaning after the first time through the batting order - I would rather gauge how close a player is to being a complete hitter.  Arraez and Wallner are at opposite ends of a very checkered spectrum while Tatis and Machado can do more things than either of them to beat the opponent.

Quote

Anyone that watches all the games knows that Clemens had a special knack for rising to the occasion

This on the other hand is supported by the record -  Clemens was practically the Anti-Wallner.  Using the same splits as I referenced for Wallner in my earlier post, Kody was seemingly uninterested when the lead for either team was 5 or more - compiling a bizarre .496 OPS in those particular 74 plate appearances - meaning that his numbers when it mattered were even better than the full season totals would suggest.  He was like that the year before with Philly too, although in much smaller sample size.

When games were within 4 runs, Clemens and Wallner got on base at a nearly identical clip (.297 and .295), but it was Clemens who had by far the better slugging percentage (.471 to .413).  It's really hard to defend Wallner's season.

[Riverbrian]

9 hours ago, Greglw3 said:

Think about it this way - I always hear from the stats revolution advocates that you can’y give up ut, you only have 27 of them so don’t bunt or steal much or at all. But with Wallner, 8 times out of 10, you’re giving away an out, those precious 27 outs.

And evaluating him as league average or better ignores the fact that .OPS and OPS+ are biased heavily toward power hitters. I makes no sense to compare apples to oranges and use that same number to compare Wallner’s OPS+ to a Luis Arraez or other leadoff hitter who is helping th team a lot by setting the table. You have to look at the role of a guy on the team.

In my opinion... The extra out or stolen out is one of the biggest influences on crooked number innings but that's another subject.

In terms of Wallner giving away outs. It's not two out of ten. 

His OBP was .311 in 2025. It was .372 in 2024 and .370 in 2023. 

Arraez OBP in 2025 was .327. It was .346 in 2024 and .347 in 2023. 

Those numbers in perspective. Every 100 PA's Wallner reached base 31.1 times. Arraez reached base every 32.7 times over 100 plate appearances.

For further perspective. Depending on where you hit in the order there typically 4 or 5 plate appearances per game. That means it will take between 20 and 25 games to reach 100 AB's. For Perspective... That's 20 to 25 games to reach base 1.6 more times in 2025. 

OPS is absolutely influenced by power hitters... or more accurately... it is influenced by Slugging. To understand this bias you need to take note of the ranges of the two stats. 

In 2025 the league average OPS was .315 and the league average Slug was .404. You add those two together and you get a league average OPS of .719. Just by league average you can already see a higher number in the Slug.

However... look what happens when you compare the averages with the league leaders of those stats. 

Using those who qualify only. Juan Soto was the OBP leader with a .392 OBP. The leader in OBP doesn't even produce the average SLG. The SLG leader amongst the qualified was Shohei Ohtani with a .622. 

That's a 218 point jump from average to top compared to a 77 point jump average to top. 

Yes power makes the world go round. Batting Average does not.

[MinnInPa]

21 hours ago, rdehring said:

Won't disagree, NIck, with everything you said about his bat.

I will be happy if I never turn on the Twins game and see Wallner in right field.  Yes, he has a big arm.  But too often those throws aren't on target.  He also takes bad routes and too often misplays balls on the ground.  I still remember what may have been his first game when he misplayed a ground ball that a little leaguer should have made.  

Big bat, yes.  Bat that could be huge part of the Twins offense, yes.  But please play him at DH.

or not at all ..play Gonzales

[Jeff K]

I think there is a reasonable chance that Wallner returns to his 23/24 performance levels.  Hopefully that means his defense improves too.  My one disagreement with the article is stating that Larnach can be the back up in right field.  He is awful.  The Twins are mesmerized by multi positional flexibility.  Only a few players should be utilized in that manner.  Larnach is NOT one of them.

[Greglw3]

9 hours ago, ashbury said:

In a world where walks didn't happen, that math might check out.  But because walks are an important part of his game, Wallner made outs 7 out of 10 times in 2025, and for his career he's been closer to 6.5.

You know what else are biased heavily toward power hitters?  Runs and (especially) RBIs.  None of the top ten RBI producers in the majors in 2025 had fewer than 30 HR.  Among the top ten Run scorers only Tatis had as few as 25 HR.

Personally I appreciate a stat that correlates well with run scoring. 

And, as I keep repeating, I hate that Wallner's power was so out of keeping and resulted in such little run production..

Are you really going to drag Arraez into a thread where he doesn't belong?  Try comparing Arraez to other guys on his own team.  He finished behind both Tatis and Machado in Runs Scored, who batted 1st and 3rd respectively sandwiching Arraez.  Weird that they both somehow set the table better than Luis.

If you prorated Wallner's run scoring to the same number of plate appearances as Arraez had, you'd be looking at 81 runs compared to 66.  Maybe Wallner should be viewed as filling a table setter role - and doing it a bit better than Luis (but less well than Luis's two teammates). 😁  This is no defense of Wallner, but to illustrate how utterly average Arraez is at scoring runs.

Instead of sorting players into arbitrary buckets - roles that can change their meaning after the first time through the batting order - I would rather gauge how close a player is to being a complete hitter.  Arraez and Wallner are at opposite ends of a very checkered spectrum while Tatis and Machado can do more things than either of them to beat the opponent.

This on the other hand is supported by the record -  Clemens was practically the Anti-Wallner.  Using the same splits as I referenced for Wallner in my earlier post, Kody was seemingly uninterested when the lead for either team was 5 or more - compiling a bizarre .496 OPS in those particular 74 plate appearances - meaning that his numbers when it mattered were even better than the full season totals would suggest.  He was like that the year before with Philly too, although in much smaller sample size.

When games were within 4 runs, Clemens and Wallner got on base at a nearly identical clip (.297 and .295), but it was Clemens who had by far the better slugging percentage (.471 to .413).  It's really hard to defend Wallner's season.

I didn’t want it to be about Arraez,

I could have used Austin Martin and his .378 OBP or Rickey Henderson or Mike Hargrove when they were walking over 100 times but not hitting for power (earlier Rickey) - the concept that OPS+ should not be used as a one size fits all stat lumping all players in baseball together for comparison’s sake, with OPS+, and ensuring that players like Joey Gallo (.177 hitter) and Matt Wallner (.202) and even post 2019 Max Kepler are cited in a way that is way out of whack with their true value as hitters.

The underlying concept is that player’s can play very valuable roles on teams with any number of blatant and/or subtle skills that lead to run scoring that don’t show up as well as a (in Wallner’s case) very flawed power hitter.

[bean5302]

18 hours ago, Nshore said:

I suspect that the pro-Wallner stuff is being written by the propaganda arm of the Twins' Central Division competitors.  Wallner may end up being the first player in ML history to get through a season with fewer RBI's than HR's.  This might be the year.

Whereas the anti-Wallner information is sourced directly from the rear end of enraged Twins fans looking for scapegoats.

[Bodie]

21 hours ago, mikelink45 said:

This is a tough one because I want Wallner to succeed, but I do not want us to make up stats and stories to overlook his failures.  22 HRs 40 RBIs see my comment to Linus.  He was 8th among Twins in RBIs. 

I did not see the normal listing of player - backups - prospects, but I too would like to see Gonzales get an opportunity.  However, I had to laugh at this quote about Gonzales because it reflects on the fact that Wallner is a bad fielder.  

And then I read

That is not true - it is what we want him to be, it is what he was before last year.  I always look forward to these position evaluations, but this one just does not ring true.

Need an "agree" button, because I don't "like" anything other than hoping he improves. One of those sad but true songs...

Edited March 12 by Bodie
Spell check shenanigans

[Greglw3]

1 hour ago, Riverbrian said:

In my opinion... The extra out or stolen out is one of the biggest influences on crooked number innings but that's another subject.

In terms of Wallner giving away outs. It's not two out of ten. 

His OBP was .311 in 2025. It was .372 in 2024 and .370 in 2023. 

Arraez OBP in 2025 was .327. It was .346 in 2024 and .347 in 2023. 

Those numbers in perspective. Every 100 PA's Wallner reached base 31.1 times. Arraez reached base every 32.7 times over 100 plate appearances.

For further perspective. Depending on where you hit in the order there typically 4 or 5 plate appearances per game. That means it will take between 20 and 25 games to reach 100 AB's. For Perspective... That's 20 to 25 games to reach base 1.6 more times in 2025. 

OPS is absolutely influenced by power hitters... or more accurately... it is influenced by Slugging. To understand this bias you need to take note of the ranges of the two stats. 

In 2025 the league average OPS was .315 and the league average Slug was .404. You add those two together and you get a league average OPS of .719. Just by league average you can already see a higher number in the Slug.

However... look what happens when you compare the averages with the league leaders of those stats. 

Using those who qualify only. Juan Soto was the OBP leader with a .392 OBP. The leader in OBP doesn't even produce the average SLG. The SLG leader amongst the qualified was Shohei Ohtani with a .622. 

That's a 218 point jump from average to top compared to a 77 point jump average to top. 

Yes power makes the world go round. Batting Average does not.

That's where we disagree. For one thing, singles are significantly more valuable than walks, especially on a fast team with hitters that are capable of bringing in runners from third with 0 or 1 out routinely.

Sorry, my biggest baseball hero is Rod Carew. I think he s very close to the best hitter in baseball history. He was not a power hitter. He won his 7 batting titles by an average of 30 points compared to Honus Wagner winning by average 15 points for his 8 batting titles.

I’m heavily influenced by the explosive run scoring capabilities of the 1977 Twins who only had one power hitter in Hisle at 28 but had Bostock .336 14 HR, Carew .388 14 HR, Glenn Adams .338 and Hisle .302 and the team scored over 800 runs. I was totally into that team and other 70s Twins teams that had high batting averages, little power and scored lots of runs.

Recent Twins teams have had offenses that dragged the team down and I maintain that the many hitters in Twins lineups on given days with .19X, 0r .20x or .21x or even .22x averages have lead to many games that the Twin struggle to score even a run and too often end up at 1 or 2 runs.

Good batting averages matter and are why 2 of the Twins most valuable offensive players this year could easily be Austin Martin ad Luke Keaschall, the Twins two top hitters for average in 2025, both with 30 SB speed.

If you offer me Matt Wallner’s .202 22 HR 40 RBI season (or even 30 HR 60 RBI with a .210 average) or Lyman Bostock’s .336 14 HR season as the 3rd outfielder, it would be the easiest decision ever! I’d also take a Gabby Gonzalez .310 with 10 HR season over Wallner’s 2025.

Since I thrived to Rod Carew doing .350, .359, .364, .332 and .388 in a 5 year period....it influences me a lot. .202 horrifies me!!!

Batting average matters a lot. ask .365 and .347 Joe Mauer, who without this two seasons of high batting average might not be in the HOF.

[Greglw3]

19 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

Whereas the anti-Wallner information is sourced directly from the rear end of enraged Twins fans looking for scapegoats.

The anti Wallner information is sourced by Matt Wallner and his inept hitting performance in 2025.

[Nshore]

43 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

Whereas the anti-Wallner information is sourced directly from the rear end of enraged Twins fans looking for scapegoats.

Actually I think Twins fans, at least those very few of us left, have been extremely patient - probably too patient with some of the hapless floundering that goes on.

[bean5302]

1 hour ago, Greglw3 said:

The anti Wallner information is sourced by Matt Wallner and his inept hitting performance in 2025.

 

59 minutes ago, Nshore said:

Actually I think Twins fans, at least those very few of us left, have been extremely patient - probably too patient with some of the hapless floundering that goes on.

Inept?

wRC+ 114.

wRC+ 124 (OPS .800 or even better) with runners on base.

wRC+ 127 when playing outfield, not DH

When playing outfield, among 79 outfielders with 300+ PA, Matt Wallner ranked 12th in all of baseball last year.

He's not the poor performer you're looking for.

[Greglw3]

42 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

 

Inept?

wRC+ 114.

wRC+ 124 (OPS .800 or even better) with runners on base.

wRC+ 127 when playing outfield, not DH

When playing outfield, among 79 outfielders with 300+ PA, Matt Wallner ranked 12th in all of baseball last year.

He's not the poor performer you're looking for.

Those stats as I explained are a distortion reflective of the 22 HR, which were so valuable that they produced 30 RBIs!

.202 is now and has always been a pathetic batting average.

Having the lowest RBIs of any 22 HR hitter in 100 years is inept. Several Twins hitters had significantly more runs driven in because they made more contact.

Having a season long struggle to hit MLB pitchers 95 MPH fastballs is inept. I watched it happen repeatedly. Wallner could not catch up to 95 MPH fastballs.

He was a very poor performer.

 

[Riverbrian]

3 hours ago, Greglw3 said:

That's where we disagree. For one thing, singles are significantly more valuable than walks, especially on a fast team with hitters that are capable of bringing in runners from third with 0 or 1 out routinely.

Sorry, my biggest baseball hero is Rod Carew. I think he s very close to the best hitter in baseball history. He was not a power hitter. He won his 7 batting titles by an average of 30 points compared to Honus Wagner winning by average 15 points for his 8 batting titles.

I’m heavily influenced by the explosive run scoring capabilities of the 1977 Twins who only had one power hitter in Hisle at 28 but had Bostock .336 14 HR, Carew .388 14 HR, Glenn Adams .338 and Hisle .302 and the team scored over 800 runs. I was totally into that team and other 70s Twins teams that had high batting averages, little power and scored lots of runs.

Recent Twins teams have had offenses that dragged the team down and I maintain that the many hitters in Twins lineups on given days with .19X, 0r .20x or .21x or even .22x averages have lead to many games that the Twin struggle to score even a run and too often end up at 1 or 2 runs.

Good batting averages matter and are why 2 of the Twins most valuable offensive players this year could easily be Austin Martin ad Luke Keaschall, the Twins two top hitters for average in 2025, both with 30 SB speed.

If you offer me Matt Wallner’s .202 22 HR 40 RBI season (or even 30 HR 60 RBI with a .210 average) or Lyman Bostock’s .336 14 HR season as the 3rd outfielder, it would be the easiest decision ever! I’d also take a Gabby Gonzalez .310 with 10 HR season over Wallner’s 2025.

Since I thrived to Rod Carew doing .350, .359, .364, .332 and .388 in a 5 year period....it influences me a lot. .202 horrifies me!!!

Batting average matters a lot. ask .365 and .347 Joe Mauer, who without this two seasons of high batting average might not be in the HOF.

Rod Carew is my also my favorite baseball player of all time and I also want to state that I am a big Luis Arraez fan as well. These players put the ball in play and make things happen... So... I'm not arguing any of your points.

Yes a single is more valuable than a walk if a runner is already on base but I jumped into the discussion because you said "But with Wallner, 8 times out of 10, you’re giving away an out, those precious 27 outs." 

This was where I felt the need to jump in. When it comes to the subject of making outs... The difference between Wallner and Arraez isn't much. 

I fully agree with you that outs are precious. The extra out or stolen out is a huge deal. If the league average OBP for 2025 was .315. Just using simple math it will tell you that approximately 1 out of 3 batters reach base on average. That is two outs and one baserunner every three batters... that is the average and as you can tell... it's going to be hard to score runs with that type of percentage of one baserunner and two outs.

So... run production for every major league club is going to come down to sequencing... stringing some hits and walks together. 

If you give away an out... an error or a walk turning 3 outs into 4 or if a CF robs you of a hit turning 3 outs into 2. The odds of a scoring a run increase decrease dramatically or worse yet... the odds of scoring multiple runs in an inning increase or decrease dramatically because it provides or takes away an opportunity to have multiple positive events happen in a given inning before the 3 out clock runs out of time. It also increases the possibility of that three run jack and this is where Power is a game changer. A three run jack is an instant crooked number. 

It is my opinion... that the crooked numbers increase the chances of winning baseball games. I don't have stats to back that up. I just believe this from my years of watching baseball. Giving up 5 runs in an inning is hard to come back from. Sometimes you do... most times you don't. 

As Ashbury has been pointing out. Wallner really wasn't a lot of help in the sequencing part last year. He's right. I just happen to believe that that sort of thing isn't necessarily repeatable from year to year or month to month or week to week or day to day.     

If I have a concern about Wallner... that would be his strikeout rate. The K is about as empty as it gets in regards to those precious outs. I'm concerned about any batter over 30%. Wallner might be improving in that regard... he has gone from 38.5 in his rookie year to 31.5 to 36.5 to the 29.1 in 2025. 

2025 wasn't his best year... he's got some things to work out. If he gets that K rate down... with that exit velocity... look out. Will he? I don't know but he costs the minimum and this team needs to develop and development sometimes requires a little patience. We can't just toss guys after a bad year when they are still under team control and cost the minimum.   

[ashbury]

3 hours ago, Greglw3 said:

I could have used Austin Martin and his .378 OBP 

Martin being on the same team is worth looking at.  With all that on-base skill, plus some base-stealing, Martin in 2025 scored runs at almost exactly the clip that Wallner did.  121 per thousand PA versus 120.  That is, well, bad.  And Wallner, for all his warts, produced more RBI per PA.  The low-power table setter leads to disappointing run production.

[bean5302]

1 hour ago, Greglw3 said:

Those stats as I explained are a distortion reflective of the 22 HR, which were so valuable that they produced 30 RBIs!

.202 is now and has always been a pathetic batting average.

Having the lowest RBIs of any 22 HR hitter in 100 years is inept. Several Twins hitters had significantly more runs driven in because they made more contact.

Having a season long struggle to hit MLB pitchers 95 MPH fastballs is inept. I watched it happen repeatedly. Wallner could not catch up to 95 MPH fastballs.

He was a very poor performer.

 

Yeah. Home runs suck. Matt Wallner should demand umpires allow terrible hitters on the Twins to get pity on base opportunities so when Wallner homers, he generates more RBI.

If Wallner's OPS is .800 and his wRC+ is 124 with runners on base, you can't complain his OPS is all from home runs or he'd have a bunch of RBI, wouldn't he?

[arby58]

On 3/11/2026 at 9:46 AM, Linus said:

The whole clutch thing is overblown. It’s more a function of the Twins not having many baserunners and opposing pitchers pitching carefully to him with men on. 

It is a silly complaint. If you break down the Twins HRs versus Wallner's, they are not that dissimilar:

	Minnesota Twins		Matt Wallner
1 run HR	117	61.3%	13	65.0%
2 run HR	54	28.3%	6	30.0%
3 run HR	18	9.4%	1	5.0%
Grand Slam	2	1.0%	0	0.0%
Total	191		20

[Greglw3]

On 3/12/2026 at 12:23 PM, Riverbrian said:

Rod Carew is my also my favorite baseball player of all time and I also want to state that I am a big Luis Arraez fan as well. These players put the ball in play and make things happen... So... I'm not arguing any of your points.

Yes a single is more valuable than a walk if a runner is already on base but I jumped into the discussion because you said "But with Wallner, 8 times out of 10, you’re giving away an out, those precious 27 outs." 

This was where I felt the need to jump in. When it comes to the subject of making outs... The difference between Wallner and Arraez isn't much. 

I fully agree with you that outs are precious. The extra out or stolen out is a huge deal. If the league average OBP for 2025 was .315. Just using simple math it will tell you that approximately 1 out of 3 batters reach base on average. That is two outs and one baserunner every three batters... that is the average and as you can tell... it's going to be hard to score runs with that type of percentage of one baserunner and two outs.

So... run production for every major league club is going to come down to sequencing... stringing some hits and walks together. 

If you give away an out... an error or a walk turning 3 outs into 4 or if a CF robs you of a hit turning 3 outs into 2. The odds of a scoring a run increase decrease dramatically or worse yet... the odds of scoring multiple runs in an inning increase or decrease dramatically because it provides or takes away an opportunity to have multiple positive events happen in a given inning before the 3 out clock runs out of time. It also increases the possibility of that three run jack and this is where Power is a game changer. A three run jack is an instant crooked number. 

It is my opinion... that the crooked numbers increase the chances of winning baseball games. I don't have stats to back that up. I just believe this from my years of watching baseball. Giving up 5 runs in an inning is hard to come back from. Sometimes you do... most times you don't. 

As Ashbury has been pointing out. Wallner really wasn't a lot of help in the sequencing part last year. He's right. I just happen to believe that that sort of thing isn't necessarily repeatable from year to year or month to month or week to week or day to day.     

If I have a concern about Wallner... that would be his strikeout rate. The K is about as empty as it gets in regards to those precious outs. I'm concerned about any batter over 30%. Wallner might be improving in that regard... he has gone from 38.5 in his rookie year to 31.5 to 36.5 to the 29.1 in 2025. 

2025 wasn't his best year... he's got some things to work out. If he gets that K rate down... with that exit velocity... look out. Will he? I don't know but he costs the minimum and this team needs to develop and development sometimes requires a little patience. We can't just toss guys after a bad year when they are still under team control and cost the minimum.   

I acknowledge that Arraez and Wallner may have made outs at the same rate when comparing plate appearances. The thing that trips me up is that Wallner hit .202 and Arraez hit .292 and has hit as high as .354 in an MLB season. Arraez also had the most hits of any hitter in the NL, durable. I find the .292 vs. .202 to be more relevant that comparing the OPS+ of a pure power hitter to a classic  spray hitter like Arraez (as was Carew).

I see Wallner started hitting the moment I made my case about being worried because of his 2025! If he can do that in the regular season, it will help the Twins immensely. I’d love to see him get 40 or more hits to left field and raise that batting average!!!  .275 with 35 HR!

[Riverbrian]

1 hour ago, Greglw3 said:

I acknowledge that Arraez and Wallner may have made outs at the same rate when comparing plate appearances. The thing that trips me up is that Wallner hit .202 and Arraez hit .292 and has hit as high as .354 in an MLB season. Arraez also had the most hits of any hitter in the NL, durable. I find the .292 vs. .202 to be more relevant that comparing the OPS+ of a pure power hitter to a classic  spray hitter like Arraez (as was Carew).

I see Wallner started hitting the moment I made my case about being worried because of his 2025! If he can do that in the regular season, it will help the Twins immensely. I’d love to see him get 40 or more hits to left field and raise that batting average!!!  .275 with 35 HR!

Keep making your case if it starts him hitting. 😉

[USAFChief]

On 3/12/2026 at 11:00 AM, bean5302 said:

Yeah. Home runs suck. Matt Wallner should demand umpires allow terrible hitters on the Twins to get pity on base opportunities so when Wallner homers, he generates more RBI.

If Wallner's OPS is .800 and his wRC+ is 124 with runners on base, you can't complain his OPS is all from home runs or he'd have a bunch of RBI, wouldn't he?

HRs don't suck. Nice strawman. Nobody said they did. But HRs don't happen  that often,  and the problem with Wallner is what he is able to accomplish in those many, many ABs when he doesnt hit a home run.

826 career ABs...77 RBI that arent himself. Seventy seven. The man has three...THREE...career sac flies.

... 3.

Baseball games arent won by adding up wRC+ or another made up metric. They're won by adding up runs. And runs dont happen by magic. They happen when someone knocks them in. 

[bean5302]

12 hours ago, USAFChief said:

HRs don't suck. Nice strawman. Nobody said they did. But HRs don't happen  that often,  and the problem with Wallner is what he is able to accomplish in those many, many ABs when he doesnt hit a home run.

826 career ABs...77 RBI that arent himself. Seventy seven. The man has three...THREE...career sac flies.

... 3.

Baseball games arent won by adding up wRC+ or another made up metric. They're won by adding up runs. And runs dont happen by magic. They happen when someone knocks them in. 

It's the same argument as always which amounts to players can choose when to be good or bad. It was the argument a lot of supporters for Jack Morris made. He only gave up runs and hits when they didn't matter. In general, the argument doesn't hold water based on statistical analysis; however, it's true, some players seem to fold under pressure.

Wallner might be such a player, but he generates RBI at a pretty solid rate compared to other Twins hitters from 2023-2025. Every 7.686 plate appearances, Wallner bats in a run. Better than a solid majority of Twins batters with 300+ PA over that time span.

So again, if nobody is ever on base, Matt Wallner will not have a ton of RBI.

[Greglw3]

On 3/12/2026 at 1:00 PM, bean5302 said:

Yeah. Home runs suck. Matt Wallner should demand umpires allow terrible hitters on the Twins to get pity on base opportunities so when Wallner homers, he generates more RBI.

If Wallner's OPS is .800 and his wRC+ is 124 with runners on base, you can't complain his OPS is all from home runs or he'd have a bunch of RBI, wouldn't he?

Stats can be used to build almost any case. His OPS was largely from the Home Runs but 22 HR are pretty much wasted when they produce 30 RBIs. That just shows the very limited nature of using OPS to compare all players to each other. 

Facts are stubborn but Wallner generated 30 RBIs on HR and 10 RBIs for the season on singles, walks, doubles, triples, groundouts and sacrifice flies. It had zero to do with not enough guys being on base.

Wallner's job as a power hitter is to drive in runs.  He was maybe 7th or 8th on the Twins in RBIs and was crushed by non-power hitting, low batting average Brooks Lee around 66-40. And Clemens.

These intractable facts are just one of the many reasons that OPS+, OPS, WRC+ and a lot of the newer, untested, not scientifically validated, and importantly, still being tweaked to this day are flawed and mis-used as one size fits all statistics.

I believe the Twins whole 6 year collapse and the demise of Falvey and Baldelli was caused because of an over-reliance on power and home runs and an under-reliance on hit and runs, 1st to 3rd, stolen bases and yes, bunts. Ask Terry Francone or Rod Carew (Two Hall of Famers) about the value of a bunt.

I still believe that if Wallner would use the whole field, go the opposite way and concentrate on contact, he’d be more likely to get his share of homers and be a much better hitter with a higher batting average. I hope he does it.