Matt Wallner Has Made the Right Adjustment

[mickster]

2 hours ago, Jim H said:

Implying Wallner is in their class? Both those guys hit over 40 home runs a year with batting averages over 250 and sprinkle a lot of doubles in there as well. If Wallner can get over 30 home runs he would provide some value. But, these advanced stats seem to overvalue home runs compared to other hits, in my opinion.  

It looks like Wallner is going to get a chance to prove he can be a little more consistent and maybe provide more than solo home runs that don't seem to be particularly clutch.

He needs to be in the lineup everyday.   Schwarber maybe he becomes

[Doube Duty Dave]

Hopefully he figures it out, but right now he is a Minnesota-grown Joey Gallo. If a pitcher misses down and over the plate, Wallner can hit it. Anything else and he has no chance. I have said it before, but I'm 56 years old with a partially torn rotator cuff and can sneak a fastball past him high in the zone. If the next Matt Trueblood article is about what a potent offensive force Kody Clemens is, I think I'll puke. 

[KirbyDome89]

32 minutes ago, MGX said:

All I did was post actual numbers, if you don't agree with the numbers fine.

Yeah, and I added some context, which is of equal importance. 

[MGX]

5 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

Yeah, and I added some context, which is of equal importance. 

Just denying what numbers clearly say isn't adding context. I guess you just dislike Wallner for whatever reason. To me he has been a productive offensive player. It seems you don't agree so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[RpR]

10 minutes ago, MGX said:

Just denying what numbers clearly say isn't adding context. I guess you just dislike Wallner for whatever reason. To me he has been a productive offensive player. It seems you don't agree so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

LOL, you can disagree without an agreement to do so.🧐

[Woof Bronzer]

23 minutes ago, MGX said:

Just denying what numbers clearly say isn't adding context. I guess you just dislike Wallner for whatever reason. To me he has been a productive offensive player. It seems you don't agree so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

You understand that wRC+ isn't an actual statistic, right?  It's some guy's attempt to measure offensive value by weighting what he most values in hitters by normalizing the data (removing all context) and guessing what would have happened if the games were played in a vacuum against robots in a way that spits out 100 as average.  It's not hard data.  Doesn't mean it isn't useful, but wRC+ is a formula, not a fact.

Here's how easy this is. 

Kody Clemens had 1.2 WAR last year, Wallner had 0.6.  Numbers clearly say Clemens is twice as good as Wallner, right?  End of conversation, if you don't think so you hate math.  

 

[KirbyDome89]

22 minutes ago, MGX said:

Just denying what numbers clearly say isn't adding context. I guess you just dislike Wallner for whatever reason. To me he has been a productive offensive player. It seems you don't agree so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Pointing out that Cal Raleigh, coming off a near MVP season, has been one of the best hitting catchers in baseball for the last 3+ years is most certainly adding context. 

Pointing out that 2025 for James Wood was a stretch of production that Matt Wallner hasn't rivaled is also adding context. 

The irony of claiming to be "just the actual numbers," guy while pushing back on the addition of more numbers (yay context) entering the chat seems to be lost. I don't understand the inability by some to separate a view of Wallner as a flawed player vs. "hating," him, but ok....

[Mike Sixel]

17 minutes ago, Woof Bronzer said:

You understand that wRC+ isn't an actual statistic, right?  It's some guy's attempt to measure offensive value by weighting what he most values in hitters by normalizing the data (removing all context) and guessing what would have happened if the games were played in a vacuum against robots in a way that spits out 100 as average.  It's not hard data.  Doesn't mean it isn't useful, but wRC+ is a formula, not a fact.

Here's how easy this is. 

Kody Clemens had 1.2 WAR last year, Wallner had 0.6.  Numbers clearly say Clemens is twice as good as Wallner, right?  End of conversation, if you don't think so you hate math.  

 

That's literally the definition of a statistic. 

[Rod Carews Birthday]

2 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

"Wasn't sexy," is probably an understatement. Wallner feasted on subpar pitching in games that were out of reach. I understand that, to a degree, everybody is going to get fat against lesser competition, but Wallner's splits were extreme. 

The bar to clear shouldn't be other prospects that have fizzled. A 114 OPS+ from your starting SS who is capable of actually defending the position would be a revelation for this club. A 114 OPS+ from a guy that struggles to play one of the smaller RFs in baseball and adds nothing on the bases is likely someone you're moving on from. 

Sure. . . and yet we had the great hitter Max Kepler there for years.  Yes, I'm aware that he was a better fielder than Wallner (although Max's best fielding days are behind him), but there is a difference between a 114 OPS+ and a 91 OPS+, and it's more than a couple of poorly played balls to the outfield.  

To be clear, Matt Wallner isn't the next incarnation of Aaron Judge.  However, as far as power hitters go, he is the player with the best chance to deliver power on the team not named Byron Buxton.  Discard him at your own peril.  

[Mike Sixel]

I have no idea if Wallner has made an adjustment that will work, or if he'll be healthy this year. What I'm fairly sure of is that no team on a budget should give up on a guy like Wallner. You might not like how he gets the results he does, but they are above league average for hitters.

ME? I'd have put him at first base or DH and put Roden in right, but luckily for all, I'm not in charge. Now that they have not done that, keep him in RF for 2 months and see what happens.

[ashbury]

2 hours ago, mickster said:

Everyday, in the lineup to be, he needs. Schwarber maybe he becomes

Fixed that for ya.

[KirbyDome89]

22 minutes ago, Rod Carews Birthday said:

Sure. . . and yet we had the great hitter Max Kepler there for years.  Yes, I'm aware that he was a better fielder than Wallner (although Max's best fielding days are behind him), but there is a difference between a 114 OPS+ and a 91 OPS+, and it's more than a couple of poorly played balls to the outfield.  

To be clear, Matt Wallner isn't the next incarnation of Aaron Judge.  However, as far as power hitters go, he is the player with the best chance to deliver power on the team not named Byron Buxton.  Discard him at your own peril.  

People were (rightfully so) pushing to upgrade RF when Kepler was there. Not for necessarily the same reasons, but the limited skillset(s) means the margin for productive vs. looking to move on from is thin. 

Best chance to deliver power on the team not named Buxton is again, an insanely low bar. I'm all for feeding him PAs this year to see if he can maintain that 2023 level of production over the course of an entire season. If 2026 looks a lot like 2025, eh, you've got a 29 year old that isn't suited to play the field and doesn't have a consistent enough bat to hold down the DH spot. 

[sweetmusicviola16]

Wallner has struggled in high leverage situations. That's an issue. But he also appears to be one of this teams best hitters. Probably better keep him. And let him play every day against both L/R. But he should be DHing. Oh my bad, this team signed Josh Bell to man 1B and he shouldn't be so Bell gets the most time at DH. What a mess. 

[RpR]

7 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

I have no idea if Wallner has made an adjustment that will work, or if he'll be healthy this year. What I'm fairly sure of is that no team on a budget should give up on a guy like Wallner. You might not like how he gets the results he does, but they are above league average for hitters.

ME? I'd have put him at first base or DH and put Roden in right, but luckily for all, I'm not in charge. Now that they have not done that, keep him in RF for 2 months and see what happens.

Slow, stiff and awkward at first base, a Perfect fit.🤑

[Wedman13]

13 hours ago, Rufus said:

I just don't understand the love affair fans with this guy.  compare him to Miguel Sano.  Sano had better career numbers and the fans booed him to death.  Wallner has played right field his entire career.  Sano played a different position almost every year.   Larnach's numbers are not great, but better than Wallner's.   

It's a joke, and this is supposed to an educated fan site.  Wallner is every last thing wrong with this lineup.  I am sure a great local kid.  I know many great local kids.  But it's getting so over the top the love affair.  It hasn't worked out.  It's too bad.  Move on

his bombs are amazing 20 times a year.  His RBI's are great 40 times a year.  His batting avg is terrible.  Please get back in a month with results, not 'adjustments'

[Fred]

11 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

No, Larnach’s numbers are not better than Wallner’s. Wallner has a better OBP (.344 to .327) and much better ISO (.261 to .169). This leads to a better wRC+ as Wallner is 33% above league average since 2023 while Larnach is 7% of league average.

133 puts Wallner 19th of all major leaguers in that time frame. Larnach is 111 out of 268 players with 900 PAs since 2023.

 

 

I want Larnach gone. He is in the way of 2 or 3 guys with much higher ceilings. I haven't reached that point with Wallner, but I'm getting close.

[Vanimal46]

7 hours ago, KirbyDome89 said:

People were (rightfully so) pushing to upgrade RF when Kepler was there. Not for necessarily the same reasons, but the limited skillset(s) means the margin for productive vs. looking to move on from is thin. 

Best chance to deliver power on the team not named Buxton is again, an insanely low bar. I'm all for feeding him PAs this year to see if he can maintain that 2023 level of production over the course of an entire season. If 2026 looks a lot like 2025, eh, you've got a 29 year old that isn't suited to play the field and doesn't have a consistent enough bat to hold down the DH spot. 

Remember the good old days when Max Kepler batting breakout articles were an annual tradition? 

[Fred]

26 minutes ago, RpR said:

Slow, stiff and awkward at first base, a Perfect fit.🤑

He looks like he could be a 1st baseman. It would be hard for me to believe that nobody has tried it already. If so, it must have looked pretty bad

[Richie the Rally Goat]

22 minutes ago, Fred said:

I want Larnach gone. He is in the way of 2 or 3 guys with much higher ceilings. I haven't reached that point with Wallner, but I'm getting close.

Larnach, Bell and Wallner are all bad fielders and there can only be one DH, but those are 3 of the 6 best hitters on this team and it drops off precipitously

if Wallner can regain his 2023/2024 magic, I’d be thrilled, and I am optimistic his adjustments can get him headed in the right direction.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

21 hours ago, Woof Bronzer said:

It's always entertaining to see what passes for a meaningful sample size for the sabermetric crowd.  If the sabermetric produces a result that goes against sabermetric gospel, it's simply hand waved away as a small sample size.  Conversely if the sabermetric produces a result that aligns with sabermetric gospel, sample size simply isn't mentioned.  

Wallner has 17 PAs in 2026.  He's batting .143 with a .650 OPS.  (Full disclosure, I'm not sure what his wRC+ is so far, which seems to be the metric that the sabermetric crowd have decided is the only one that matters when evaluating Wallner.  I'm sure it's fantastic.)  Might be juuuuuuust a bit early to proclaim Mission Accomplished.  

I've said many times I think Wallner is neither the worst Twin to ever suit up, nor a misunderstood All Star caliber slugger.  The fact that a 28 year old one tool player with less than 5 career WAR conjures up such intense passion amongst fans is really fascinating.  His top 2 bRef comps are Jon Nunnally and, lol, Oswaldo Arcia.  I'd have to go back and look but I doubt there were 500 articles written about Oswaldo Arcia.  

wRC+ (FG) or OPS+ (BBR) are nearly identical, they are a convenient all encompassing stat of weighted inputs to run creation on a 100=league average scale. They are not the be-all end-all by any stretch, but they are good and convenient, much the way OPS was the nerd stat du sur 15 years ago.

Clearly you know this, but its too early to use much statistical analysis this season. On Monday Wallner had a 200 wRC+ yesterday it was 95, today it’s 77, tomorrow it could be 50 or 150, wRC doesn’t matter. Clearly I’m a Fangraphs guy.

[USAFChief]

2 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

wRC+ (FG) or OPS+ (BBR) are nearly identical, they are a convenient all encompassing stat of weighted inputs to run creation on a 100=league average scale. They are not the be-all end-all by any stretch, but they are good and convenient, much the way OPS was the nerd stat du sur 15 years ago.

Clearly you know this, but its too early to use much statistical analysis this season. On Monday Wallner had a 200 wRC+ yesterday it was 95, today it’s 77, tomorrow it could be 50 or 150, wRC doesn’t matter. Clearly I’m a Fangraphs guy.

Not that it matters, but I'd call wRC+ a metric, rather than a statistic.

Either way, I'd prefer the Twins keep giving Wallner chances for at least this season. He does have the potential to be a quality hitter, and it's not like there are better options currently. There are a couple minor leaguers who are gonna need a chance soon, but there's low hanging fruit to drop before Wallner.

However, I disagree he's been a good MLB hitter to date, except in short stretches.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

56 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

Not that it matters, but I'd call wRC+ a metric, rather than a statistic.

Either way, I'd prefer the Twins keep giving Wallner chances for at least this season. He does have the potential to be a quality hitter, and it's not like there are better options currently. There are a couple minor leaguers who are gonna need a chance soon, but there's low hanging fruit to drop before Wallner.

However, I disagree he's been a good MLB hitter to date, except in short stretches.

In terms of semantics, wRC+ and OPS+ are qualitative not quantitative and are preferred as better predictors than batting average. Dusting off my college math, I think I’m getting at the parameter (the f) of the statistic. Y=f(x), the x would be plate appearances and y would be “how much value a hitter is predicted to have on the season” kinda crude WAR.

 

Wallner falls about 80 plate appearances shy of TK index to hit sample size. Does he need those 80 plate appearances to make his career 130ish wRC+ statistically significant? Or is the ~30% above average not qualify?

[peterb18]

Matt Wallner is unreliable with his swing…too inconsistent and unreliable. Hope he  has  success but  doubt it.

 

 

[SteveLV]

5 K's today.  Not sure what he figured out, but he needs to be better than that!  Tied all-time franchise record.

Have no idea why he can't try to play 1st base. Doesn't seem possible he could be worse than Clemons is.....

[USAFChief]

On 4/2/2026 at 8:52 AM, Richie the Rally Goat said:

In terms of semantics, wRC+ and OPS+ are qualitative not quantitative and are preferred as better predictors than batting average. Dusting off my college math, I think I’m getting at the parameter (the f) of the statistic. Y=f(x), the x would be plate appearances and y would be “how much value a hitter is predicted to have on the season” kinda crude WAR.

 

Wallner falls about 80 plate appearances shy of TK index to hit sample size. Does he need those 80 plate appearances to make his career 130ish wRC+ statistically significant? Or is the ~30% above average not qualify?

He's 30% above average using the metric du jour.

I dont happen to agree.

[tarheeltwinsfan]

After striking out 5 times (it's called a platinum sombrero) yesterday against the Rays, it's back to the drawing board for Wallner.

[RpR]

12 hours ago, SteveLV said:

Have no idea why he can't try to play 1st base. Doesn't seem possible he could be worse than Clemons is.....

Because he is Slow and Stiff, not quick and fast.

[tony&rodney]

Wallner is a DH as is Bell, Larnach, and Caratini plus maybe more. That is a tough thing for a team. So far Big Matt hasn't had to lumber very far or cost his pitchers, whereas Larnach and Caratini have already struggled in the field. It is what it is and the Twins need to make the best of it for now until someone better forces their way forward.

Wallner cannot play first base, nor can Larnach. Larnach was used one time in summer ball. You have to know that multiple teams/coaches have already made a number of

attempts putting Larnach and Wallner at first base. It would not be responsible to place either in such danger from throws or batted balls much less pick off plays. If you still think so that merely shows that you have never had to catch a ball at 90+mph or field a ball at 100+ mph. Both would be safer at catcher, although pitchers and umpires would not be amused.

Wallner gets full time play until he totally implodes or someone passes him up. Hopefully he can adjust and find success.

[USAFChief]

On 4/1/2026 at 11:59 AM, Mike Sixel said:

That's literally the definition of a statistic. 

No. It's definitely not.

 

[jkcarew]

I think the lesson to be learned here is not whether Wallner is good or not good per se…

but instead, that an article RIDICULING his skills and adjustments would necessarily have resulted in the INVERSE of what he’s done since this favorable article was written. Instead of 7 K’s in his next 9 PA…which is what he’s done…we’d be looking at 7 HR in 9 PA. At least.

It’s obvious. Stop writing positive articles about guys’ performances or adjustments immediately prior to a game. On the other hand, ripping a player in this situation never hurts, and usually results in said player instantly going on a tear. I can’t believe I even have to say this. We should all know this by now. Let’s be a little more responsible.