Sure, in the same way that in 1980 Reagan was the backup establishment candidate if George Bush (as they called Papa Bush back then) failed.
Essentially, what you've got are a lot of boutique or niche candidates. Reagan had appeal that went beyond those niches or specialty groups that later developed. He wasn't confined by categories that didn't yet play a large part in Republican politics.
Something similar is true of Walker now. He's hardly in the same confined Establishment or moderate lane with Jeb Bush (the lane Christie or Romney would have been in). He's also not narrowly oriented to Evangelical or social conservatism on the one hand or freewheeling libertarian economic conservatism on the other. Nor is he in the Tea Party niche with Cruz.
That's what Jonah Goldberg was getting at a few days ago when he labeled Walker "vanilla" -- meaning that he was a generic Republican who wasn't owned by any of the various blocs that make up the party and wasn't beholden to any one particular group. A lot of people read "vanilla" as some kind of insult and didn't get the point Jonah was making.
The unfortunate thing about GOP politics now is that if a candidate isn't wholly given over to one of the large blocs that make up the party, many assume that he or she is the Establishment candidate. That's not necessarily the case now, any more than it was the case with Reagan 35 years ago.