Angels are one of the few teams we've played this year that made a conscious effort to bust our shifts on them. It worked many times. Still not convinced that is all luck and still hold on to my thoughts that the Twins were outplayed this series. I respect your opinion though.

In this game alone, the Angels had 14 singles (4 XBH). 

 

To get to 14 singles in a MLB game, you need a healthy dose of luck on your side. Sure, maybe they beat the shift a few times but I watched those swings; many weren't intentional, such as Pujols getting that check swing single in game one (I think it was game one).

 

The Angels played well, I'm not knocking their play at all. But sometimes, luck is just on your side and it should be acknowledged that when the team BABIP is over .400 in a series (which I suspect it was this series), you're getting really lucky, just as any player with a BABIP over .400 is considered lucky and guaranteed to regress.

maybe chris gimenez is the answer?

 

Even when the Tigers did the same thing to the Twins last week?

Except they didn't. In the four game series, they topped out at 10 hits in one game. That's a pretty normal number.

 

And the Twins outhit them for the series.

Well enough complaining from me today. Twins got the win. It's a brand new series in Seattle tomorrow and we're 4.5 games ahead of the Indians.

 

That's the definition of luck, especially considering the low velocity balls they were constantly hitting. The Angels weren't ripping homers and doubles all over the field, they were singling the Twins to death.

 

Again, the Angels are inclined to produce quite a few hits through contact but they weren't even making great contact, the ball was just going where the Twins weren't on a frustratingly regular basis.

 

Again, that's luck.

I'd be curious to see the average velocity of their hits...even just of the singles...and compare it to the average in other series. It would be interesting to represent luck another way than just BABIP.

 

I'd be curious to see the average velocity of their hits...even just of the singles...and compare it to the average in other series. It would be interesting to represent luck another way than just BABIP.

When the other team scores 7 runs and you win; that's probably what I consider lucky?

I don't remember who it was, but I remember someone intentionally punching it down the 3rd base line?

We need to bring Morin. As in, more relievers in. 

 

I don't remember who it was, but I remember someone intentionally punching it down the 3rd base line?

I think that was Calhoun. A good example of not luck just because of low exit velocity.

On the other hand, at least the Twins didn't have 18 hits but were only 3-17 w/RISP.

On the other hand, at least the Twins didn't have 18 hits but were only 3-17 w/RISP.

Which tells you something about luck. According to some, the Angels willingly hit the ball wherever they pleased, yet the moment it became a scoring situation, that purposeful hitting vaporized into thin air.

 

Why the discrepancy?