Only in baseball can you fail to do what the object of the game is and still win

SCOTT JACOBS

The Angels and Dodgers played a truly bizarre game last night. If you haven’t heard about it (likely improbable, if not impossible by now), the Angels lost a game in which they no-hit (literally, but not technically: I’ll elaborate in a minute) the Dodgers.

The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim had five hits. The Dodgers had none. And yet, because of a few errors and a sacrifice fly, the “real” LA team in this Freeway Series won a game that they basically didn’t earn.

The combined pitching efforts and brilliance of Jered Weaver and Jose Arredondo went all for not, as the Dodgers won the strangest game my memory can recall.

Here’s the thing though: this is not exactly a cool story. In fact, if I was an Angels fan I’d be sick to my stomach. In what other sport can you fail to do the main objective and win?

I’ve never heard of such a thing.

It’s such a weird story I can’t even make a reasonable comparison.

Now, let’s not lose sight of the fact that the Angels five hits got them no runs. So give credit to the Dodgers pitching too. But the mere fact that a team can win without putting the ball in a place where the defense can’t get it simply astounds me.

I had always wondered if scenarios like this truly did happen. After all, A.J. Burnett pitched a no hitter for the Marlins once against San Diego where he walked NINE guys. Nine.

Think about that for a moment. You could no hit a team for nine innings, but walk six in one inning, get an error or two, and four or five runs could cross the plate. It really adds a new dimension to the question: are hits slightly over-rated?

After all, there is no certainty that the team who gets the most hits will win. I’m sure a percentage on that is floating around the internet, and your odds are better if you do get more hits, but maybe this game proves something else:

It’s about the LOB (Left on Base). The Dodgers got four guys on base through three walks and an error. The Dodgers capitalized once. The Angels got runners on base through five hits and four walks. Yet, they failed to score.

So is this game small proof that LOB is more important then hits?

The other thing that was wild about the game was that it wasn’t a no-hitter. The Dodgers didn’t need the ninth inning because they had the lead, so Los Angeles of Anaheim (I hate that name) didn’t get credited for a no-hitter.

Any way you look at it, it just screams, “huh?”

The one guy that scored was Matt Kemp, who got on base in the first place from a slow rolling ground ball that Weaver was unable to field cleanly. Then a throwing error by catcher Jeff Mathis allowed Kemp to make his way to third, where a sacrifice fly later allowed him to score.

Does this game prove anything about the little things of the game? No. Does it really prove anything? Not really. Trying to figure out this game sort of makes you wonder: could someone throw a perfect game and… lose?

Consider: A perfect game is not allowing a hit or a walk. The Dodgers didn’t get their run from a walk and it obviously wasn’t from a hit. So I guess, basing it on that fact, you could feasibly lose a game even if you threw a perfect game.

Could you imagine?

A no, well 8 inning no hitter, is tough enough to pitch and then lose. But could you imagine if a pair of errors caused a guy who threw a perfect game to lose?

After hearing about this wacky game, nothing is beyond the realm of possibility in sports.

But for those that point out this proves the beauty of the game, I have just one thing to say.

I hope you have a better argument then that.

Popularity: 4% [?]