It feels misleading to me.
1) The Rays are having a good season. Their run-scoring is about the same as the Twins. They've been shut out 3 times. But they've been held to 1 run only five times. Our Twins have been shut out just once, but they've scored 1 run ten times. Not much difference in win probability, 0 versus 1 run. The Rays happened to pitch a shutout one of the times I mentioned, the Twins won none of their 1-run offense games, "as expected". Bottom line, there's not much difference in scoring a run versus not, if we're looking at shutouts only.
1a) Atlanta is right up at the top with the Nationals and Dodgers, in runs scored. They've been shut out five times this season, and scored 1 run five other times. Lost 'em all, "as expected." As for the Nationals and Dodgerts, two shutouts and six 1-run games, for each of them - no wins. Anyway, none of these offenses have demonstrated the same kind of futility as often as our Twins have. To be "impressive", I'd want to see the Twins be on more of a par with the big boys, in avoiding the no-chance-to-win games.
2) The eye test tells me this is just not a reliable offense. I realize their runs per game are a titch above league average. They racks up runs, like any team does, when the opposition is weak in some way. But it "feels" to me like it's more of a factor with this team than average. The eye test also tells me a lot of times they score meaningless runs to avert the shutout; that's hard to define a metric for and I certainly don't know how. It's perplexing that now and then they'll score against top opposing pitchers, and I don't know how to separate out "good pitcher having a bad day" versus "good pitcher unable to shut our unstoppable guys down," either.