Ryan Ward has a solid debut, but bullpen blows it again as Dodgers lose to Rockies 54%

By Mirjam Swanson0%

4/19/2026, 3:45:10 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Optimism Bias, and Representativeness Heuristic, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 20.7% saturation with 180 hits. Analysis detected 1,196 faulty-reasoning hits from 869 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 52.1% and a BS Rank of 54% (10,211 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 53.30% of the article peer group.

DENVER  What do you know? 
The once-stampeding Dodgers have been caged by the Colorado Rockies. 
With a 9-6 loss Sunday at Coors Field, the two-time defending World Series champions lost back-to-back games for the first time this season. 
The Dodgers again couldn’t hold a lead, letting the Rockies tee off for 15 hits. 
Nor could the Dodgers keep up offensively at the hitter-friendly park  though they put some pressure on in the ninth inning, when Shohei Ohtani led off with a ground-rule double and the Dodgers scored twice to cut the lead to three runs. 
Then the new guy, Ryan Ward, made the final out in his big league debut, robbed of a hit and a chance to keep chipping away by a diving Troy Johnston in right field. 
Before that, the Rockies  who beat the Dodgers twice in 13 meetings all of last season  chased starter Roki Sasaki from the game in the fifth inning and then ruffled the Dodgers’ relievers. 
That included closer Edwin Díaz, who came on in the eighth and promptly gave up three singles, a walk and two runs before being pulled with the Dodgers trailing 8-4. 
“He and Blake Treinen combined to face eight batters without getting an out. 
“They both weren’t sharp,” said manager Dave Roberts, who had theories but not many answers  though he did have real concern, especially about Díaz, who recently had his right knee checked out by the medical staff. 
Roberts said the closer wanted to pitch after nine days off, even though it wasn’t a save situation. 
But his velocity was slightly down (95.4 mph vs. 
95.8) and so, “today was a tough evaluation,” the manager said. 
“It really was,” Roberts said. 
“Because, you know, I know what it’s supposed to look like, and when it doesn’t look like that, it gets a little concerning, really.” 
And losing for the second time to the Rockies, who are now 9-13? 
Being in danger of losing their four-game series, after arriving in Denver without having lost to a National League opponent, against a club that hasn’t made the postseason since 2018? 
It’s well below the bar the Dodgers have set, and it added a bitter note to Ward’s otherwise sweet debut. 
Ward punched a big league clock for the first time wearing No. 67 and cranked his first hit off Rockies starter Michael Lorenzen in the fourth inning, lining a changeup to right field for a single that scored Andy Pages, made it 3-0 and got the 20-some members of Ward’s party up, jumping in place, hugging and high-fiving. 
“When I was on first base, I got to see them all jumping around up there,” Ward said. 
“That was a pretty special moment.” 
He also singled in the sixth and swung on the first pitch in his first at-bat, a fly out in the third inning. 
The Dodgers gave Sasaki a 2-0 lead in the third. 
Alex Freeland drove in Hyeseong Kim, and Shohei Ohtani doubled in Freeland  and extended his career-best on-base streak to 51 games, moving past Willie Keeler into third place in Dodgers history. 
Sasaki went 4-2/3 innings, threw 78 pitches and gave up three runs on seven hits, striking out two and walking two. 
His ERA after his fourth start: 6.11, worst in the six-man rotation. 
The Dodgers fell behind 6-4 in the seventh when Treinen  who was cleared Friday after he was struck in the head by a batted ball during batting practice  gave up four consecutive hits, including a two-run home run by Mickey Moniak. 
The result likely will be a minor detail when Ward tells the story years from now about getting the call after first baseman Freddie Freeman was placed on the paternity list. 
The Dodgers’ No. 19 prospect and reigning Pacific Coast League MVP spent the last seven years in the minors. 
Last season, he hit 36 home runs and drove in 122 runs with a .937 on-base-plus-slugging percentage for triple-A Oklahoma City, and he has a 1.020 OPS and four homers this year. 
Ward made it a point to improve his chase rate, draw more walks and get on base more frequently, everything the Dodgers asked of him. 
He also passed the broadest patience test. 
“The plate discipline, being a better hitter  he’s done all that,” Roberts said. 
“He’s improved his defense. 
But honestly, for me, just not to let his lack of opportunity in the big leagues deter him. 
That’s easy when you get frustrated and let it affect performance, and he hasn’t done that.” 
If anything, Ward said, the waiting made him better. 
“I used it to keep going. 
‘OK, if I’m not there yet, what do I have to do to get there?’” 
he said. 
“‘What part of my game do I need to work on to keep getting better?’ 
“I used it as fire to keep working.” 
That will be the Dodgers’ assignment too. 
In the finale of the four-game series Monday, the Dodgers are expected to start left-hander Justin Wrobleski (2-0, 2.12) against Colorado left-hander Jose Quintana (0-1, 5.63). 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.0%Mirjam Swanson: 3.9%Daily Pilot: 2.9%Confirmation Bias7.0%This article: 1.5%Mirjam Swanson: 0.4%Daily Pilot: 1.2%Anchoring Bias1.5%This article: 2.2%Mirjam Swanson: 1.5%Daily Pilot: 3.5%Availability Heuristic2.2%This article: 9.7%Mirjam Swanson: 1.9%Daily Pilot: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic9.7%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 1.3%Mirjam Swanson: 0.7%Daily Pilot: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias1.3%This article: 7.2%Mirjam Swanson: 3.3%Daily Pilot: 7.5%Framing Effect7.2%This article: 3.5%Mirjam Swanson: 1.1%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Loss Aversion3.5%This article: 3.1%Mirjam Swanson: 0.8%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Status Quo Bias3.1%This article: 4.9%Mirjam Swanson: 1.9%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect4.9%This article: 11.3%Mirjam Swanson: 5.6%Daily Pilot: 3.6%Optimism Bias11.3%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 20.7%Mirjam Swanson: 7.4%Daily Pilot: 7.8%Negativity Bias20.7%This article: 7.2%Mirjam Swanson: 3.2%Daily Pilot: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias7.2%This article: 6.1%Mirjam Swanson: 0.9%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error6.1%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 1.5%Daily Pilot: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.7%Daily Pilot: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 8.2%Mirjam Swanson: 7.6%Daily Pilot: 5.1%Halo Effect8.2%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.8%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.6%Mirjam Swanson: 2.9%Daily Pilot: 1.3%Recency Bias3.6%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.4%Daily Pilot: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 4.4%Mirjam Swanson: 1.5%Daily Pilot: 4.9%Appeal to Authority4.4%This article: 3.3%Mirjam Swanson: 0.3%Daily Pilot: 1.2%False Dilemma3.3%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.5%Daily Pilot: 0.7%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 7.0%Daily Pilot: 4.4%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 2.3%Daily Pilot: 1.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.7%Mirjam Swanson: 3.7%Daily Pilot: 5.7%Appeal to Emotion0.7%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 2.3%Mirjam Swanson: 1.2%Daily Pilot: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.3%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.2%Daily Pilot: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.3%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.8%Mirjam Swanson: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Composition/Division0.8%This article: 3.6%Mirjam Swanson: 3.3%Daily Pilot: 2.8%Anecdotal3.6%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.3%Mirjam Swanson: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 1.3%Unattributed Quote4.3%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.2%Daily Pilot: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 18.0%Mirjam Swanson: 12.3%Daily Pilot: 6.0%Biased Writer Voice18.0%This article: 2.9%Mirjam Swanson: 0.9%Daily Pilot: 1.5%Indoctrination2.9%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mirjam Swanson: 0.7%Daily Pilot: 4.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

869 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers26%attributed speech645writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageDave Roberts • 37 words • 100.0% coverageDave Roberts • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageDave Roberts • 11 words • 0.0% coverageDave Roberts • 5 words • 0.0% coverageDave Roberts • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 58 words • 100.0% coverageRyan Ward • 18 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Ward • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 43 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageDave Roberts • 14 words • 0.0% coverageDave Roberts • 4 words • 0.0% coverageDave Roberts • 18 words • 100.0% coverageDave Roberts • 16 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Ward • 9 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Ward • 6 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Ward • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Ward • 15 words • 0.0% coverageRyan Ward • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Dave Roberts

82%flagged-word coverage
147 attributed words66% of attributed speech82% writer coverage
0%15.0%30.0%Unattributed Quote+25.2 ptsWriter: 0.0%Dave Roberts: 25.2%25.2%Biased Writer Voice-24.2 ptsWriter: 24.2%Dave Roberts: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination+11.2 ptsWriter: 1.1%Dave Roberts: 12.2%12.2%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.