Winners and losers: Phillies drop first series after break to Mets 83%

By Evan Macy92%

7/19/2026, 8:44:41 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 31 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Anecdotal, with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 25.9% saturation with 212 hits. Analysis detected 2,105 faulty-reasoning hits from 819 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 74.4% and a BS Rank of 83% (3,744 of 21,176 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 82.30% of the article peer group.

When the Phillies set up their pitching staff after the end of the MLB All-Star break, they prioritized their upcoming series against the Dodgers (which starts Monday at Citizens Bank Park). 
They did so at the expense of their first series after the break against the Mets. 
With no true fifth starter to speak of, the Phillies lost yet another game in Andrew Painter's former rotation slot, and as a result lost two out of three to the lowly Mets to start the official second half of the season. 
In the two losses the Phillies scored just two total runs. 
Perhaps the best team in baseball arriving Monday will shake them out of the funk. 
Having Cris Sánchez and Zack Wheeler on the mound for the series certainly won't hurt. 
Before we turn the page to L.A., however, here's a look at some winners and losers from the three-game set: 
Winners 
Jesús Luzardo 
The Phillies truly do have three aces, as Luzardo has truly come on over his last half dozen starts. 
It carried over after the All-Star Game (where he tossed an impressive perfect inning in his home ballpark) to Saturday afternoon. 
The lefty threw five innings of two-hit baseball, striking out seven before handing it off to a bullpen that stepped up to hold the Mets scoreless over the final four frames of the middle game of the three-game set. 
Trea Turner 
Philly's lone run Thursday came on a Turner solo shot. 
Perhaps the oft slumping leadoff man will find his groove in the second half? 
The offensive contributions continued in a big way two days later (the Phils had a rare Friday off) as he went 3-for-4 with a walk and an RBI propelling the Phils to a 6-1 win. 
He hit a double Sunday too. 
Turner is not usually stuck hitting in the low .240s  he's usually chasing batting titles. 
Reversion to the mean could mean some well overdue heavy hitting from the shortstop down the stretch. 
Aaron Nola 
If Nola is simply serviceable for the rest of the regular season, it'll be a huge boost for a Phillies rotation with zero reliability after the top three arms. 
Nola seems to be putting it all together of late, with a solid six innings in the team's loss Thursday. 
The 4-1 setback wasn't his fault  he allowed just three runs to keep the Phillies in it. 
But the offense was invisible as he was dropped to an ugly 3-7. 
Still, quality starts from Nola is a recipe for success. 
Losers 
Anyone in the No. 5 starter spot 
It's becoming a schedule loss, frankly. 
Alan Rangel, while perhaps a suitable long reliever, is not a starting caliber pitcher on a contending ball club. 
He gave the Phils four innings of work in Sunday's 6-1 loss, and was tagged for five runs over the first two innings he pitched with seven total hits and three walks on his ledger. 
The Phillies have too much on the line for them to just shrug and try something still unproven every fifth game. 
With potentially two more go-arounds in the rotation before the trade deadline at the end of July, it's virtually a lock that someone new will be starting here come August. 
Brandon Marsh 
Baseball is the pro sport with the largest sample size, giving players nowhere to hide. 
You are what your numbers say you are. 
Marsh spent the first half of the regular season uncharacteristically chasing an NL batting title. 
It earned him a start in last week's All-Star Game. 
But while Marsh is a great outfielder and a very solid hitter to be sure, he's just not elite. 
And his 1-for-12 showing against the Mets (his lone hit a meaningless single in the ninth inning Sunday) is showing how hard it is to hit .300 for an entire 162-game season. 
Marsh started July with a .319 batting average. 
Just over two weeks of games later, and the figure is down to .293 (from July 2 through Sunday he was hitting .116). 
Marsh is still in the midst of a career-best season but his inconsistency underlines the importance of finding an outfield bat at the trade deadline. 
The schedule 
The Phillies have feasted on bad teams this season (34-18 against teams under .500) but they've struggled a bit against good teams (21-27). 
Their next three series are going to be a gauntlet, and hopefully they'll be able to remain a few games behind the Braves when the upcoming stretch is over. 
The Dodgers are in town starting on Monday, as the Phillies will look to fight off memories of last October's brutal NLDS loss against the best team in the majors right now. 
Then the AL-East leading Yankees are in town next weekend before the surprisingly potent Marlins wrap up the nine-game test in Miami. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.7%Evan Macy: 2.4%PhillyVoice: 2.8%Confirmation Bias6.7%This article: 1.8%Evan Macy: 1.9%PhillyVoice: 1.1%Anchoring Bias1.8%This article: 9.5%Evan Macy: 5.6%PhillyVoice: 3.0%Availability Heuristic9.5%This article: 11.1%Evan Macy: 3.9%PhillyVoice: 1.4%Representativeness Heuristic11.1%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.8%PhillyVoice: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 10.7%Evan Macy: 5.2%PhillyVoice: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias10.7%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 3.0%PhillyVoice: 4.2%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 4.5%Evan Macy: 1.0%PhillyVoice: 0.5%Loss Aversion4.5%This article: 0.9%Evan Macy: 0.6%PhillyVoice: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.9%This article: 3.1%Evan Macy: 0.7%PhillyVoice: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect3.1%This article: 7.1%Evan Macy: 6.9%PhillyVoice: 4.8%Optimism Bias7.1%This article: 11.7%Evan Macy: 5.9%PhillyVoice: 1.4%Pessimism Bias11.7%This article: 24.7%Evan Macy: 10.4%PhillyVoice: 6.5%Negativity Bias24.7%This article: 2.2%Evan Macy: 0.9%PhillyVoice: 1.3%Self-Serving Bias2.2%This article: 8.9%Evan Macy: 2.7%PhillyVoice: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error8.9%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.5%PhillyVoice: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.6%PhillyVoice: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Evan Macy: 3.2%PhillyVoice: 3.5%Halo Effect6.5%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 2.6%PhillyVoice: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 10.6%Evan Macy: 6.3%PhillyVoice: 1.6%Recency Bias10.6%This article: 7.0%Evan Macy: 1.9%PhillyVoice: 0.4%Primacy Effect7.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 2.3%Evan Macy: 1.7%PhillyVoice: 3.1%Appeal to Authority2.3%This article: 11.5%Evan Macy: 2.5%PhillyVoice: 1.1%False Dilemma11.5%This article: 3.7%Evan Macy: 0.8%PhillyVoice: 0.4%Slippery Slope3.7%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 9.0%Evan Macy: 10.3%PhillyVoice: 3.9%Hasty Generalization9.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 12.0%Evan Macy: 4.0%PhillyVoice: 3.4%Appeal to Emotion12.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 25.9%Evan Macy: 8.7%PhillyVoice: 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)25.9%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 2.6%Evan Macy: 0.8%PhillyVoice: 0.4%Burden of Proof2.6%This article: 3.1%Evan Macy: 0.7%PhillyVoice: 0.2%Appeal to Nature3.1%This article: 2.8%Evan Macy: 1.0%PhillyVoice: 0.3%Composition/Division2.8%This article: 15.0%Evan Macy: 3.2%PhillyVoice: 1.7%Anecdotal15.0%This article: 2.3%Evan Macy: 0.5%PhillyVoice: 0.1%No True Scotsman2.3%This article: 5.3%Evan Macy: 2.6%PhillyVoice: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)5.3%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 2.3%Evan Macy: 0.5%PhillyVoice: 0.1%Special Pleading2.3%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 1.2%PhillyVoice: 1.0%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 1.9%PhillyVoice: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 22.0%Evan Macy: 16.2%PhillyVoice: 3.9%Biased Writer Voice22.0%This article: 10.4%Evan Macy: 3.0%PhillyVoice: 1.8%Indoctrination10.4%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.0%PhillyVoice: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Evan Macy: 0.9%PhillyVoice: 2.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

819 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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