Pitching LeBron — how the 76ers ⁠36%

By Tim Kawakami⁠34%

7/9/2026, 12:22:32 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Unattributed Quote, and Halo Effect, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 37.1% saturation with 102 hits. Analysis detected 584 faulty-reasoning hits from 275 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 42.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠36% (14,201 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 64.90% of the article peer group.

Kawakami: Pitching LeBron — how the 76ers, Cavs, and Warriors (in that order?) 
line up 
Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Golden State appear to be the most likely landing spots for LeBron James. 
Agent Rich Paul, left, insists that he doesn’t know where LeBron James will play his 24th NBA season. 
| Source: Ronald Martinez/Getty Images 
By Tim Kawakami Sports Columnist 
For subscribers Published Jul. 9, 2026 at 12:22pm 
Email (opens in new tab) 
Twitter (opens in new tab) 
Bluesky (opens in new tab) 
Facebook (opens in new tab) 
LinkedIn (opens in new tab) 
Telegram (opens in new tab) 
WhatsApp (opens in new tab) 
Reddit (opens in new tab) 
LeBron James hasn’t asked for any direct free-agent pitches this time around, but he’s gotten a few pretty decent indirect ones, anyway. 
Let’s give 76ers overlord Bob Myers — hey, remember him? — the lead spot on this, since he got an invitation onto essentially the official platform for this process, the “Game Over” podcast, cohosted by LeBron’s agent, Rich Paul. 
“If you’re talking about the Sixers, if [LeBron] was here, I would say, ‘I honestly believe this is your best chance to win,’” Myers told Paul and Max Kellerman (opens in new tab) on an episode that dropped Wednesday morning. 
Hmm, I believe Myers made a very similar point as the lead man for a different team chasing a different all-time player 10 years ago. 
I’ll check the ancient history books to see if it worked out for him or not. 
More about the author 
@timkawakami (opens in new tab) 
Draymond Green Golden State Warriors Sports Sports Steph Curry Steve Kerr 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 8.0%Tim Kawakami: 4.3%The San Francisco Standard: 2.7%Confirmation Bias8.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 4.5%The San Francisco Standard: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 7.5%The San Francisco Standard: 3.5%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 9.1%Tim Kawakami: 4.3%The San Francisco Standard: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic9.1%This article: 9.1%Tim Kawakami: 1.3%The San Francisco Standard: 0.8%Hindsight Bias9.1%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 6.4%The San Francisco Standard: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 4.7%Tim Kawakami: 1.8%The San Francisco Standard: 6.8%Framing Effect4.7%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.3%The San Francisco Standard: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.2%The San Francisco Standard: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 11.6%Tim Kawakami: 11.5%The San Francisco Standard: 2.7%Optimism Bias11.6%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 3.4%The San Francisco Standard: 1.3%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 1.6%The San Francisco Standard: 7.2%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.8%The San Francisco Standard: 1.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 2.2%The San Francisco Standard: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 14.2%Tim Kawakami: 2.1%The San Francisco Standard: 3.9%Halo Effect14.2%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 1.3%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.8%Tim Kawakami: 3.2%The San Francisco Standard: 1.3%Recency Bias5.8%This article: 9.1%Tim Kawakami: 1.2%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Primacy Effect9.1%This article: 5.8%Tim Kawakami: 0.3%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias5.8%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.5%The San Francisco Standard: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 14.2%Tim Kawakami: 3.7%The San Francisco Standard: 3.3%Appeal to Authority14.2%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 1.4%The San Francisco Standard: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.7%The San Francisco Standard: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 1.1%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 5.4%The San Francisco Standard: 5.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.7%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 14.2%Tim Kawakami: 0.7%The San Francisco Standard: 0.4%Bandwagon14.2%This article: 14.2%Tim Kawakami: 0.7%The San Francisco Standard: 4.4%Appeal to Emotion14.2%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 1.6%The San Francisco Standard: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.8%The San Francisco Standard: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 17.1%Tim Kawakami: 3.3%The San Francisco Standard: 3.4%Anecdotal17.1%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 6.5%Tim Kawakami: 0.9%The San Francisco Standard: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)6.5%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 14.5%Tim Kawakami: 0.8%The San Francisco Standard: 1.3%Unattributed Quote14.5%This article: 14.2%Tim Kawakami: 0.7%The San Francisco Standard: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection14.2%This article: 37.1%Tim Kawakami: 7.1%The San Francisco Standard: 5.2%Biased Writer Voice37.1%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.6%The San Francisco Standard: 1.1%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tim Kawakami: 0.0%The San Francisco Standard: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 2.9%Tim Kawakami: 0.2%The San Francisco Standard: 2.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…2.9%

275 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers21%attributed speech217writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageRich Paul • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageBob Myers • 40 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Bob Myers

100%flagged-word coverage
40 attributed words69% of attributed speech64% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Bob Myers: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-47.0 ptsWriter: 47.0%Bob Myers: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-18.0 ptsWriter: 18.0%Bob Myers: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -3.7 ptsWriter: 3.7%Bob Myers: 0.0%0.0%

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

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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