OutKick88%

NBA playoffs ratings are not actually the highest in 33 years, as reported 63%

By Bobby Burack0%

4/30/2026, 7:15:41 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 13 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Negativity Bias, and Out-Group Homogeneity Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 30.2% saturation with 175 hits. Analysis detected 642 faulty-reasoning hits from 580 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 57.9% and a BS Rank of 63% (7,753 of 20,444 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 62.10% of the article peer group.

The NBA is touting the first round of the playoffs as the most-viewed since 1993. 
The league says the round is averaging 3.84 million viewers through 27 telecasts, up 7% from last year. 
NBA supporters are celebrating and asking OutKick for comment. 
History suggests Bill Simmons may soon mention me on his podcast while praising the league’s latest viewership averages. 
That said, we caution those getting too excited on the message boards. 
While the numbers the NBA is promoting are technically accurate, they are also misleading. 
CLICK HERE FOR MORE OUTKICK ANALYSIS 
For one, the year-over-year comparisons are invalid. 
The distribution has changed. 
This year, games air on ABC, NBC, ESPN and Prime Video. 
Previously, they aired on TNT, ESPN and ABC. 
The difference between games on a cable channel like TNT and those on a broadcast network like NBC is significant. 
LeBron James and Luka Doncic walk on the court during game 5 of the first round of the NBA playoffs between the Los Angeles Lakers and Minnesota Timberwolves at Crypto.com Arena on April 30, 2025. 
(Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times) 
Regional sports networks also no longer carry first-round matchups under the new rights agreements. 
In past years, fans in major markets like New York and Los Angeles could watch local Knicks and Lakers broadcasts. 
That option is gone. 
Viewers now have to watch the national telecast, greatly inflating national estimates. 
Another factor is the measurement system itself. 
The 2026 postseason is the first to be fully measured under Nielsen’s Big Data + Panel metric, introduced last September. 
Early readings suggest the new methodology has increased live sports viewership by about 8%. 
ZERO BS. 
JUST DAKICH. 
TAKE THE DON’T @ ME PODCAST ON THE ROAD. 
DOWNLOAD NOW! 
Some estimates say the methodology change has increased NBA playoff averages even higher, closer to 13%. 
Taken together, it is entirely possible that fewer Americans are watching the playoffs this season than last. 
The claim that this is the most-viewed first round in 33 years is completely false. 
INGLEWOOD, CALIFORNIA - FEBRUARY 14: NBA Commissioner Adam Silver speaks during a press conference during 2026 NBA All-Star Weekend at Intuit Dome on February 14, 2026 in Inglewood, California. 
(Photo by Ryan Sirius Sun/Getty Images) ((Photo by Ryan Sirius Sun/Getty Images)) 
Still, the majority of sports outlets have simply parroted the NBA's press release without the added context. 
It's unclear if these outlets are unaware of the deception or are simply afraid to upset the league. 
There is a reason the NBA won't credential the author of this article, but approves random fanboy bloggers to cover games. 
Now, to be fair, the NBA isn’t alone in how it presents ratings. 
As OutKick reported, the Super Bowl’s decline was steeper than the 2% figure the NFL cited after adjusting for the new Nielsen metric. 
NHL playoff gains have also been smaller than the league suggests. 
However, no league tries harder to spin its popularity than the NBA. 
And no league has more defenders of its declines than the NBA, with commentators like Simmons and Ryen Russillo as dedicated to the cause as the league's own in-house communication division. 
OUTKICK IS NOW ON THE FOX APP: CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD 
No one said the NBA is "dying." 
But the league is less popular now than at any point in the past 25 years  and the latest spin about first-round ratings doesn’t change that. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 5.9%Fox Nation: 4.1%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.8%Fox Nation: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 4.1%Fox Nation: 3.6%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 1.7%Fox Nation: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 1.9%Fox Nation: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 2.0%Fox Nation: 3.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 7.0%Fox Nation: 12.0%Framing Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.7%Fox Nation: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.7%Fox Nation: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 1.1%Fox Nation: 2.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 9.7%Bobby Burack: 4.0%Fox Nation: 1.7%Pessimism Bias9.7%This article: 11.9%Bobby Burack: 13.6%Fox Nation: 10.9%Negativity Bias11.9%This article: 6.7%Bobby Burack: 2.3%Fox Nation: 2.7%Self-Serving Bias6.7%This article: 3.1%Bobby Burack: 2.8%Fox Nation: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error3.1%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 5.5%Bobby Burack: 2.5%Fox Nation: 3.2%In-Group Bias5.5%This article: 10.3%Bobby Burack: 2.1%Fox Nation: 2.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias10.3%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 1.9%Fox Nation: 2.9%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.7%Fox Nation: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 2.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 12.1%Bobby Burack: 4.7%Fox Nation: 2.5%Ad Hominem12.1%This article: 1.2%Bobby Burack: 1.5%Fox Nation: 0.7%Straw Man1.2%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 3.1%Fox Nation: 5.1%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 2.3%Fox Nation: 1.8%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 1.0%Fox Nation: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.0%Bobby Burack: 12.1%Fox Nation: 6.1%Hasty Generalization5.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.6%Fox Nation: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 1.6%Fox Nation: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 4.6%Fox Nation: 7.8%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 1.5%Fox Nation: 1.3%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 3.2%Fox Nation: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 1.3%Fox Nation: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 1.5%Fox Nation: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.5%Fox Nation: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 2.8%Bobby Burack: 3.8%Fox Nation: 2.3%Anecdotal2.8%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.3%Fox Nation: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 1.9%Fox Nation: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.0%Fox Nation: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.4%Fox Nation: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.2%Fox Nation: 0.6%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 2.5%Fox Nation: 1.7%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 1.8%Fox Nation: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 30.2%Bobby Burack: 19.9%Fox Nation: 6.2%Biased Writer Voice30.2%This article: 6.7%Bobby Burack: 2.0%Fox Nation: 1.4%Indoctrination6.7%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 0.1%Fox Nation: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Bobby Burack: 3.9%Fox Nation: 3.4%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 5.5%Bobby Burack: 2.1%Fox Nation: 1.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…5.5%

580 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker3.1%attributed speech562writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageNBA • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

NBA

0%flagged-word coverage
18 attributed words100% of attributed speech60% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Biased Writer Voice-31.1 ptsWriter: 31.1%NBA: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-6.9 ptsWriter: 6.9%NBA: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -5.7 ptsWriter: 5.7%NBA: 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.