New York is the NBA’s largest U.S. media market, but media rank alone does not fully describe the size of a team’s home market. There is no single official NBA market-size metric. In this analysis, I compare teams using three measures:
Get a summary in:
These measures describe different geographic and economic characteristics of a market. Nielsen DMAs and Census metropolitan areas do not have identical boundaries, so population and GDP should be read alongside the DMA ranking rather than as estimates for the DMA itself.
I also compare the three market measures with Forbes' 2025 NBA franchise valuations to examine how closely the size of a team's home market relates to the value of the franchise.
| NBA Team | Nielsen Media Market | Home Metro Population 2025 | Home Metro GDP 2022 | Forbes Value 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| New York Knicks | New York (#1) | 20.11M | US$2,171.5B | US$9.75B (#3) |
| Brooklyn Nets | New York (#1) | 20.11M | US$2,171.5B | US$5.60B (#9) |
| Los Angeles Lakers | Los Angeles (#2) | 12.84M | US$1,235.9B | US$10.00B (#2) |
| LA Clippers | Los Angeles (#2) | 12.84M | US$1,235.9B | US$7.50B (#4) |
| Chicago Bulls | Chicago (#3) | 9.43M | US$845.2B | US$6.00B (#6) |
| Dallas Mavericks | Dallas–Fort Worth (#4) | 8.48M | US$692.8B | US$5.10B (#13) |
| Philadelphia 76ers | Philadelphia (#5) | 6.33M | US$523.9B | US$5.45B (#10) |
| Houston Rockets | Houston (#6) | 7.90M | US$645.8B | US$5.90B (#7) |
| Atlanta Hawks | Atlanta (#7) | 6.48M | US$534.3B | US$5.00B (#14) |
| Washington Wizards | Washington, D.C. (#8) | 6.47M | US$664.6B | US$4.70B (#16) |
| Golden State Warriors | San Francisco–Oakland–San Jose (#9) | 4.63M | US$731.7B | US$11.00B (#1) |
| Boston Celtics | Boston (#10) | 5.03M | US$575.8B | US$6.70B (#5) |
| Phoenix Suns | Phoenix (#12) | 5.23M | US$368.7B | US$5.43B (#11) |
| Detroit Pistons | Detroit (#14) | 4.39M | US$307.9B | US$3.65B (#27) |
| Orlando Magic | Orlando (#15) | 2.96M | US$197.2B | US$3.90B (#25) |
| Minnesota Timberwolves | Minneapolis–St. Paul (#16) | 3.79M | US$328.6B | US$3.60B (#28) |
| Denver Nuggets | Denver (#17) | 3.09M | US$289.5B | US$4.60B (#17) |
| Miami Heat | Miami–Fort Lauderdale (#18) | 6.39M | US$490.6B | US$5.70B (#8) |
| Cleveland Cavaliers | Cleveland–Akron (#19) | 2.17M | US$163.9B | US$4.80B (#15) |
| Sacramento Kings | Sacramento (#20) | 2.48M | US$177.3B | US$4.45B (#18) |
| Charlotte Hornets | Charlotte (#21) | 2.94M | US$232.9B | US$3.80B (#26) |
| Portland Trail Blazers | Portland (#23) | 2.54M | US$205.4B | US$4.25B (#22) |
| Indiana Pacers | Indianapolis (#26) | 2.21M | US$186.9B | US$4.20B (#23) |
| Utah Jazz | Salt Lake City (#28) | 1.31M | US$137.1B | US$4.10B (#24) |
| San Antonio Spurs | San Antonio (#31) | 2.81M | US$167.1B | US$4.40B (#19) |
| Milwaukee Bucks | Milwaukee (#38) | 1.58M | US$122.2B | US$4.30B (#21) |
| Oklahoma City Thunder | Oklahoma City (#47) | 1.51M | US$95.0B | US$4.35B (#20) |
| New Orleans Pelicans | New Orleans (#50) | 0.97M | US$96.7B | US$3.55B (#29) |
| Memphis Grizzlies | Memphis (#51) | 1.34M | US$97.0B | US$3.50B (#30) |
| Toronto Raptors | Outside U.S. DMA system | 7.11M | CAD 522.4B (~US$401.4B*) | US$5.40B (#12) |
Media rank, population and GDP measure different parts of a team's home market. A Nielsen DMA is based on local television viewing patterns. Census metro population measures residents inside an official metropolitan area. Metro GDP measures the value of economic activity produced there.
The differences can be large:
Keeping the three measures separate avoids hiding these differences inside one overall market score.
GDP also needs to be read carefully. It shows the scale of the local economy, not the amount of money available to an NBA franchise. A large metro economy includes industries and activity that may have no direct connection with basketball.
Toronto cannot receive a U.S. Nielsen DMA rank.
Its home market is large by other measures. Ontario's population data puts the Toronto Census Metropolitan Area at 7.11 million people in 2025. That would place Toronto between Houston and Atlanta if compared with the U.S. home metros by population.
Statistics Canada reports Toronto CMA GDP of about CAD 522.4 billion in 2022. Using the Bank of Canada's 2022 annual average exchange rate, that is roughly US$401.4 billion.
The converted figure is useful for scale, but I do not give Toronto a formal position in the U.S. GDP ranking because the Canadian and U.S. GDP series are not fully harmonized.
Forbes values the Raptors at US$5.4 billion, 12th among all 30 NBA teams. Toronto also has a wider national role because the Raptors are Canada's only NBA franchise, so the local metro does not represent their full potential audience.
The full Forbes dataset shows a clear relationship between market size and franchise value, but it is far from perfect.
I calculated Spearman rank correlations for the 29 U.S. franchises, using each franchise as one observation. Teams that share a market, such as the Knicks and Nets, therefore also share the same DMA, population and GDP figures.
| Market Measure | Correlation With Forbes Value Rank |
|---|---|
| Home-metro GDP | 0.79 |
| Home-metro population | 0.77 |
| Nielsen DMA rank | 0.77 |
A value closer to 1 means that the two rankings tend to move together more closely.
All three measures show a fairly strong relationship with franchise value. GDP has the highest correlation in this dataset, although the difference is small.
The cleanest evidence that market size is not enough comes from teams that share the same market.
The Knicks and Nets have the same DMA, population and home-metro GDP. Forbes values the Knicks at US$9.75 billion and the Nets at US$5.6 billion, a difference of US$4.15 billion. The Lakers and Clippers also share the same media market, population and metro economy. Forbes values the Lakers at US$10 billion and the Clippers at US$7.5 billion, a difference of US$2.5 billion. Geography cannot explain either gap.
There are also large differences elsewhere in the league. Golden State ranks No. 9 by DMA but No. 1 in Forbes value. Miami moves from No. 18 by DMA to No. 8 in franchise value. Oklahoma City moves from No. 47 to No. 20.
Some teams move the other way. Detroit is No. 14 by DMA but No. 27 by franchise value, while Minnesota is No. 16 by DMA and No. 28 by value.
Brand strength, arena economics, sponsorships, team revenue, history and national or international popularity can all affect valuation.
A peer-reviewed study of NBA team values reached a similar broader conclusion. Population and GDP were significant in parts of the analysis, alongside factors such as revenue and championships.
The data therefore suggests that market size matters, but it explains only part of why one NBA franchise is worth more than another.
Market size describes the environment around an NBA franchise. It does not measure the quality of the basketball team.
NBA roster building is also limited by the league's salary-cap, luxury-tax and apron rules. Drafting, player development, trades, coaching and management can matter more to results on the court than the size of a team's home market.
Oklahoma City makes the distinction easy to see. The Thunder play in the No. 47 U.S. media market and have the smallest U.S. home-metro GDP in this dataset. Those figures describe their local business environment, not their basketball strength.
DMA also does not measure a team's total audience.
The NBA's 11-year media agreements with Disney, NBCUniversal and Amazon began with the 2025-26 season and run through 2035-36. The NBA's official announcement describes wider distribution across broadcast television and streaming platforms.
League Pass and other digital services also allow fans to follow teams far outside their home markets. A Lakers fan in New York or a Warriors fan in Europe is part of the franchise's wider audience but not its local Nielsen DMA.
For that reason, I use market size as context rather than a complete rating of an NBA franchise. DMA measures local media reach, population shows the size of the home metro, GDP shows its economic scale, and Forbes valuation shows how valuable the team business has become. None of those figures tells the whole story on its own.
