Trace a claim to its original setting
When an NBA item catches your attention, look for the person or organisation that first made the statement. A team announcement, a league document, a reported story and an editorial column serve different purposes. Repetition across many accounts does not create independent confirmation. If the item is only a screenshot or an isolated quotation, reserve judgment until you can recover its setting. Read enough of the original explanation to establish the team, the subject and the period being discussed. A useful source trail makes a story easier to evaluate even when the eventual conclusion remains uncertain.
Check both the time and the degree of certainty
An item may move from speculation to reporting, formal confirmation and a later correction. Words such as possible, expected and confirmed describe different states and should remain different when a story is summarised. Also distinguish the publication time from the time of the underlying event. An old interview circulating again is not automatically a new statement. On an updated article, ask what changed, rather than assuming that the date at the top means every paragraph is newly reported. Preserve any uncertainty that the original source explicitly describes.
Keep analysis in its proper role
A discussion of rotations, tactics or a team’s prospects can raise valuable questions without constituting a new roster announcement. Compare the evidence, the sample and the limitations behind an argument. The confidence of the wording is not a substitute for those things. This checklist is a way to organise public information and decide what still needs verification. It makes no claim about a current trade, injury, lineup or result, and it does not require the reader to treat every early report as either completely certain or entirely useless.
