The Minnesota Timberwolves are asking fans to believe this could be a special season. Watching it should be the easy part.

Instead, supporters enter another year having to figure out which subscription covers which game, what their existing television package actually includes and how much more they need to spend to follow their own team.

That frustration deserves more attention than it gets.

In Awful Announcing’s ranking of NBA broadcast accessibility for the 2026-27 season, Minnesota finished 28th out of 30 teams. Only the Indiana Pacers and Cleveland Cavaliers ranked lower.

The ranking considered streaming prices, television distribution, national exclusives and free broadcasts. It is an editorial assessment, rather than an official league measurement. But its conclusion should still bother an organization trying to turn excitement around Anthony Edwards and LaMelo Ball into a larger, lasting audience.

Fans should be talking about basketball. Too often, the conversation starts with whether they can find the game.

A Timberwolves subscription still does not get you every Timberwolves game

Minnesota’s new local broadcast home is DAZN. The standard package costs $119.99 for the season or $19.99 per month, with more expensive options offering additional features, according to FOX 9’s breakdown of the subscription plans.

A direct subscription has real advantages. Someone who wants Wolves basketball without an expensive cable bundle now has a straightforward way to purchase the local broadcasts. The problem appears when that fan reasonably asks whether purchasing the Timberwolves package means they can watch the Timberwolves throughout the season.

It does not.

DAZN’s own viewing guide explains that games carried exclusively by ABC, ESPN, NBC, Peacock or Prime Video are excluded from its package. Depending on their existing services and access to broadcast television, fans may need additional subscriptions to cover those games.

That distinction is perfectly understandable to people who follow sports media rights. It is considerably less satisfying to someone who has just paid for a product bearing their favorite team’s name.

The customer sees one team and one schedule. The business sees separate packages of rights.

Every time those two perspectives collide, the fan gets another task: check the listing, locate the service, determine whether the subscription is active and decide whether another game justifies another payment. None of that makes the basketball better.

Fifteen free games are welcome, but fans can ask for more

The Wolves deserve credit for preserving a free option. Fifteen games will be simulcast on KARE 11. DAZN also says those games will be available free through its app to fans who create an account.

That matters for households watching their budgets and for people who follow the team casually. It also demonstrates why broader access is worth pursuing. A free game gives someone an opportunity to become invested before asking them to buy anything.

Yet 15 local broadcasts represent only a slice of an 82-game season. National games on broadcast television add opportunities, but the overall experience remains fragmented.

Awful Announcing actually gave Minnesota some credit for its national appeal. More appearances on ABC and NBC help soften the limitations of the local arrangement. Even with that benefit, the Wolves landed near the bottom.

Elsewhere, the same ranking highlights far more extensive free television access. Milwaukee finished first with 80 games available over the air, while Phoenix ranked third with 79.

Those markets have different circumstances, schedules and agreements. Minnesota cannot simply copy another team’s contract. Still, the comparison makes it difficult to accept that this is the best fans should expect.

Minnesota has too much momentum to make watching feel like homework

The most committed fans will probably do the work. They will learn the schedule, buy the necessary packages and keep track of where Edwards is playing each night. The bigger concern is everyone else.

Think about someone who hears that Ball is making Minnesota more entertaining and wants to watch a quarter after dinner. Or a parent trying to introduce a child to the team. Or a longtime supporter whose familiar television routine suddenly no longer works.

Each additional obstacle creates another opportunity for that person to do something else.

That is the risk of treating accessibility as a customer-service detail. It affects how people build a relationship with a team. Familiarity comes through repetition: catching an unexpected comeback, seeing a young player improve, learning which bench player changes the energy.

A highlight clip can generate interest. An accessible broadcast can turn that interest into a habit. Minnesota has spent years working toward the kind of relevance that makes those opportunities valuable. There should be urgency about making the team easy to discover and follow.

Fans do not need to reject streaming or pretend producing broadcasts costs nothing. A paid local package can be reasonable. What deserves scrutiny is the complete experience: the combined expense, the missing games and the amount of planning required to watch a season.

The Wolves can have an exciting roster and an unsatisfying broadcast arrangement at the same time.

Supporters should feel comfortable demanding better. Paying customers are allowed to expect convenience, and local fans are allowed to want a stronger connection to their team.

Minnesota wants people invested in its championship ambitions. Making those ambitions easier to watch would be a good place to start.