We’ve endured perhaps the ugliest regular season of NBA basketball ever, one defined by injuries, load management, and tanking of games. It’s been a campaign that perhaps only a steadfast bettor could love. That said, most basketball fans are of the belief that the worst is behind us as the playoffs finally arrive.  Thankfully, there is probably no other league that changes more from the regular season to the postseason than the NBA. It is supposedly at this point that the individual stats, contract incentives, and perhaps point spreads, don’t tend to matter. Also, it can’t be overstated, if players can play, they usually will. We can even have reasonable faith that the teams involved actually want to compete and win. 

Considering that the playoffs drag on for two months or so, it essentially is a second season, and unfortunately, with the enhanced stakes as compared to the regular season, besides the things I just mentioned, there are a lot of other different factors that go into handicapping the proceedings. For one, with the series aspect, you have a situation where teams are facing one another up to seven consecutive times. This leads to a lot of ebb and flow, and thus knowing how teams react to wins and losses at this time of year is key. Second, the crucial thing at this point is simply winning games. 

For even the most savvy NBA bettors, the start of the playoffs can be a tricky time, as they are finally getting to utilize trends and systems that come when teams are playing with equal motivation. One of the things that I feel is most important when analyzing the games over the next couple of months is to arm yourself with logic-based historical trends and systems from recent playoff action. In this article, the first of what will be a round-based series, I am going to help uncover some of that information, sharing some of the most prominent recent betting data that has affected the NBA playoffs, in particular, the play-in games and the first round action. I will be doing this same type of analysis for each of the rounds as the postseason progresses. Look for the second-round analysis in 2-3 weeks. 

Note that all of these trends will be qualified daily for all VSiN Pro Subscribers on our Daily NBA Analytics Reports.

We are three years deep into the league’s ridiculous play-in tournament, where four “deserving” teams battle to be the final two seeds in each conference. Believe me when I say I use the term deserving loosely. These #7-#10 seeds for 2026 had virtually no competition for their positions, as both of the #10 seeds in each conference finished double-digit games ahead of their lesser tanking challengers in the standings. With three years of results and 18 games in the books, there have been a few unique trends that have formed. Take a look before we move on to the first round analysis. 

–  Home teams in the NBA play-in games have gone 12-6 SU but 8-10 ATS in the first three years of competition

–  Home favorites of -6 or more have won their last four tries while going 3-1 ATS in the play-in games

–  Home favorites of -5.5 points or fewer have lost three straight play-in games SU and ATS

–  Home teams in the #7-#8 seed matchups have gone 4-2 SU but 1-5 ATS over the last three seasons

–  Home teams in the #9-#10 seed matchups have gone 2-4 SU and ATS in six prior play-in games

–  Home teams in the second play-in matchups for each team have gone 5-1 SU and ATS

–  #8 seeded teams have been the most successful play-in teams from a betting perspective, going 6-5 SU and 9-2 ATS in 11 prior games

–  #9 seeded teams have been the least successful teams in play-in action, 2-6 SU and ATS in eight games

–  Teams that have lost the initial #7-#8 matchups have gone 5-1 SU and ATS against the #9-#10 winners in their second attempts to land a playoff spot.

Recent Playoff/First Round History

Looking back quickly at some recent playoff results, one should first acknowledge the success of outright winners in postseason games. In fact, after last year’s 78-13 ATS record for outright winners, they are now on a six-year run of 454-58-6 ATS, a winning percentage of 88.7%. The numbers compare very favorably to a league like the NFL for the playoffs. With that noted, if you believe an underdog has a chance to cover a point spread, you should also consider their ability to win outright as well. 

Alternatively, rather than buying lines down or backing favorites on money lines, laying the actual point spread has proven a better strategy. You’ll see when we get to the Finals article in a couple of months, the outright winner ATS record for that round is absurd. In addition, for those interested in overall home/road trends in recent playoff action, note that hosts are 254-181 SU and 223-210-2 ATS (51.2%) in the last five postseasons, including 51-40 SU and 48-43 ATS a year ago. The last five seasons timeframe is noteworthy since those are the five “normal” postseasons since the league orchestrated its playoffs in “the bubble” at Orlando in 2020.

Let’s get right into breaking down the opening round. For the many people who believe this round is far too prolonged and even a waste of time, 21 lower-seeded teams have advanced in the last 13 years of the playoffs, including eight over the last three years! I think this recent trend stems largely from teams not really showing everything in the regular season anymore and caring only about making the postseason, not about seeding. 

That said, 12 of the 21 “upsets” were #5 seeds beating #4s, and six others were #6s over #3s. Last year, for the second time in three years, we saw a #2 (Houston) lose to a #7 (Golden State). In 2024, #1 (Milwaukee) lost to a #8 (Miami). Prior to that, the last “seed upset” of that magnitude came in 2012 when #8 Philadelphia knocked out #1 Chicago. Thus, the chances of #1s Detroit and Oklahoma City, or #2s Boston or San Antonio going out early are minimal. 

Accurately spotting potential “upsets” is a good start to making profits in your postseason wagering. Hopefully, some of what I unveil coming up will help you do that. Even if not, there are still plenty of other key systems that should assist in navigating the first-round action, not only by series, but on a game-by-game basis.

Naturally, being able to predict an upset in a series will give you a leg up on a game-by-game wagering basis as well, but perhaps equally important is being able to find the heavier underdogs that wind up being more competitive than expected and push the favorites to the limit in a series. Of course, vice versa can be equally profitable, finding favorites that will sweep through a first round series easily. Take a look at some of these series trends based upon won-lost records at various time lengths of the regular season.

·   There have been 20 first round sweeps over the L12 playoff seasons, with three coming by lesser-seeded teams. Interestingly, in 10 of the 17 favored sweeps, the better-seeded team had a worse ATS record over the last half-season, and 12 of them had even or lesser ATS records in the last 20-game time periods. In other words, you can probably ignore any late-season ATS trend data that might have you considering a potential upset or longer series. In many cases, these better teams spend the last quarter of the regular season on cruise control, more interested in ensuring health than winning and covering games. For 2026, New York and Cleveland are in this spot, as is either Detroit if it hosts Charlotte. In the West, OKC will be in it unless it hosts Golden State.

·   There is actually a better chance that a #1-#8 or #2-#7 series goes longer if the better seed had a better ATS record in the latter parts of the season. In fact, in 14 of the last 19 series of these seed types that went six or seven games, the better seed had an even or better record over the last 10-game period. Boston and San Antonio were the best ATS teams among the top 4 in this year’s postseason.

·   The last 10 games outright records can also be an indicator of a #1-#8 or #2-#7 series that could go longer. In 12 of the last 19 matchups of those seeds to go six games or longer, the worse seed had an equal or better record in the last 10 games of the regular season. This was in play for the Golden State upset of Houston last season. All four top 2 seeds were at least 7-3 outright in their last 10 games, and will be in this spot.

·   In 15 of the last 16 #4-5 and #3-6 series that ended in upsets (worse-seeded team winning), the teams had overall won-lost records within four games of one another. This was the case in the Minnesota takedown of the Lakers last year. For 2026, this will be in play for the Lakers-Rockets series.

·   There has been a significant benchmark in the success of the lower-seeded team at 10 wins less than the opponent over the last 11 playoff years. If more than 10 regular season wins separate the teams, only Miami in 2023 has won a series, and the lesser seeds are averaging just 1.17 game wins per series, with 10 sweeps in 36 series. Additionally, only four other teams pushed a series to seven games. All four top ½ seeds will be 11+ games better than their first round foes.

·   When 10 or fewer wins have separated the teams, the worse-seeded team won an average of 2.37 games per series, including 18 of those 60 series wins. Only seven times did a team get swept, and only 12 other times did it win just a single game. For ’26, the #5-#6 seeds in each conference would appear to have the potential to each win at least two games in their respective series.

·   Only five of the last 31 playoff better seeds that won at least four more games AGAINST THE SPREAD in the regular season have lost a series. The 26 winning teams lost only 1.31 games per series as well. In essence, it is important that teams played well against the spread in the regular season. Both Cleveland and Oklahoma City swept their opponents in this scenario in 2025. Both Denver and the Lakers have this advantage in the West, as could all four #1 or #2 seeds, depending on how the play-in games go.

·   Using the records from the second half of the season has also revealed quality underdogs. When the worse-seeded team had an equal or better record in the second half of the season, they won 12 of last 23 series while going 75-66 outright in games! This is a very strong indicator of potential upsets, and last year, both Minnesota (vs. LA Lakers), and Golden State (vs. Houston) pulled series upsets. Charlotte is the team to watch here in a potential matchup with Detroit.

·   Alternatively, when there was five games or better record in the second half of the season for the better seed, all but one of the last 41 won their series while going 161-46 SU. Furthermore, only one other of the 41 worse-seeded teams pushed the series to seven games. Of course, the lone winner in this trend was Miami in 2023. Last year, the three teams that qualified combined to go 3-0 in series and 12-1 in individual games. New York has this edge over Toronto, and there figures to be at least a couple more from the eventual #1 or #2 seeds with their opponents.

·   Of the last 16 better seed sweeps, all 16 had better records in the second half of the season, only one had a worse record in last 20 games, and only three won fewer of their last 10 games. Again, Charlotte is the only team of concern here.

·   There is an interesting benchmark for worse-seeded teams at 48 wins (59%+) or more. Those that reach that regular season mark have gone 9-25 in series, and 83-114 (42.1%) in individual games over the last 12 postseasons. Those that have 58% or less (47-35 in full season) are just 10-52 in series and 104-224 (31.7%) in individual games in that same span. The potential first round “live underdogs” are #5 Houston and #6 Minnesota in the West. All others won fewer than 48 games.

·   Big favorites have held a significant edge – Since the start of the 2014 playoffs, NBA first round favorites of 8.5 points or more are 98-14 SU and 67-45 ATS (59.8%).

·   Bigger road favorites are also a solid bet – Only 12 of the last 62 road favorites of 4.5-points or more have lost outright, going 50-12 SU and 40-21-1 ATS (65.6%).

·   First round home favorites of 4 points or less have proven to be a bad investment lately, as since 2014, they are just 50-41 SU and 38-52-1 ATS (42.2%).

·   The last four NBA first round playoffs saw 91 Unders, 79 Overs, 2 Push– (53.5%). However, each of the last two year’s totals was split 21-21-1 in round 1.

·   With the meteoric rise in scoring over the last few years in the NBA, it is interesting to note that in the lowest totaled first round playoff games over the last six postseasons, 218 or less, Under the total is 84-65-5 (56.4%). In all games with totals above 218, Over the total is 76-66-2 (53.5%).

·   A long-standing trend of home teams being better to wager when coming off a win in a series has turned the last three playoff years. In fact, Home teams coming off a win in the prior game of a series are 30-23 SU but 21-32 ATS (39.6%). Those coming off a loss are 31-21 SU and 30-22 ATS (57.7%) in that same span. There is seemingly a huge reliance on the court edge. This 18.1% ATS swing is a good indication of how home court advantage can swing momentum in a series.

·   Blowout losses carry over – There is a bit of a misconception when it comes to teams “bouncing back” from rough first round losses. In fact, teams that lost their previous game by 12 points or more are just 68-127 SU and 81-112-2 ATS (42%) in the next contest since 2013.

·   Heartbreaking losses have a galvanizing effect – Teams that lose close games, or those decided by 3 points or less, in the first round of the NBA playoffs have bounced back with a 44-20 SU and 40-22-2 ATS (64.5%) mark in the next game since 2014. In the line range of +5 to -5, these teams are on an amazing 27-9 SU and 24-10-2 ATS (70.6%) surge! Of note, only 18 of the last three seasons’ 129 first round games were decided by 3 points or fewer.

·   Teams that shoot 40% or less from the floor in a first round game have been lousy bets in the next contest, going 56-79-3 ATS (41.5%) since 2014.

·   Beware of teams that shoot the 3pt shot well in one game but still lose. Those that shot 40.0% or better on 3-point shots but still lost have gone just 25-46-1 ATS (35.2%) in the next contest since 2016 in the first round.

·   Nearly three of every four home teams win opening game – Home teams have gone 69-27 SU and 51-43-2 ATS (54.3%) over the last 13 seasons. They were 14-2-0 SU and 12-4 ATS in ’24-‘25!

·   In the last six playoff seasons played at home courts, game 1s have gone Under the total at a 33-15 (68.8%) rate.

·   Over the last nine non-neutral playoff seasons, first round game 2 hosts are on a 57-15 SU and 48-24 ATS (66.7%) run!

·   Opening game home winners are, of course, also a solid game 2 bet – Contrary to popular “ying-and-yang” bettors’ beliefs, home teams that won in game 1 of a first round series are 39-12 SU and 33-18 ATS (64.7%) since 2016. However, they were 2-4 ATS last spring.

·   Game 2’s with double-digit home favorites have gone Under the total at a 15-6 (71.4%) clip since ’13, with only seven of the visiting foes eclipsing 100 points.

·   Game 3 point spreads most often tell the story, as hosts of 4.5-points or more are on an 18-2 SU and 16-4 ATS (80%) stretch since 2013, while home dogs of 4.5-points or more are just 4-19 SU and 9-13-1 ATS (40.9%) in that same span.

·   Since you’re probably wondering at this point, game 3 home teams in the +4 to -4 line range are currently on a brutal skid of 10-20 SU and 9-20-1 ATS (31%) since 2017.

·   Game 4 home teams in the +3 to -3 line range have fared well recently, going 21-11 SU and 21-10-1 ATS (67.7%) since 2013.

·   Game 4 home underdogs of 3.5 points or more are just 10-31 SU and 14-26-1 ATS (35%) since 2013.

·   Teams down 0-3 in a first round series are just 12-26 SU and 16-21-1 ATS (43.2%) in their last 38 game 4 tries.

·   Game 5s have belonged to the home teams over the last four non-neutral court playoff seasons. However, they have been close shaves, as these teams are 39-13 SU (just 25-27 ATS – 48.1%) since 2017.

·   Non-neutral game 5s have been defensive-focused of late, going 26-20 Under the total (60%) since 2018, with road teams putting up just 104.9 PPG.

·   Outright winners have been incredibly proficient against the point spread in game 6s, going 32-3 ATS (91.4%) since 2015.

·   Game 6s have usually been road domination – Road teams in NBA first round game 6s are 29-17 SU and 33-13 ATS (71.7%) in the last 13 seasons, including 2-1 SU and 3-0 ATS last year.

·   Road teams looking to close out a series in game 6 of the first round are 20-9 SU and 21-8 ATS (72.4%) in their last 29 tries. Outright winners are 28-1 ATS in those games, but the lone ATS loser in that span came a year ago when Denver failed to win but did cover at the LA Clippers.

·   Game 7s are usually competitive – Every fan loves a big game 7, and NBA fans should even more, as although the first-round game 7s have gone heavily to the favorites (15-5 SU), they are just 8-11-1 ATS (42.1%) in those 20 do-or-die contests.

·   Much to my surprise, 12 of the last 18 (66.7%) first round game 7s have gone Over the total.

·   #1 seeds are good bets when underrated – #1 seeds when in the small favorite (-2.5 or less) or underdog role are 10-7 SU and ATS (58.8%) since 2013 in the first round of the playoffs. They are also 12-5 Under the total (70.6%) in those games.

·   #1 seeds are 10-3 SU and 9-4 ATS (69.2%) in their last 13 first round games when trailing in a series.

·  #1 seeds close out series…period. They are 23-3 SU and 18-8 ATS (69.2%) in their last 26 first round playoff closeout tries. This is a big reason they haven’t been pushed to a game 7 since 2014. Last year, both #1’s swept their first round foes.

·   #2 seeds have been crazy good as bigger chalk – #2 seeded teams are on a strong run of 73-17 SU and 56-34 ATS (62.2%) when favored by 4.5-points or more.

·   #2 seeds start fast – #2 seeded teams are on a run of 42-8 SU and 32-18 ATS (64%) in the first two games of first round series over the last 13 years.

·  #2 seeds have also bounced back quickly from losses, 24-4 SU and 22-6 ATS (78.6%) in their last 28, including 4-0 ATS a year ago.

·  #3 seeds bounce back on the road after losses – Third-seeded teams are on a run of 12-8 SU and 14-6 ATS (70%) on the road after losing the prior game in a first round series.

·  #4 seeds have been brutal in games 3 and 4, with a 17-35 SU and 19-32-1 ATS (37.3%) record in such games of their first round series since 2013.

·  #4 seeds have tended to stack losses, as they are just 31-35 SU and 25-41 ATS (37.9%) since 2013 in same series games following a loss.

·  Big road favorites of 5 points or more looking to close out series are money, showing a record of 16-3 SU and 14-5 ATS (73.7%) since the start of the 2013 postseason.

·  Small favorites/underdogs closing out series have also been solid of late – teams attempting to close out a series in a non-game 7 scenario and playing as underdogs or favorites of 2 points or less are on a 15-7 SU and 16-6 ATS (72.7%) run in their last 22 tries.

·  Teams getting a second (or third) closeout opportunity after losing the prior chance are 29-11 SU but 17-21-2 ATS (44.7%) in their last 40 tries.

·  Success in first round games comes with topping the 117-point mark, as teams that have scored 118 points or more are on a 128-29 SU and 126-31 ATS (80.3%) run over the last seven postseasons. These teams were 15-1 SU and 14-2 ATS in 2025, with the only loss coming in a 119-118 Indiana win over Milwaukee in which both teams met the magic scoring mark.

·  In terms of points allowed, 99 points is the key benchmark. Teams that have allowed 98 points or fewer in the last seven first round playoff seasons are 113-20 SU and 110-21-2 ATS (83.9%).

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR