What is it with this tendency to speak of a 'Nobel prize' when it concerns a different, lesser known prestigious prize in a field for which there happens to be no Nobel prize (Abel prize, Turing award)? It's a lazy way to try to draw attention to it, and pernicious even because it makes the whole purpose of these named awards questionable.
Perhaps you answered your own question: "It's a lazy way to try to draw attention to it". It's not crazy, though, to me at least. The general population has some understanding of the Nobel but doesn't with others (e.g., Fields Medal). Why not give a comparison point?
The only one that sticks out as pernicious to me is the Economics Nobel, which was explicitly created to sound like a Nobel prize, but really isn't one.