The NBA 65-Game Rule and Appeals Are So Silly
The NBA recently implemented a rule that almost really backfired during this season with the 65-game minimum. Luka Doncic, Cade Cunningham, and Anthony Edwards were ineligible, despite all three being strong candidates for First-Team All-NBA. Doncic, Edwards, and Cunningham all appealed, and the NBA somehow made the whole situation worse.
The NBA's 65-game rule is bad for business
At a point earlier in the season, it looked like Cade Cunningham might win MVP by being the only viable candidate still eligible. Of course, Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Nikola Jokic, and Victor Wembanyama squeaked into eligible status, and Cunningham got hurt and missed too many games.
That was when the conversation began to really heat up. People started to realize that the rule was not helping. Its intended purpose, to prevent stars from sitting out to rest, was not being realized, and it was instead hurting players.
Now, even after both Doncic and Cunningham won their appeals and are eligible, it's clear that the rule isn't working. And by making those two but not Edwards eligible, the NBA has essentially made the entire situation worse.
Why not Anthony Edwards?
It makes total sense that Luka Doncic was granted eligibility. He missed the minimum partly because he missed two games for the birth of his child halfway across the country. That fit the bill for an extenuating circumstance, and it's good that he can make All-NBA despite it.
Cade Cunningham's case was less airtight, but it's also a win. He missed 11 games because of a collapsed lung suffered on the court. That's a big injury, and it was very obviously not a case of Cunningham resting for the playoffs because he returned with the Pistons having the top seed already locked up.
Read More
NBA/Basketball
Anthony Edwards' appeal was denied because his case doesn't have a situation like that. He dealt with various issues that kept him on the bench, and the NBA didn't feel that any of them were too difficult to deal with, so he's still ineligible.
But Edwards is not a player who ever rests. He is always in the lineup, and he's not the guy this rule was made for. He missed 19 total games in five seasons before 2025-26. Does that sound like someone who needs to be incentivized to get on the court? This whole thing is utterly ridiculous.
It's time do away with it
So, if you're keeping score, Victor Wembanyama, Luka Doncic, and Cade Cunningham are all eligible for NBA awards despite them not hitting 65 games played. There were a ton of weird loopholes with the minutes aspect of the rule and the NBA Cup, of which some games do not count to the tally but count for awards.
The simple fact that it's come to this is proof that the rule isn't working. Star players are playing, but most of them have always played. And really, what is the difference between 65 games played and Edwards' tally? It's totally meaningless.
When you get down into the nitty-gritty of it, it gets even more silly. Edwards, Cunningham, and Doncic all played far more total minutes than Wembanyama, who was eligible without appeal. They should all be eligible.
The point of this isn't to disqualify Wembanyama, because the Spurs did well to manage his workload within the rules. The point is that the rule is silly. Let voters vote for these awards and All-NBA teams with the idea that games played matter. If they determine that Edwards, with less than 65 games played, is deserving of All-NBA (which he is), then he should get it. It's as simple as that, but the league has made it way too complicated.
