Earning a spot on an All-NBA team is the simplest way for a player to become eligible for a Designated Veteran or Rose Rule contract, allowing them to earn a higher maximum salary than they'd typically qualify for (35% instead of 30% for veterans, or 30% instead of 25% for players coming off rookie contracts). But that doesn't mean that there are financial benefits for every player who receives All-NBA recognition.
In order to become "super-max" eligible, a player must meet a set of specific criteria related not just to his on-court achievements but to his total NBA years of service, his contract situation, and how he joined his current team.
For instance, Luka Doncic would have been super-max eligible last summer as a member of the Mavericks, but the trade that sent him to the Lakers took that option off the table, since a player who changes teams via trade during his second contract isn't permitted to sign a Designated Veteran deal. With a super-max deal no longer in play, Doncic signed a standard max-salary extension (starting at 30% of the cap) with his new team last summer.
So, while Doncic's bid to be granted an "extraordinary circumstances" exception to circumvent the 65-game rule and gain All-NBA (and MVP) eligibility this spring could have a real impact on his career résumé, there are no financial implications hinging on that ruling.
For other players who narrowly met the 65-game criteria or will fall just short of it, there are more significant financial consequences to take into account. In the space below, we're taking a closer look at the All-NBA caliber players whose future earnings figure to be impacted the most by whether or not they got to 65 games this season.
