Why is there no minimum game requirement for solo/duo que rewards?

I am curious why there is not a required number of ranked wins needed in a season to qualify for ranked rewards. At first this is going to sound like a salty troll rant, but trust me there is some logic behind it.

What we know:

1. You have to play 10 placement matches to be placed into a league and division.
2. Once your placed. There is no lp decay if you are Gold, Silver, or Bronze.
3. Each season starts with a hard reset.
4. The longer you wait to play your ranked matches in the season, the less you are effected by this reset.
5. To receive ranked team rewards you need to record 10 wins with your team to receive rewards.

We believe is true: 6. You need to play more than your 10 placement matches to find your true elo/ranking. There is not an actual number but more of a range. I would say a couple hundred ranked games, but the number is debatable.

So the problem I see is this. Since you only play 10 ranked games to be placed there is some luck involved on what teams you get, matchups, etc. It also depends on what time of year you play your ranked games as you will rank on average higher the later in the season you play. Knowing these two things can we not conclude that for a good chunk of players the rank they are placed in is most likely not their actual rank? Especially when it comes to new players and smurf accounts.

Example: My cousin just started playing this game and got level 30. He only plays Malphite. He played his placement matches about 2 months ago on his brand new level 30 account. He played only malphite in his 10 placement matches. To my amazement, his stats were not too bad. He still needs to work on his csing, but as malph jungle, support, and top his csing was not a huge issue. He went 8-2 in his placement matches and was placed in Gold IV. This is the highest I have ever seen anyone placed. He played a couple of games after getting ranked but quit after 2-3 because the games "got a lot more difficult". Nevertheless, he will receive his gold rewards this season.

Example 2: I started playing ranked in season 2, but really got into it starting in season 3. Since season 3, I have been roaming around different divisions of silver. I have been shifting between silver 2 & silver 3 most of this season (until this last weekend when I went on a huge losing streak and now am sitting in silver 4 for the first time this season). Despite playing many ranked games, many champions, and using professional guides, etc. I am still a silver player, which is fine. At least I know where my true elo (silver 2 so I know if I keep playing I will get back there sooner rather than later). However, if someone only plays a fews ranked games a season they will never really know where they are at.

Is the reason there is not a win requirement for low level ranked rewards because no one cares about the silver rewards? I mean... I can't argue with that since I could care less about the silver border I continue to receive each season. But regardless, shouldn't someone only receive rewards if they in fact have shown what their true rank is? I know there is elo decay in higher ranks and used to be for Gold/silver as well. I think its a good thing they got rid of the elo decay, but I would suggest you have to win a certain number of ranked games to receive rewards.

I hate having these end of the season kids get ranked and placed into my new silver 4 home with 3-4 ranked wins of their careers. I mean... i guess that is a different story but even though silver rewards are shit I still feel I deserve it more than them. Especially since the only way they will get another win and not be demoted to bronze is if me and my fellow longtime silver teammates carry the game for most of them. This is the salty part of this thread so we will just leave it at that.

Anyways, just curious why there is no minimum win requirement.