Warriors: F Them Picks Edition

Previously, I talked about Giannis and the upcoming NBA Draft, thinking about the Warriors possibilities in both.

If I’m honest, however, if I were the Warriors, I wouldn’t go for Giannis and I wouldn’t simply make the pick.

Giannis is still great, but he is no longer the easy “trade everything and figure it out later” bet. He turns 32 this year, would handicap the Warriors in both salary cap and future assets, and likely turns the trade into some version of Butler for Giannis plus most of the remaining draft capital. That may raise the ceiling, but it also narrows every other path.

Making the pick has the opposite problem. The No. 11 pick is valuable, but the realistic good-case version of that player probably joins the rotation right away. That is useful, but it does not necessarily boost the Warriors back to contention. The Warriors do not just need another young player. They need another 16-game player: someone who can stay on the floor in a real playoff series.

Instead, I would use that pick, and potentially others, to bring in a young, good-contract player who might have a Nickeil Alexander-Walker unlock in him.

That means the ideal target is already a 16-game player, or close enough that the Warriors are not betting on a totally new player. In the right role with the Warriors, he could become a premium starter.

This would allow the Warriors to keep their core players and add more talent. They need to add more 16-game players, not just swap existing ones for better ones. Butler for Giannis is still a swap. It makes the top better, but it may not make the whole playoff rotation good enough.

The better question is where being aggressive has the best expected value.

Using No. 11 on a rookie keeps the asset cheap, but it asks an old team to wait. Even if the pick hits, the most likely timeline is Year 2 or Year 3. The Warriors need playoff minutes now.

Trading everything for Giannis is the opposite problem. Giannis is good enough, but the cost may solve one problem while creating several others: no depth, no flexibility, no future picks, and very little margin for age or injury.

That leaves a third path: use the pick(s) as currency for a player who is already closer to playoff usefulness than the average rookie, but still young enough to have another level.

This is an optionality strategy, not just a talent strategy: the Warriors are trying to add a player who can help now without closing off the next move.

If the Warriors trade one or two picks for the right young player, they can still keep most of the roster intact, retain existing talent, and give themselves time to see whether the player scales in a bigger role. If he does, they found a premium starter before the market fully priced him. If he does not, they still have a movable player, some remaining draft capital, and a path to the next deal.

That is very different from the Giannis path. With Giannis, the Warriors may get the best player in the trade, but they also lose most of their optionality. The assets are gone, the cap is tied up, and the team becomes dependent on an aging superstar staying healthy and drama-free deep into a max contract.

That is why the price matters. One pick is a bet. Two picks is an aggressive bet. Three picks is only for someone with a real chance to become a premium starter. Four picks is only for someone who already looks close to that level.

The process was:

Start with contract value. The player had to be under roughly $20 million, young enough to still improve, and ideally controlled (including restricted rights) for at least two more seasons. I removed players who are restricted free agents this summer because they are harder to acquire cleanly and likely require sending real salary back.

Look for a reason the other team might say yes. A good young player on a cheap deal is not available just because the Warriors want him. There needs to be a forcing function: apron pressure, a coming extension crunch, a position logjam, a roster reset, or a larger star-trade scenario.

Filter for playoff utility. I did not want bad-team stat producers or prospects who need three things to improve before they matter. The player needed at least one bankable playoff skill today: defense, shooting, size, decision-making, rim protection, or real secondary creation.

RankPlayerUpside rankContractWhy Their Team Says YesPrice – First Round Picks
1Anthony Black3$10.1M in 2026-27; extension eligible; 2027 RFA path. (Spotrac)Orlando is expensive after building around Banchero, Wagner, Bane, and Suggs. Black is the next extension decision, and No. 11 plus another pick asset may help them reset cost/control.2
2Zaccharie Risacher4Rookie-scale deal; $13M-ish in 2026-27 with team control after. (SI)Hawks have positional/role congestion and may consider using Risacher as a trade-up or roster-balancing piece. This is more “lost conviction” than cap pressure. (Yahoo Sports)1
3Deni Avdija1$13.1M in 2026-27, $11.9M in 2027-28; elite surplus deal.Portland only says yes if it needs pick capital for a Giannis/star package. 4
4Cason Wallace2$7.4M in 2026-27; 2027 RFA path. (Spotrac)OKC is the apron-pressure case, but picks are not naturally attractive to them because they already have too many. They say yes only if this is part of broader consolidation.3

Ask whether the role is suppressing the talent. The Nickeil Alexander-Walker lesson is not just “find a young player.” It is “find a player who already has NBA-ready skills, but whose current team context does not fully reveal them.” That is different from betting on a raw prospect to become a new player.

Price the bet. I treated this year’s No. 11 pick as the baseline price. From there, the question is how far the Warriors should be willing to go: one pick for a buy-low swing, two picks for a cleaner young playoff player, three picks for a high-confidence unlock, and four picks only for someone who already looks like a premium starter.

The final group is where the player, contract, team pressure, and Warriors asset structure could plausibly line up.

Price is my rough estimate of draft-capital cost, with 1 meaning this year’s No. 11 pick and 4 meaning an aggressive multi-pick package.

The names split into different types of bets.

Anthony Black is the cleanest Nickeil Alexander-Walker-style target. He is not a pure upside swing. He already has size, defense, passing, and enough handle to imagine a bigger role without inventing a new player. The question is whether the shot solidifies. If it does, he could move from useful playoff guard to premium starter.

Zaccharie Risacher is different. He is not a NAW-style player yet. He is more of a distressed former No. 1 overall pick. The case is that Atlanta may have lost some conviction while the original wing-size, shooting, and defense foundation still exists. That is a one-pick bet, not a multi-pick bet.

Deni Avdija is the cleanest player on the list. The issue is not whether he is a 16-game player, it’s whether Portland would ever move him. The only reason this becomes plausible is if the Blazers are trying to make a bigger star move, such as Giannis, and need to convert Deni into pick capital. Four picks is aggressive, but it is coherent because Deni is already close to premium-starter level on a bargain contract – he was an All Star this year who can be a physical, primary scorer and passer and hold his own defensively.

Cason Wallace may be the best true NAW analog after Black. He is on a loaded team, playing a compressed role, with real defense and enough offense to imagine more. The pre-draft case always suggested there might be more guard skill than his role showed. At Kentucky, he shared the ball, played in cramped spacing, and still showed passing, defensive pressure, and enough shooting to project as more than a defensive specialist. Oklahoma City probably knows exactly what it has, and picks are not naturally attractive to a team that already has too many of them.

The distinction between these names is confidence level.

Risacher is a one-pick swing because the upside is real, but the proof is not. Black is worth more because he already has a clearer 16-game foundation and a plausible role unlock. Wallace costs more because the defensive floor is already playoff-grade and the offensive upside may simply be hidden by Oklahoma City’s depth. Deni costs the most because he is not really an unlock bet anymore. He is already the kind of premium starter the Warriors would hope one of these other players becomes.

The framework: the Warriors pay more only when they are buying more certainty, chasing the highest-probability path to adding another 16-game player before the Curry window closes.

If the No. 11 pick stays a pick, the Warriors are betting on development speed. If it becomes part of a Giannis package, they are betting almost everything on one star solving the whole roster. If it becomes the centerpiece for someone like Black, Wallace, Deni, or another young 16-game player, they are making a different bet: that the draft pick is more valuable as a shortcut through the development curve.

That is the middle path I prefer. It’s still aggressive, but it does not require the Warriors to gut the roster, and it does not ask them to wait three years for the pick to matter.

Where will Giannis Go? Houston.

Giannis Antetokounmpo is reportedly back on the NBA trade market, and it sounds like this will be done before the 2026 NBA draft. Since the Warriors were part of the rumors this last season, I wanted to review where they realistically stand. My prediction is simple:

Houston gets the deal done for Alperen Sengun, Jabari Smith Jr., and a future first for Giannis.

But first, let’s discuss the assumptions in my argument.

Core Assumptions

  • The Bucks have already decided to trade Giannis before the draft.
  • They need a coherent public story the day after the trade. The return must be clear to fans, media, ownership, and the locker room.
  • They are not set up for a clean tank. Their future draft-pick control is compromised. Losing more games is not necessarily beneficial, especially considering the proposed draft lottery restructuring built to deincentivize tanking.
  • They already have No. 10 in the 2026 draft. The ideal trade either adds another premium draft asset or adds a young player who functions like one.
  • Giannis has practical destination leverage. Because of his contract situation, teams will not pay full value unless they believe he will accept the destination.

Bucks Strategic Assumptions

  • They want a reset, not a full teardown. The likely goal is to become younger, cheaper, and more flexible, not to become the worst team in the league.
  • They need at least one fan-facing centerpiece. The return needs someone fans can immediately understand as part of the next era.
  • They will prefer immediate or near-immediate value over vague distant upside. A 2026 lottery pick matters because it can be used right away. A young player already producing matters because fans can see the new direction immediately.
  • They will discount distant future picks unless there is a clear reason to believe those picks could become premium assets.
  • They do not want an old star as the main return. Older stars matter only if they can be rerouted for younger assets or picks.
  • They will value clean salary and contract flexibility. In a Giannis trade, getting off Myles Turner’s remaining money could be part of the value.

Below I rank the deals that I think could actually get agreement from Milwaukee, the acquiring team, and Giannis himself.

My Prediction: Houston Gets the Deal Done

Houston: Alperen Sengun, Jabari Smith Jr., 2027 #1 routed from Phoenix
Milwaukee: Giannis

Houston is the cleanest “win-now urgency” bidder because its timeline has already shifted. The Rockets are no longer patiently collecting prospects around Sengun, Jabari Smith Jr., Reed Sheppard, Amen Thompson, and future picks.

By adding Kevin Durant, they moved into a shorter contention window, which makes a second consolidation trade more defensible. Sengun is young and productive, but his best role is as an offensive hub, and Houston may decide that Giannis gives them a higher playoff ceiling next to Durant, Amen, and their remaining defensive infrastructure.

From Milwaukee’s side, Sengun + Jabari + a premium first is one of the few packages that gives the Bucks both salary matching and a coherent post-Giannis story: a young All-Star-level center, a young stretch forward, their own No. 10 pick, and another future draft asset.

This deal is painful for Houston, but they would still have Giannis, Durant, Amen Thompson, (and likely, Fred VanVleet) and enough defensive infrastructure to be a real contender.

A Clean Reboot: Golden State Warriors

Golden State: Brandin Podziemski, Moses Moody, Jimmy Butler, No. 11 + 3 other first round picks
Milwaukee: Giannis, Myles Turner

The Warriors can give the Bucks a full reboot package: immediate draft capital, young rotation pieces, short-term salary, long-term cap cleanup, and future exposure to a declining franchise.

If Giannis is gone, Myles Turner’s remaining long-term money becomes much harder to justify on a reset roster. Golden State can absorb that contract because Turner still helps a Curry-led title push as a stretch big and rim protector.

In return, Milwaukee gets Podziemski, a former Wisconsin Mr. Basketball, Moody, Butler’s expiring salary, No. 11 next to its own No. 10, and three others first round picks.

Moody’s injury lowers his value, but he is still young and on a manageable deal. Butler is expiring salary who could be traded (or more simply, bought out) to a contending team before the 2027 trade deadline.

Podziemski is the key young player in the deal. I am assuming he can be re-signed around $15 million to $20 million per year, which would make him a useful long-term contract for Milwaukee. At that number, he fits the reboot story as a young, productive guard next to two lottery picks. If he costs meaningfully more, his value to Milwaukee drops.

The Bucks argument is that this deal lets them reboot immediately: two adjacent lottery picks, two young rotation players, future post-Curry picks, and a clean break from both the Giannis era and the Turner (3 years, near $90M) contract.

Cleanest Bucks Fit, But Less Likely: San Antonio Spurs

San Antonio: Stephon Castle or Dylan Harper + Devin Vassell + Keldon Johnson
Milwaukee: Giannis

The Spurs are young, good, and can keep following the OKC-style homegrown path. The deal only makes sense if they feel urgency to win it all now. Giannis next to Wembanyama would be an absurd defensive frontcourt, but the cost is abandoning the Spurs’ young core as it is starting to prove itself.

Castle or Harper is the type of young player Milwaukee can sell as the next era. Vassell and Keldon Johnson are included for salary matching, but are also good fair contract young players. This deal doesn’t need a draft pick.

For Milwaukee, this is probably the cleanest young-player package. The Bucks get a potential supestar guard, useful salary, and a reset story that makes sense.

The Best “Almost” Team: Atlanta Hawks

Atlanta: Dyson Daniels, Zaccharie Risacher, Onyeka Okongwu, No. 23
Milwaukee: Giannis

I do not think the Hawks include No. 8. If No. 8 and No. 23 are both included, the package is very attractive for Milwaukee.

The other key piece is Nickeil Alexander-Walker, this last season’s most improved player. I do not think Atlanta includes him because he is an amazing value at his contract. If he is in the deal, things look very different for Milwaukee. But if Atlanta is trying to build around Jalen Johnson, and Giannis, Walker is exactly the type of reasonably priced two-way player they should want to keep.

The broader issue with Atlanta is that their young players are all useful, reasonably priced, and under team control. Dyson Daniels is good, but flawed. It is not clear he can become a good enough offensive player. Risacher (former #1 overall pick) had a very shaky second year, so his stock is down. Okongwu is solid, but his development has been slow enough that the ceiling is unclear.

Atlanta has the assets to make a deal happen, but the version they would want to offer probably is not strong enough to beat Houston, San Antonio, or Golden State.

My Ranking

  1. Houston: my prediction to land him
  2. Golden State: cleanest full reboot package
  3. San Antonio: cleanest Bucks young-player package, but less likely
  4. Atlanta: best almost-deal, probably not enough without No. 8 or Walker

But What About XYZ Team?

Note: I did not go deeply into the salary structure for each team below to see if deals are actually possible. I just looked at the core proposal to “get close.”

The pick counts below are conservative estimates. I am excluding swaps, encumbered picks, and picks that may not be legally tradable.

TeamClean tradable firstsBucks wantWhy it fails / who says no
Memphis~5: No. 3, No. 16, 2028, 2031 PHX, 2032No obvious centerpieceThe picks are strong, especially No. 3, but Giannis acceptance is the blocker. Bucks do not have clear value for Ja Morant in this type of reset.
Clippers~3-4: No. 5, 2030, 2032, maybe 2029 INDNo obvious centerpieceBucks say no unless they love No. 5 or a first-tier player falls. The pick has to carry too much of the package. Clippers’ future sheet is messy after No. 5.
Lakers~3: No. 25, 2030, 2032Austin ReavesBucks say no. Reaves is good and marketable, but not enough as the main Giannis return at likely $40M+ money.
Heat~3: No. 13, 2030, 2032Tyler Herro or Bam AdebayoBucks say no on a Herro-led package. A Bam package is more interesting, but Miami probably does not trade Bam if the goal is to pair him with Giannis.
OKC~3: No. 12, No. 17, one of 2031/2032 under strict ruleChet or Jalen WilliamsOKC says no. They can pay their existing players and are already championship level. They have no need to compress the timeline. OKC has plenty of other young talent that would be attractive, but I just don’t think OKC cares.
Celtics~3: No. 27, 2027, 2030 or 2031Jaylen BrownCeltics probably say no if Jaylen is required. Bucks say no if he is not. Late picks do not carry the deal.
Cavaliers~3: No. 29, 2030, 2032Evan MobleyCavs say no on Mobley. Bucks say no without Mobley because the picks are not good enough.
Knicks~3: No. 24, 2030, 2032No obvious centerpieceBucks say no unless a core player is included. The pick package is too thin.
Magic~1: 2032 only under strict ruleFranz WagnerBucks say no because there is no 2026 first and little clean pick flexibility.
Timberwolves~1: No. 28 only under strict ruleJaden McDanielsBucks say no. Minnesota lacks clean tradable firsts and cannot beat the market without a core player.
Nuggets~1: No. 26 only under strict ruleJamal Murray or Peyton WatsonBoth sides probably say no. Denver lacks clean picks and does not have a clean Bucks-facing package.
Blazers~2: 2027 and one of 2031/2032Deni Avdija or Shaedon SharpeGiannis says no. He already played with Dame.

My Only Thoughts from the Warriors Play-in Loss

This is a part two of sorts from My Only Thought’s from the 49ers Super Bowl Loss. It’s official, to me anyway: the run is over. (I’ve taken a news break from the 49ers the last couple of months and will do the same for the Warriors and basically all of sports.)

This team was better than last year’s team, and had more wins but for a group of 4 Hall of Famers over their peak, we can clearly see this team can’t get better from the core. To go out to the Kings the way they did last night, they don’t have the switch either. They basically didn’t have anything left. They were basically healthy, after a year of good Spurs-like minutes moderation. The Kings were missing two huge players in Huerter and Monk.

Sometimes it ends, and that’s ok. We’ve hit the end. Here’s what I’d do, as painful as it is.

  1. Let Klay go. He’s going to get a huge deal for an up and coming team, like the Magic. He deserves it. If he wants to take an undermarket price to stay, the Warriors should agree.
  2. Let Chris Paul go. He was here to help organize the offense when it was too much on Steph. In the Kings game, it’s clear he wasn’t enough. Like Klay, he can be of more value to another team.
  3. Draft Bronny James with their second round draft pick and challenge Lebron to come for a lesser salary. I’m not sure where this pick is and if the Lakers might take Bronny with a #1 to keep LeBron.
  4. Andrew Wiggins played well in the last two months and I think he’s not lost anymore. But he was really inconsistent the last two years due to personal and physical problems. If there’s a solid trade package that he can be put into, let him go, but his salary is OK.
  5. Pay Kevon Looney’s partial guarantee of $3M instead of the full $8M. I love Looney but he’s become Roy Hibbert-ized for this generation of basketball. Warriors need to create full financial flexibility.

What remains:

  1. PG Stephen Curry
  2. C Draymond Green
  3. PF Jonathan Kuminga
  4. SG Brandin Podziemski
  5. SF Andrew Wiggins
  6. SG/SF Moses Moody
  7. C Trayce Jackson-Davis
  8. PF Gary Payton II

Bronny James is on a 2-Way. Only Steph, Draymond, and Wiggins make significant money. LeBron has a player option next year, so he can just walk or the Warriors can package Paul/Wiggins to the Lakers / other teams in a trade. I would prefer LeBron take less money (he has said he would and this would allow the W’s to pick up another player) and the Warriors keep Wiggins. Pick up depth with the remaining cap flexibility – either wing or big. I do like keeping Usman Garuba as the developing third big man – he proved he could was a NBA-ready defender in Euroleague as a 19 year old.

It’s not yet known if the Warriors will have a #1 draft pick this year, and they could trade that for help (they have enough youth) or use it if they have it.

The Case for Entering the NBA Draft and Economic Opportunity Costs

Occasionally I hear Jim Barnett and Bob Fitzgerald, the Warriors’ TV announcers, talk about how players who stay in college for additional years do not lose much from doing so – that not only do such players get better and become more mature from the experience, they also end up making the same amount of money (or perhaps more) from elongated careers.

As a Cal Bear, this makes me think of the upcoming decisions of super freshman Ivan Rabb and Jaylen Brown. Sorry Jim and Bob, I disagree with you because of former Warrior Chris Porter.

Porter is expected to be a late lottery pick in the June NBA draft. He could have been a lottery pick had he come out after an All-American junior season last year.

Andy Katz, ESPN.com (May 2000)

Chris Porter lost potential lifetime financial security by staying in school
Chris Porter lost potential lifetime financial security by staying in school

Over 15 years ago, Chris Porter was a hot NBA prospect, projected to be a lottery pick after his junior year. He was featured on the cover of Sports Illustrated. A year later, after giving scouts a full year to focus on his weaknesses, he was drafted by the Warriors at the 55th overall pick (I was very excited by this pick, as I remember).

He went on to have a nothing career.

This is the danger of giving up guaranteed money.

Let’s break this down for Rabb and Brown.  As of today, according to DraftExpress (a reputable source on pre-NBA talent), Jaylen Brown would be the 4th pick (or is the 4th best prospect, however you want to read it) in this summer’s draft. Ivan Rabb is 14th. Both would be considered “lottery picks”, draft picks for teams that do not make the NBA playoffs, just as Chris Porter could have been so long ago.

So why should both Rabb and Brown leave for the NBA?

In a worst case scenario, any 1st round draft pick gets two years of guaranteed money upon signing. As of this year, the amount for the lowest 1st round draft pick (30th) is approximately $1.9 million dollars. Even if a rookie has a terrible agent (see: Ricky Williams / Master P), he would still more than likely get at least $1.5 million. (I am going to leave any net present value arguments out of this entire discussion, as well as taxes, agent fees, etc.)

If their draft positions hold, Rabb and Brown would get closer to $3M and $7M, respectively.

Minimum $1.5M dollars and a (virtually) guaranteed spot at worst case on a NBA basketball team for two years is nothing to scoff at, especially if you did not grow up in a fairly affluent family. I went to Business School at Kellogg (Northwestern). If I were offered this deal today, I would absolutely take the $1.5M now, despite having a good amount of work experience and knowing I can do other things. Thus to paint 20 year olds (who are probably unable able to do other things at this state in their lives) as silly for taking the money is a bit ridiculous.

Yes, it sounds great to believe in your talent, that the money will always be there, but that’s actually the dumb move.

Taking money now is the smart thing, if it is guaranteed. For any player’s long term development, he has to be in a good team situation in which he can grow (compare San Antonio Spurs vs Brooklyn Nets) – this is something a player has much less control over and thus, has much more risk. The money is guaranteed while the opportunity to play, be liked by a coaching staff, is not.

What are the opportunity costs for staying?

Other than having your draft position go down, costing you literally millions of dollars, if you get booted to the second round as Chris Porter, you will not have a guaranteed contract, or a contract at all. Let’s ignore the chance for life-changing injury too, which could happen but is rare.

If you go to the NBA DLeague (the minors) on your own to try to make it to the NBA, you can make up to $25K a year. This could easily be 19K or 13K as well.

In other words, if your stock falls for whatever reason and you fall out of the 1st round, you will AT BEST be making just 3.3% of what you would have made, IN THE WORST CASE, as the lowest chosen first round draft pick.

This is a huge drop. Yes, someone could make good money (six figures to low seven figures) internationally, but if you are just starting your career and feel you are an NBA player, you will probably try the DLeague first.

A key thing to note here is not just the relative different of the 96.7% drop in salary, it’s the absolute drop. If you had this disparity with Kobe Bryant’s pay, you would still be making $750K per year, a ton of money for 99% of Americans. But this is $25K, and you won’t be flying first class, staying in nice hotels. This is bus life, a hard way to earn $25K (roughly equivalent to making $13/hr at a full time job for a year).

If a player stayed in school in order to complete his college degree and then dropped out of the first round, I would say he wasted the point of going to college. Jaylen Brown, Ivan Rabb, get in the draft now and go to summer school in the future.

If you want a more current example of how delaying can matter, look at Skal Labissiere from Kentucky. If he could have entered the draft a year ago, he might have gone #1 overall. After a poor freshman season, however, he might now be picked towards the end of the lottery, a $4.5 difference in guaranteed money.

Is there another way?

In my opinion, college basketball (the talent level) suffers from elite players leaving early. It is harder for non-traditional powerhouse teams to create momentum off of strong seasons (if Rabb and Brown leave, the Bears program is very weak for next year). Players are unable to mature in a more natural (college) setting and have to develop their games in the constant pressure of the professional ranks among men 5-15 years older. In addition, unless they play for a terrible team, elite players will likely see more reps and minutes playing for a college team.This lack of elite players over consecutive years is also part of the college game’s ratings decline.

Solution: Let players enter the draft but continue to play in college.

How this would work:

  1. College Players can enter the draft anytime in their college career.
  2. If drafted in the 1st round, a player could stay in school up to their 4th year after their high school graduation year (you cannot stay in school forever).
  3. Contracts are guaranteed (as they are today) for 1st rounders, while contracts for 2nd rounders can be offered guaranteed (optional by the team, as today). Contracts take effect once the player decides to leave school.
  4. 1st round picks do not have to sign their contracts, but their rights would stay with the drafting team until the end of their 4th year after high school graduation. Rights to 2nd round picks would only stay with the drafting team until the next year’s draft (a bit like the college baseball draft).
  5. Players who want to maintain college eligibility cannot leave school and take time off to prepare for the draft process. Instead, teams can visit with them during specific break (spring break, summer break) periods. This will limit the number of workouts (and injuries) possible, but interviews should be fine. Schools like Kentucky would likely hold on-campus “Pro Days” as in the NFL, which admittedly could favor powerhouse schools in college recruiting.
  6. Players give up their college eligibility completely by leaving school and going through the normal pre-draft preparations – this would be no different from today.
  7. Teams can cut players with no salary cap hit (the year the player enters the NBA) in case a player seriously regresses (or for whatever reason), but the player still gets fully paid.

For NBA Teams

  1. Teams no longer have to pay to develop players (ex. Jermaine O’Neal) and then see them leave once they are physically and mentally ready to contribute to a team. Thus, teams pay more for actual expected contribution than potential.
  2. Insurance can cover players who (perhaps this can be paid in half by the player, through his contract, and the team) have a career-ending injury during college after being drafted.
  3. Per Net Present Value, it is always better to have a financial obligation later than sooner.
  4. Non-ready players take fewer jobs away from NBA veterans.

For College Teams and the NCAA

  1. Teams can hold on to players longer, and coaches would no longer be in this weird “I want you to stay, but I swear it’s for your own good, not for mine” position.
  2. Having players for multiple years helps sustain programs.
  3. Consistency and multi-year player resonance creates better television ratings and attention, i.e. business revenue.

For Players

  1. Significantly less risk. If you have a good potential draft position, get drafted and get guaranteed money when you leave. If you’re hot, strike. If you’re not, keep working.
  2. Make progress on a degree (what college is for), become more mature, and improve your skills so you don’t flunk out (see: Anthony Bennett) once you do reach the NBA.

Some other notes about why this makes sense. First, we can look internationally. Teams like the Spurs have signed professional international players for years, knowing they are unlikely to come to the NBA right away. In that time, these players develop further and come to the NBA ready to contribute. These aren’t necessarily older players either – many European players (Tony Parker, Ricky Rubio, Kristaps Porzingis) turn professional as teenagers, before their college-age years.

In addition, with the NCAA’s supposed focus on amateurism, under this plan, players will not get paid anything until they leave for school. This is like getting a job offer when you are still in college, which is pretty common. MBA students often finalize their jobs up 10 months in advance of the actual start date.

I think these changes will not prevent players who can play in the NBA right away (ex. Karl-Anthony Towns) from jumping, nor should it. However, it can help the many players who have the talent, but not quite the skill set, with Brown and Rabb as examples. Jaylen Brown cannot shoot or handle the ball particularly well, and yet his physical talent makes him a great NBA prospect. An additional year or two would allow him to become a great player and make more progress on his academic ambitions without financial risk (aside from if his family needed money to survive right now).

This is a solution that helps everyone – both NBA and NCAA teams, younger players in college, older players in the NBA, and the NCAA as a business. Fans get to watch their NBA teams’ young talent in college and become more devoted and hopeful for their futures while enjoying their favorite college players for multiple years.