>this point primarily for financial reasons and most NBA teams
>figure why spend money on that to develop talent if they can
>get the NCAA to do it for them.

It'd take a tremendous project, and I think you're right that as long as they're getting basically what they want for free there's not a lot of incentive for them to undertake some huge change in the way things work.

>I also don't think its coincidence that most people think the
>2 best front offices in the NBA right now are the Warriors and
>the Spurs and those 2 teams rarely draft "1 and done"
>players.

Alright, but this is another opportunity for me to ask an actual NBA fan: The success those teams have enjoyed means they're routinely picking at the back of the draft. So is that an apples to apples comparison or are they just maximizing the impact of their lower draft position?