Has any team ever toyed with the idea of paying a current GM for future wins, whether or not that GM is actually employed by the team? (The incentive might go as far as, say, the longest term big contract the GM has negotiated.)
There is a lot of talk, with the Randolph and Allen deals especially, of executives making desperation trades to save their jobs but hurting the franchise in the long term. The problem is this type of move makes total sense under current contracts; why would a GM sacrifice his job, and millions in personal money, for a long term benefit that he would never experience anyway due to bad rebuilding years? What is Danny Ainge's incentive to make the Celtics better in three years when there is no chance he is making that long? His personal economic motives clash harshly with the benefit of the team.
A system based on economic rewards for building on the future, even after they've left the team, would give general managers the individual incentive to think twice about a short-term moves while aligning their personal economic interests to the actual long-term success of the team.