I'm sorry but this is BS (and I don't mean that as a personal attack, just a repulsion to the idea)

As if researcher must drop everything they're doing and attempt to reproduce every wild claim. It simply doesn't happen because these people are able to work through hypotheticals and form value predictions... Just like they do with any other research resource allocation decision.

No, it's far worse to lock up knowledge behind academic institutional norms and hide and yell "rigor" when anyone is curious to see what's being worked on. People can decide for themselves what is worth pursuing and the OP is likely correct that we're doing damage to our own progress by not disseminating a hypothesis that's being worked on but could use more resources. Furthermore this fear of someone publishing before you in a race to claim the Nobel prize likely doesn't help.

The institutions should formalize and normalize a method for broad open access to research in progress and broader collaboration.