I don’t think that’s necessarily a good strategy. Not everyone has the same body mechanics or athletic potential. Look at Taro Hirose as a prime example. Genius level hockey IQ but unable to put on weight or get stronger and it keeps him out of the league as an every day NHLer.
It doesn't have to be everyone. It has to be one guy here and there. Brayden Point had all the skill, and played the right way... lacked skating. Did fell at draft, skating was physics, possible to improve by development. Jamie Benn was same, Mark Stone was same... these guys did fell at draft because of lack of skating. All did develop to superstars after the draft.
Good skater is already a good skater, there's no big jump. People so much admire what player is now, what are his tools. Scouts mostly do opposite. What's the potential, what can you develop. Buy the rising stock, not the stock which value already is at highest. So you kind of have to find out these high IQ talents or characters, who play the game with the right way, and have multiple of them, and then one day some of them, falled on the low rounds, will find some extra gear through development, and then it's a totally different guy. Huge jump at general level.
The ideology to draft from weak teams is more boom or bust, than safe. I see it at Red Wings drafting. Mazur and Hanas picks have been that. I think Mazur will be the first big lottery win for us. Söderblom too.
Still easier to build physics than skills after the draft age. We have seen at Detroit many examples, like Datsyuk. But do we have any example of a guy who was physically ready, but lacked skill and IQ...? Then this guy did built them after draft.
And this doesn't mean about 1st round picks. All of them already have good physics, those are those safe picks with highest probability to hit. But all guys who fall to low rounds, the USDP with "rich dad's kids" imo falls out from the picture. They want more boom or bust.