I was thinking about this the other day and wondered how much of a factor, if at all, it might be.
Where players are acquired from and if it has an effect on their play. It might be nothing and a player is who they are.
I was thinking as an example, you have a player like Connor Garland, who came from an absolute dumpster fire in Arizona. They have no expectations of winning, there might be a strong losing culture there. He comes to Vancouver and it's more of the same, so he's not going to go out of his way to change things, just slide back into how most of his career has been.
But you take a player who's spent time with a winning organization, or at least an organization that has structure and a winning environment, sets expectations for their players, and have them come in and rub off on the team changing the culture.
Three examples that came to mind are Bear, Schenn, and Miller.
Bear came from Carolina, an organization that has become one like I described, to be modeled after. I recall in his first game here someone gave up on the play because it was close to the end of the period and he stood there like "What the f*** guys?"
Miller came from Tampa, one of the most winning organizations of the last few years, but even he seems pretty beat down by the Canucks. Or maybe that was always his attitude stemming from the NY Rangers.
Schenn is a guy who also came back to us from Tampa, but is an example of a guy who has that winning attitude regardless of where he plays. It's built in him, doesnt' know how to be another way and expects the same from his teammates.
Maybe there's something to it, especially for a rebuilding team or a team looking to change it's culture, to prioritize players in trades or free agency, from winning or better teams, then to pluck pieces from loser teams.