The thing is this doesn't end at the two or three 'elite' players on your roster. It's why goalies can 'steal' games. Build a better team and you'll beat most teams with a few 'elite' players on their roster if their roster can't keep up with yours.
See, I don't buy this. The gap between any given third or fourth liner is much much smaller than that between an average player and an elite one. Those margins are where games are won and lost.
Odds are if your team is build properly, you'll likely end up with a few players who fall into that 'elite' category regardless.
Sure, which is why you shouldn't trade them away for non-elite players.
You should and it's not. When you develop your own talent--and I'm talking top to bottom, not just these 'elite' players--you have the ability to negotiate their salaries. You have the power to control your payroll and build the foundation of your roster as you see fit. This falls into my point about timing. If you choose to go the path of adding a high end player through trade, you do so when the time is right. You do so when you have the assets you can afford to spend, when you have the cap you can afford to commit and when you're convinced the rest of your roster is capable of competing.
I don't think it's as complicated as that at all. The hardest part is finding those top tier players. You basically have to either spend some time in the toilet or get really really lucky at the draft table to get them. So if you're a team that's lacking in that department and a chance comes along to get one, you simply have to try.
The idea of finding 'elite' players regardless of cost or position then figuring everything else out later is as silly as it gets. If it were true this was how GMs viewed the league, the trade market would be booming at the deadline every single year for teams hoping to push themselves over the top with these 'elite' players. And the cost for them would always be astronomical.
Well, no because, once again, teams that get the real different makers tend not to let them go. If what you said is true and elite talent matters less than overall depth, you'd see GM part with quality for quantity a helluva lot more than they do. Instead, these players get giant long term contracts.
Teams that win Stanley Cups generally learn how to win them. It's a process that often involves multiple years of failure. In those failures, the team builds its foundation. They see what it takes to win in the playoffs and they find out first hand what it takes to lose. There's no quick fix to get there.
The Crosby Pens went from 29th to narrowly losing in the SCF in just three seasons. The Blackhawks missed the playoffs in 07-08 and were champs two years later.
Vegas just went to the SCF in their first season for crying out loud.
It has nothing to do with learning (if it did, why has San Jose never won?) but a combination of the right people in the right place at the right time.