I disagree with you nearly completely. However, that is okay. We do not need to agree on everything.
My question is why do you feel the 1st round comp pick given by the league is excessive or a bad idea in the first place? That is the only thing the league has control of and they implemented it so teams don't get screwed and lose a high value selection if they take a risk drafting the best player available who wont show to certain teams (or show to the league at all). This was done to even the playing field between the top clubs and the bottom clubs. All the trading of first round picks between teams wont matter if a player picked in the first round refuses to report to the league at all. (Although to be fair, I do think future 1st round picks should be allowed to be traded. Both for normal player trades as well as for defected players. But comp picks are still needed)
The amount of additional picks traded on top of the comp first is determined between the two clubs based on how they value the player. Hell I'd even argue that the additional picks the teams are getting in these defective player trades are too low in value based on the CURRENT league trade values.
For example:
Saginaw traded former captain Mitchell Stephens to London
In return Saginaw received:
2018 2nd round pick (Ottawa)
2018 2nd round pick (Kingston)
2019 2nd round pick (Owen Sound)
2020 2nd round pick (Sudbury)
2017 3rd round pick (London)
2019 3rd round pick (London)
A solid number of picks, but was slammed in some hockey circles for Saginaw not getting a player back in the deal.
That was for 43 games from a rental player.
Now say take a consensus top 5-10 player in a draft who you are going to get a MINIMUM of 2 seasons from with the high possibility of 3 seasons and a small chance of 4 or 5 seasons. Value should be way higher than that.