Wouldn't that mean they're less creative and intuitive? Creativity and intelligence aren't the same thing.
For me, intelligence has two components: one is being able to separate signal from noise and the other is synthesis. Synthesis is to see connections between ideas that others haven't identified.
Knowing the right high percentage play (IQ) and being able to capitalize on it in a unique way are actually not very different from each other.
Classic example in hockey is Gretzky's office. Puck carriers have an immediate problem of pressure from the checker and that was one way of creating separation. No coach or trainer was ever going to come up with that for the same reason that no coach ever tells their players to shoot between their legs off a net front pass, as Kyle Connor did the other night.
And notice how when Svechnikov does the lacrosse goal, Forsberg does it later. Not unlike Roger Bannister breaking the 4 minute mile. There are heights we haven't seen in hockey because the flow of information has gotten so fast that it's accelerated the process of people becoming sheep, as opposed to facilitating more invention. But once something becomes a real executable advantage, it can get added to the vocabulary of the game. I don't think there's enough of it right now, relative to the abundance of info.