Will blindly hiring for "X years of experience" result in hiring mediocrity?

My friend, James Leith made a critical point today:

So, how often do job descriptions require "X years of experience"? What does that measure?
...
It's not about how long you've been in the game - it's about the plays you've made, the lessons you've learned, your failures, your wins, and the value you've delivered.

Some people have 10 years of experience when they grow from year 0 to year 10. Other people have only 1 year of experience multiplied by 10 times.

Talent spotters need to be able to analyse the candidate and tell the difference between the two.

Think of a period of your life when you experienced the most growth in your career. I can bet you, it was a time you did something you had never done before. It was a time you tried something new. For that to happen, someone had to hire you despite not having every experience sitting perfectly in a row. Someone had to take a punt on you and give you a chance.

Now, take a look at today's hiring practice. Every job ad requires years of experience and a 'track record' in doing exactly what the job description says. Extrapolate this to the rest of the economy. Is there any wonder why the entire country is facing stagnation, mediocrity and skills shortages?

As I wrote here, hiring blindly based on years of experience will result in:

If the reason why you got your current job is that you did exactly the same as your previous job, and your next job will be doing the same as your current job, then where is your growth in personal skills? If you repeat this en masse to the rest of the economy, you will get a huge swathe of the workforce facing skills stagnation. With widespread skills stagnation, is there any wonder why Australian workers’ productivity [growth] has fallen to a cliff?