I agree that it is also used to replenish the player pool, but the bottom teams deserve the better players in the draft. Yes training makes your team better, but getting a very trainable player in the draft can turn around your team if trained correctly...if not you must go buy trainees. Yes you can buy trainable players at a reasonable price, but not elite ones. The worst teams deserve the best shot at elite players...i'm not saying we make it a slam dunk that they get them, just give a bump in points to increase their chances.
As for teams that tank and the economy...okay I see your point that a team can have no salary and be in a league that is D3 or higher and make a lot of money. However, when you demote your ability to make money automatically goes down and you must work your way back up to a higher division. Can you bank the cash and use a smaller roster to get their over time...yes of course. If teams are willing to sacrifice losing for draft picks then so be it in my opinion.
Now you say his disagreement was that a smaller weekly investment getting the same/more points than a larger one...well I think my examples showed that it doesn't have to be the case in the system I am proposing.
Now how do you feel about my proposal? What is your opinion on the topic?
Regardless of what the change would be, I do believe we need more visibility of the draftable players and the draft needs to be far less luck. Whether something similar to my idea or a percentage of extra points given as someone else proposed I really don't care...I just would like something to change for the better to make the draft involve less dependent on luck.