Well the talent was no doubt there for a lot of these, but the system wasn’t. All these new youngsters are for example crazy fit compared to Haris Sohail, Umar Akmal, and Sohaib Maqsood. Abdullah Shafique quite literally packs a six pack.
Secondly, I feel there is more trust in the system now to groom batsmen than there was before. This is because a narrowed down system of just 6 teams means if you emerge as a top run scorer, you were able to do so without capitalizing on mediocre third seamers after batting out the new ball, or bashing full tosses from spinners.
There are also incentives to play positive cricket that weren’t there before which we see in how the Quaid e Azam points table is structured. Teams like Northern are doing fascinatingly well as a result. And finally, coaches are no longer accountable to their respective departments. But rather, now they are accountable to the PCB. In the previous system, 6th coach was the 6th best coach out of 20.
In this system, 6th coach is the worst coach out of 6. Removal of certain coaches between 2019 to 2020 based not just on results but on brand of cricket, set the precedent for this. You can no longer afford to be complacent, or rely on your “experienced” 35 year old gang to bash second XI standard 20 year olds. That used to be a winning formula - now, coaches are forced to pick the genuine best. On a similar point, given the number of teams in the previous system, one loss or win here or there just wasn’t enough. You were allowed to be mercurial and just needed one solid patch of form as a team to rise to the top. This new system can send you from the top to the bottom of the table within 2 games. You need to be consistent, and you need to always be on your toes from a strategic point of view.
That’s why coaches are beginning to back proper young talents as failure to do so will cost them their jobs. In turn, the genuine quality talents are quickly spotted. Before, you would have a crop of young batsmen emerge like the ones you mentioned but you couldn’t really differentiate the quality quickly because stats tended to be inflated against worse teams, and therefore didn’t tell you the entire story. Now, stats give a much, much clearer picture of quality. Though they don’t tell the entire story, a 150 here means a lot more than a 150 by a batsman 3 years ago. This allows quick identification and promotion.
There are still many wonders of the system that are still being implemented. Expect to see the results more clearly in 1-2 years’ time. Just as a sneakpeak, let me illustrate a hypothetical scenario. We know that not all these young batsmen will make it to the top level, because only 11 people can play for Pakistan. What that means is that we will have a lot of technically correct, fit, strokeplaying batsmen dominating the charts in five years time, when Omair bin Yousuf, Ali Zaryab, Saif Badar, etc are all at their peaks, while Khurram Manzoor and co are phased out. That in turn raises the standard of domestic cricket even further compared to today. So now imagine that around that time a new fast bowler comes along and tops the charts - it will mean a lot, lot more than Tabish Khan topping the charts with a dukes ball against substandard lineups.
Then you will know that there is genuine quality - no need to throw players against the wall and see what sticks.