"Some of the best solutions for problems come from people who have not yet become indoctrinated in the "standard" methodology."
Is that really true, or a hypothesis? How was it tested, and what are the numbers? For example, do 5% of the solutions come from people in their first year and the other 95% come from those with between 1 year and 40 years? Or is it more like 80% and 20%?
Knowing those numbers helps determine strategy. The former suggests that novel solutions are hard, and inspiration is only weakly connected to experience, while the latter suggests that people should move to new fields every year or two, in order to take advantage of this effect.
For that matter, if the numbers are 1% and 99% then it implies that while 'some of the best solutions' come from new people, the overwhelming majority do not, in which case your observation, while still true, has a different interpretation.
In my own research, I came up with a novel and useful implementation for a multiple-graph maximum common subgraph isomorphism. It's a problem that I worked on when I first entered this field, when I was in my late 20s, but with 10+ years of experience in the field I was able to come up with a faster, more efficient and more general purpose method.
(FWIW, it's based on the observation that in practice, for
the types of graphs I work with, a certain NP-hard method - pairwise subgraph isomorphism - is actually very fast. New people to the field assume 'NP-hard' means 'avoid at all costs', so avoid use this method.)
Is my story anecdotal? Absolutely. Which is why I'm curious to see the evidence you used to form your statement.