I've seen that attempted: I worked at a very well known SV company as it was growing. When we looked at what we were asking to even get an interview, we saw that most of our best workers could never have a prayer of passing our resume requirements when we hired them. But we had so many people applying, we could really ask for the moon and still get enough resumes.

But the fact that on paper we were getting better candidates didn't ever lead to better performance: Past a certain point, not hard to reach if you pay relatively well, the correlation between interview performance, resume and actual performance on the job is basically random. Hell, I've seen a team change managers, and seen the stack rank be basically opposite for both: One guy wanted to give a large bonus to the guy the other one wanted to put on a PiP.

Thinking that, on the interview, your candidate is magically better than your average coworker takes a lot of optimism, or a lot of pessimism about your coworkers.