I understand your point, but really it was more of a case of putting the wheels in motion. You can't conjure up massive salaries for the players from nowhere, getting money into the game is a gradual process. The game has to be producing revenues before the salaries come in. Packer started this, he ran World Series Cricket with the view of making a profit, a large one at that. Which is now the main focus of cricket bodies worldwide (see Cricket Australia's recent media deal, allowing Melb and Syd TV to go live against the gate), and Dalmiya has a lot to be proud of in progressing that body of thought, taking these ideals and furthering them throughout the game.
Most of that i've answered in my previous post directed to social.
But i sorta disagree that conjuring up massive salaries is a gradual process.
North American sporting history is a proof of that. Right from the beginning, there was massive money being shelled out for Babe Ruth, Maurice Richard, Joe DiMaggio, Gordie Howe, etc. Sure, they wern't making 10-20 million per season as you see today but back in the 20s and 30s, 1-2 million was practically the same as 10-20 million, once you adjust the inflation factor.
And i agree that Packer introduced some excellent concepts that could've helped cricket.
The only problem is, he didn't have a lasting effect and his 'revolution' was largely a temporary one.