I like your analogy and welcome to Cardschat, however, I wouldn't be me if I didn't give you a little flame. You lump Greg Raymer and Moneymaker in the same category in your post and insinuate that neither played correctly to win the WSOP Main Event, both were lucky. This statement is baseless and completely uninformed and I totally disagree with you and so will anyone that knows anything about Poker. Yes, Moneymaker won a sick amount of races and all in's where he was a 'dog and got very lucky, but Raymer is a completely different story alltogether. Raymer was a higher-limit pro before the WSOP Main Event and was never at a loss for someone to stake him to play in those games, because he was good. I have watched the final table with his audio commentary track playing, and he has a great poker mind and a sick reading skill. He was all-in a lot, which may have seemed reckless, but he was far from reckless. He was an astonishing chip leader and he was willing to gamble on slight edges in his favor to win pots, because a loss wouldn't hurt him that much in the grand scheme of things. I don't remember the exact number, but I think he was only behind in a race situation when the money went in once at the final table. Pretty tough to call that lucky.
Either way, Raymer has been great for poker as has Monymaker. Every time I play online ring games or even some home games, I thank god for both of them and how much dead money they brought into poker.