Yep. I agree with your butterfly effect comments and analysis. I could understand if someone asked a hypothetical and asked about an outcome of perhaps a single game (ie: Slot Gio in game 5, do we win OT?), but not a full series or a long stretch. IMO, penalties did both teams in for game 3 (Ducks), 4 (Calgary) and 5 (Calgary) as key goals were scored on the PP in those games. Game 1 was a huge rallying point IMO. It was a huge learning experience and wouldn't really call it a wake up call. I believe style wise, we came into game 1 with the wrong style play and were at a disadvantage due to it. By game 3 (IMO) we had developed game play that made us reasonably competitive (within 1 goal each if we exclude empty netter).
The best part of hockey at times is the fact it's such a free flow game. Play 20 games over and over with the same rosters and the outcome can be completely different 20 times. Adding Gio might have a ripple effect or a splash, but with the strong current that the Ducks had the whole time, I would agree with you, Ducks win anyways as a splash or ripple doesn't affect a current. Maybe we delay the inevitable at most.
That being said, I believe that Gio had a part in the kid's doing well after Gio was out. I wouldn't say this season comes to fruition in spite of Gio, because I believe he had a big hand in the way the season ended as well as how the early season unfolded. Dude was back training within days after the initial injury and surgery.
On a side note... hypothetical are sorta fun when you begin to consider butterfly effect.