The champion fighter in my 5e game is often the mvp. The more complicated battle master is also often the best damage dealer and most effective PC, dependant on the rolls.
Are you talking especially about combat? That's the impression I'm getting because of your emphasis on damage dealing.
If the Champion Fighter is a rugged outdoorsman with a decent Charisma, then yeah, very easy to be the driver in all three pillars.
What party composition do you have in mind? Eg I would assume its easier to build a "social pillar driver" as a bard, sorcerer, wizard or warlock than as a champion fighter.
Mearls spoke to 4E again on his Twitch show today: one of the issues in real terms he brings up, was the game style you mention was always dominant. He said that 4E was the best edition ever...for the given playstyle that was being attempted. But that isn't what most people were doing or looking for.
Sorry, I'm getting confused a bit because the style I mentioned was one for which I think 4e
doesn't offer anything, namely, "there aren't any such decisions for the players to make, because eg the GM makes them all by manipulating pacing, outcomes, etc behind the screen, ensuring every PC build gets some spotlight, etc".
If Mearls is saying that 4e
supported that style and only that style then I think he's radically confused about the game - I've never seen anyone who likes that style praise 4e, let alone point to 4e as a good fit for it.
If Mearls is saying that 4e didn't support that style, and hence wasn't popular with the large number of RPGers who enjoy that style, then I would agree with him.