Two responses:The question is meaningless, because the 4e combat rules aren't what you use for this purpose. You would be using the Skill Challenge rules for that, or else handling things purely narratively. In either case, combat statblocks never even come up.
First, I interpreted @AbdulAlhazred's post as expanding the scope of the conversation beyond 4e, and into a broader discussion of the role of the game world. So my response, although borrowing a term (minion) from 4e, was not intended to be 4e-specific, but instead apply to any game that might use different statblocks to represent the same creature.
Second, even if I had been talking specifically about 4e, my understanding is that one would indeed likely use the combat rules for a three-way combat caused by kiting one enemy into another group of Ogres.
This wasn't addressed to me, but I have a strong opinion on this topic. D&D games have had table variation from the beginning. There's no objective standard for how far one can tinker with the system before it becomes not "actually playing D&D", and even if there were, the only purpose such a categorization serves is gatekeeping....so...you're not even actually playing D&D, you're playing "the thing I made from D&D that includes several systems that were never part of any official D&D in order to make the things I want to make sense actually make sense"?
Come on, man. This isn't cool for a meaningful discussion about things. You can't substitute "the thing I built out of D&D which differs in key ways from every published D&D" for "D&D," no matter how much you might like to.
Yes, this means that different people can have different experiences with a game system because they each tinkered with it differently. It makes it slightly harder to talk about D&D because the baseline of what D&D looks like is so fuzzy. That seems like a small price to pay for an awesomely flexible game.
Even if you don't like my kiting example, my basic point stands. If the PCs don't know what situations will lead to what statblocks (even in general terms), they can't effectively plan around how powerful a creature would be in a particular situation. That makes CaW much trickier by introducing an extra variable (mechanical representation) that complicates PC strategies. (Again, my claim is system-agnostic; I'm not specifically taking about 4e.)One creature, one situation, one statblock. THAT'S my end-of-story. You determine what the statblock should be when you need it; otherwise, you use its innate nature, which inherently precedes the mechanical-abstraction process.