Here is the bottom line. Draw rate is not a indication of perfect chess play!
You assume too much.
I just want to point out that you are the one who assumes the most.
What is claimed more or less is that chess might already be solved (or in case of specific weak claim in this thread that it's within 200 ELO from godlike engine under TCEC time controls). The solution is to run SF for a long time on good hardware with maybe minimal opening book.
As you don't have a proof this is not a solution and we don't have a proof it is the solution we can look at various evidence to estimate which hypothesis is more likely. Here is evidence that chess is already solved (I am more interested in this claim that 200ELO as I think this one is just too boring):
-draw rate increases with hardware/computation time
-no one is able to win a corr game anymore against even slightly competent opponent who doesn't gamble in the opening (and even that is very rarely enough)
-no one is able to produce a series of moves that beat current SF in main line openings (assuming something like depth of 75)
-proving it's not a solution is easy (just show an example of SF at big depths losing to a series of moves); that no one is able to come with even one example makes the hypothesis more likely to be true
while all you have going for your is your feelings and wishful thinking. All you can say is that there is no proof it's the solution (or that SF is within 200ELO) but then again, you don't have a proof it isn't either.
.