No harm intended on my part. I agree with you about the 8th grader issue. They would not likely know the names John Lennon, Paul McCartney, Mick Jagger, or Jimmy Page either. The only reason they would know who Elton John is would be because of the Lion King or the recent movie about his life.
I understand your point about DLR. I am a huge fan of his and agree that VH's best stuff was when he fronted the band. I think the difference is that the band could go on without him. It cannot go on without Eddie. Not sure I know how to explain it, but I really do believe that to be the case. The only argument against that would be the entire Van Halen III album, but that is outside the scope of this conversation. Up until his death was announced, many of us still held out hope that we might see some new Van Halen material. That hope is gone now. The rest of VH can still go do other stuff, but it will never be VH again.
Obviously, people have strong opinions about this, but I believe any guitarist worth their salt will express that EVH influenced them at some point as they were learning their craft. The list of people who fit that category can be counted on one hand.
Not disagreeing with your point necessarily, but you compared EVH to Mick Jagger in terms of his importance to the band. I think you'd be surprised how popular Van Halen could have remained had DLR stayed somewhat sane, and he, AVH and Michael Anthony gone out and recruited a new guitarist. We'll never know, and the music might not have been quite the same but my guess is they'd have still been very relevant. The Stones without Jagger? I don't think so. I just don't think that is a great comparison. DLR was HUGE in the early-mid 80's.