That way you'll get loads of crap research too. In fact if you evaluate scientists on criteria such as "motivation and leadership" you make it more political not less. In your system there is absolutely no incentive to actually do the research, so you'll give all the money to a bunch of people who are great at writing proposals but who don't actually do science. Every second spent doing science is a second not spent writing the research proposals.
There is a very simple solution to the problem that completely eliminates gaming research results and publishing bias. Require that the statistical methodology is completely specified prior to any data acquisition. The paper is written before the data is acquired and it has some blank spots where the data will be filled in with a method that is completely mechanical (e.g. with a computer program that processes the data and spits out the figures that will be used to fill the blanks). Journals should decide whether to publish a paper or not based on the version without the data.
There is a very simple solution to the problem that completely eliminates gaming research results and publishing bias. Require that the statistical methodology is completely specified prior to any data acquisition. The paper is written before the data is acquired and it has some blank spots where the data will be filled in with a method that is completely mechanical (e.g. with a computer program that processes the data and spits out the figures that will be used to fill the blanks). Journals should decide whether to publish a paper or not based on the version without the data.