I see the point, and there might be something to it.
But some of those relegation threatened teams are easy to beat now, and they'll be easy to beat at the end of the season as well. It's not a cast iron rule that teams scrapping for their lives all of a sudden become formidable opponents, where once they were relative pushovers. Can't just turn it on and off like that.
For instance, Fulham only won two of their last 12 games in 2013/14. Norwich only won two of their last 12 as well. Cardiff only won one of their last 12.
These are the teams that got relegated, and they were all in the bottom 5 with 26 games of the season gone.
Generally, I do still think you'd rather be playing the Leicesters, QPRs and Burnleys than the West Hams, Stokes and Newcastles, let alone the Chelseas, Arsenals and Liverpools.
I think you missed my point a little, I said 'teams that are fighting for something are dangerous' therefore not just the relegation threatened sides, obviously Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool are extremely dangerous and even West Ham who are still in the hunt for Europa League, they will be fighting hard.
In the last three seasons the following happened:
2013 - 2014
The teams in the bottom three (at 26 matches played) between them averaged
0.85 points per game after the first 26 games and
0.94 points per game in their final 12.
The teams 11th, 12th and 13th (at 26 matches played) between them averaged
1.06 points per game after the first 26 games and
0.89 points per game in their final 12.
Verdict - The sides in the bottom three (at 26 matches played) went on to take more points per game in their final 12 matches than the sides that were mid table.
2012 - 2013
The teams in the bottom three (at 26 matches played) between them averaged
0.78 points per game after the first 26 games and
0.78 points per game in their final 12.
The teams 11th, 12th and 13th (at 26 matches played) between them averaged
1.13 points per game after the first 26 games and
1.11 points per game in their final 12.
Verdict - The sides in the bottom three (at 26 matches played) went on to take less points per game in their final 12 matches than the sides that were mid table.
2011 - 2012
The teams in the bottom three (at 26 matches played) between them averaged
0.78 points per game after the first 26 games and
1.36 points per game in their final 12.
The teams 11th, 12th and 13th (at 26 matches played) between them averaged
1.26 points per game after the first 26 games and
1.28 points per game in their final 12.
Verdict - The sides in the bottom three (at 26 matches played) went on to take more points per game in their final 12 matches than the sides that were mid table.
I think the teams currently in the relegation zone could pose more of a threat in these last matches than they have thus far this season, it's not going to happen every season nor in every game but it will happen in some seasons and in some games, the point I'm making is that your assumption the current points totals are a reasonable prediction of the difficulty of the matches to come is flawed and what might seem like an easy run of fixtures because those sides are at the bottom fighting relegation could actually prove to be tricky matches.
As an example, this weekend just gone a side in the relegation zone (Burnley) got a point against Chelsea at Stamford Bridge. Some on these forums argued they should have beaten Manchester United last week, the side right at the bottom Leicester drew to Everton at Goodison this weekend.
Who knows what teams are going to do what, far too many variables, looking at the fixture list and making a prediction on what will happen is severely flawed in my opinion. Last season title challengers Chelsea did exceptionally well against the very best sides in the league but lost the championship in the so called 'easier' fixtures.
This is football, it happens, the unpredictability is what makes it so addictive.