You seem to dismiss publishing as performative when you don't rate the work. I can tell you that a lot of genius work dies on the vine because the researcher is

You seem to dismiss publishing as performative when you don't rate the work. I can tell you that a lot of genius work dies on the vine because the researcher isn't capable in these "performative" aspects of the job. And many genius researchers' work never gets read/cited because they can't write. Publishing and disseminating work is a skill that (imo) is almost entirely distinct from researching, but you must have this skillset to succeed in research. If your research group is succeeding by picking low hanging fruit (in your eyes) then this is a great sign. You should learn from them. Your talents will not go to waste through learning these new skills. Lastly, if you like TA work then you should definitely continue because you can then look for lecturing positions after. To my knowledge TA roles generally require postgrad/PhD.