The other point worthy of consideration in a "delayed" scenario is that, even with a delay of only a couple of years, the relative power balance of the two alliance blocs is potentially significantly altered. The quite finely balanced setup referenced in the first part of this series - that allows both for either side to "win" a conflict, and for the war to drag on over several years of stalemate - might no longer exist by 1916,1917,1918...
A short more contained and overall less destructive war, not drawing in all of OTL's Great Power participants who joined later (Italy, Turkey, USA), probably wouldn't have the cultural impact of being recognised as a Great War, a "war to end all wars" etc.
Most prominent in my mind here is Russia, who might be in a much better starting position as a result of a delay, if ongoing industrialisation, military modernisation, and fiscal reform programmes can be completed from 1914-191?, and without all the plates coming crashing down in the meantime. There might be no miracle at Tannenburg ITTL.
It may be a myth, but I've always been led to believe that the German military mindset during this period was one of "better now than later", in relation to an eventually inevitable confrontation with Russia.