I don't know an awful lot about textual criticism as it pertains to Christianity, though from what I have read from people interested in such things it is a fascinating subject.
The Way on the other hand is based in practice rather than scripture, so I wouldn't think that someone else's analysis of texts would bring us any greater understanding of this path than our individual insight can.
Even if the Pali Canon is somehow proved to be 100% what Gautama said, it is still only a shadow of what he actually experienced. Kinda like a jigsaw puzzle, we go by the picture on the box for reference but we still have to do all the work on our own.
We aren't totally sure that this being we refer to as the Buddha was real, let alone what exactly he taught. I don't think it's important, at the core we have a solid an open framework for practice in the Four Noble Truths and The Noble Eight Fold Path.
Regardless to our differences of opinion, interpretation, and methods of practice we still have this core to build on. So I guess in a way the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eight Fold path are about as close as one can get to the "original teachings".
But that is just my opinion.