Agreed, Grappling and Disarming gives an incentive not to
dumbstat strength as a melee character,
unless you are very dodgy. But here´s the thing: This often-cited "Pixie with a Combat axe" example[1] is not the real problem here.
The real blunder is the fact that high-Strength characters can easily rule out many weapons once they hit a certain strength level. Bringing a Knife to a fistfight (or Cyberspurs, Clubs, Swords...)
should give you an advantage, both from a realism and a balancing POV (your fists are always there and don´t need to be "drawn"). But once you bulk up enough, your fists will always be
strictly better than melee weapons - even
without stuff like Bone Lacing. So you have a situation where a reasonable, realistic tactical option - grabbing a melee weapon - suddenly puts you at a
huge disadvantage.
And just look at the Damage Codes of some of the melee Weapons! Some of them are so low that you can´t help but ask yourself if they were originally conceived under the assumption that the base Melee damage would still be added to them. An extendable Baton has an AR of 5 and a Damage Code of 2Stun[2]. Go up to 3 Strength and 2 Reaction, and you already hit the point where this weapon has no purpose
whatsoever.
And why does the Streetsam Archetype even use a Sword when his Strength 10 alone is enough to punch harder and with a better AR than with his fists?
[1]...which is pointless anyways, as there are no Pixies in 6th Edition yet, and we they don´t know if they will have some additional "common sense" restrictions on weapon sizes this time

[2]... which is weird enough, because this also means that a Sap is strictly better RAW. Maybe another mistake?