Nah, that's not all, that's just a propaganda by Balkan Slavs, to make their identity more compact lol. Look, i sniff from a miles away this kind of stuff.
They started accusing Albanians of trying to Albanize E-V13, then hoop, they reversed the role. Captain Obvious.
Let's view it from a neutral point of view. There is no escape from it, sooner or latter results are coming.
If the baseline for Proto-Slavs is about 3 percent and specific branches, how can that "Slavicise" E-V13 as a whole? I don't get it.
What I get is that
a) Slavs have Carpatho-Balkan admixture (not West Asian!) which Baltoslavs had not, even in the early stages
b) Some E-V13 branches were spread by Slavs, by Proto-Slavs and South Slavs. E-V13 works in this scenario like a package:
3 % from start
? % in Pannonia-Carpathians-Moldova
? % in Serbia
Therefore originally Slavs carried about 2-5 % E-V13 when coming to any region, and then they acquired more, obviously, if coming in a territory in which they assimilated a population (like Romance speakers from the Danubian provinces) with a higher percentage.
Any people in the Balkans which got Slavic admixture therefore got some (undefined how much) E-V13 from incoming Slavic groups.
In the case of the Albanians or Southern Vlachs, it is pretty obvious that this isn't much. You can extrapolate it, generally speaking, from the core Slavic lineages (R-Z282, I2a-Din). There could be individual founders though, which skew results, but again, nobody could Slavicise E-V13 in the Carpatho-Balkan zone based on my model.
Because whatever total paternal contribution Slavs had, going after my model, 2-5 of that total contribution would be E-V13. Like if its 50 %, probably between 1-3 %. Since the Balkans has way more E-V13, it won't be all Slavic, that's a no brainer and therefore I don't get the problem.