So basically your argument is players can be assessed purely on stats? The "eye test" is understanding their specific role in the team, the game state, all sorts of variables stats don't capture. You need to use stats in conjunction with the what you observe of how those stats are accumulated.
Seriously?
Less typing, more reading would be my recommendation. Stats have their place, but the game, indeed any competitive sport, is more complex. I don't think that should be a controversial opinion.
No, Im saying you have to have both.
You raising Rankine and Holmes were poor examples imo.