Well the ability to complete a pass is actually quite important when you're talking about the quality of somebody's passing isn't it? Or are you finally admitting that the only things you seem to consider relevant are statistics you enjoy rather than inherently meaningful statistics?
Do you know what one of my favourite statistics is? It's Steven Gerrard's Premier League trophies count. The reason I like it is because it is zero, and taken in isolation, seems to suggest that Gerrard is a loser and a sh*t player. But of course that isn't true, he's actually an excellent player whom I happen not to like. As much as I would like there to be causality in that sequence of events there clearly is not - post hoc ergo propter hoc.
Frankly I feel a little uncomfortable hopping on a high horse when it comes to matters of 'truth' as I have read Kant and I have read Hume and I am aware of just how subjective any seemingly sure 'truth' can actually be, but your methodology is so egregiously flawed that any epistemological guilt is washed away.