Thanks for the clarification!
Umm Mike I didn’t respond because of the pure logic involved:
1) If you reference the source (the Union) to which you judge and base your argument/findings on THEN
2) It is safe to say that you agree not to be selective of just tidbits of what they publish HENCE
3) When they publish a lifetime average they use that as a relative gauge of the whole (not just a selective tidbit) and use that lifetime average/stand by it ALSO
4) You mention that sometimes he barely broke 70% and last I saw in year alone average it was above 80% so hmmm appears that John is doing just fine in the eyes of the Union
5) Your standalone opinion is fine, but sounds like you bend the evidence to fit your own conclusion.