While I don't necessarily disagree with you regarding Jurco, I think you have to be careful with this argument. The counterfactual makes the argument less plausible. People only ever insinuate "stats don't matter that much" when they're talking about guys who aren't producing. I've never, ever, seen someone argue that stats don't matter that much when I guy is scoring a ton (which is after all the point of the game). Except maybe when it came to Franzen lol.
If stats aren't the only, or even the predominant, way of evaluating a player's worth, then that argument would be just as true for players who produce a lot as those those who don't produce much at all. But nobody ever argues it that way.
I think the jury is still out on Jurco. I think he has all the tools to be a good player. But it's very possible that his first 30 odd games were the exception and not the rule. Truth is, we don't know what kind of a player he is at this point.
I just think it's really easy to see his 4G + 2A in 44 GP last year and call him disposable - but not as easy to understand why/how that could be a mis-representation of his value to our organization, or what he could accomplish given an opportunity in the top 6 (a much better fit for his skillset than on a line with Glendenning).
The argument that stats don't matter that much can actually be utilized to the other extreme... Look at a guy like Alex Ovechkin, he is the epitome of elite production yet also the games biggest loser... Is it his fault? Not entirely, but the fact that he can score 51 Goals and somehow end a season -35 (in 2014) indicates he may be part of the problem as much as he is the key ingredient to winning games.