List the facts! You said it yourself, you could rattle off 10 positives categories that aren't being properly weighted. If you've got a glut of info that says Pagan is more than a low leverage, clean inning guy I'm all ears!
You're going to complain about arguments being skirted or shifted, but toss Jax out as a comp? Hmmm.
Whataboutism aside, yep, Jax was brutal for about a month but there was certainly plenty of hand wringing over his performance. He's been stellar since mid May, and he's pitching late innings/high leverage, i.e. he's an actual weapon, hence he's not viewed similarly to Pagan.
There's no "yeah but," here. The case against Pagan is straight forward; he can't handle leverage, he doesn't pitch well when inheriting runners, the need to shield him has a domino effect, and his role is best suited for guys auditioning. Do you have an actual rebuttal to any of that, or is this a never ending tap dance?