We do look at, and consider, everything. It’s part of why averaging is so important, as well as why we have a sliding scale we can measure up or down to.
I think some folks are taking the scale as “Oh, this is what I should be at.” I knew that was a risk, as people have a tendency to latch on to numbers as truth. 
It may be more helpful to think of it as a fixed point that lies between the most common level of player and the most visible/highest performing players that we can then adjust up or down to in order to provide similar comparisons.