@GeronimoAlpaca
It’s not perfectly clear (to me anyway) what it means to “overemphasize” stats.
You might be able to answer your own question, in your own way, if you express the problem in terms of specific data and procedures for measuring the apparent overemphasis.
For example, using CDS data you could rank colleges (1) by admission rates, then (2) by average test scores, then (3) by the percentage of entering students who ranked in their HS top 10%; then measure the ranking boost a college would get from a ranking based only on the average of ranks 2 and 3 (“stats”) vs. admission rates alone. I did this based on some numbers I had on hand in a spreadsheet for the USNWR ~T75 colleges. For example, the “47” in column 1 for GA Tech, below, means its rank would be 47 positions higher (39th vs. 86th) if we ranked based only on those 2 stats instead of only on admission rates.
BOOST … COLLEGE
47 … GA Tech
40 … Rensselaer
38 … Case Western
37 … UC Davis
34 … UCSB
34 … UCSD
32 … UIUC
27 … Harvey Mudd
25 … Whitman
23 … UMiami
23 … Scripps
23 … Smith
22 … Haverford
22 … Mt Holyoke
20 … W&M
20 … Rochester
20 … Bryn Mawr
20 … Wellesley
19 … UVA
19 … Brandeis
16 … Boston C
16 … Gettysburg
15 … Notre Dame
15 … Washington U
15 … Carnegie Mellon
15 … Wake Forest
13 … Kenyon
13 … Tufts
13 … Michigan
11 … Cal Tech
8 … Wisconsin
6 … Union
5 … Chicago
3 … MIT
-57 … US Air Force Academy
-83 … US Military Academy
-85 … US Naval Academy
Vanderbilt would be listed if test scores were the only “stat” we considered. Its test score rank is high relative to its admit rate rank; however, its rank by class standing (students in T10%) is lower than its test score or admission rate ranks. On the other hand, some of the UCs would not be on this list if we considered only test scores vs. admit rates (and ignored reported class rank). So your “boost” numbers might be very different from mine if you use different data or procedures. My data is from CDS files that are several years old, too.
A high “boost” doesn’t necessarily mean a college cares more about stats than ECs and other “holistic” factors. It may mean it is a “self selecting” school to which relatively few low-stats students even apply. The service academies have low admission rates, but wouldn’t rank quite so highly by average test scores or class rank alone (due to some combination of their applicant pool characteristics and the admission criteria they most value.)