I don't like how winfluence is based against team win percentage. Let's say an above average player on a way above average team loses 10% more points than team but is still 75%. Now then you've got an average player, on a below average team, and he's pulling in 5% more win percentage than his team winning 45%. The winfluence metric will rank the average player higher. It doesn't seem useful unless you want to rank a player only relative to his teammates.
Also these stats seem really difficult to compute. An average person probably couldn't do it without a computer spreadsheet. I like them, but ideally stats should be simple, likes in points, goals, sacks, g count, whatever.
If you stop pro-rating each stat to the number of points played you won't need a Points Played stat. Players who are on the field longer will have already been rewarded more Gs.
I am only trying to be constructive with my criticism, everyone with good ideas should be heard so that the best ones make the final product. We're all in it together. I am very excited to see how this thing evolves, and just as excited to see who the statisticians say is the #1 player at the end of the year. I wish I could do more to help, but keep up the good work!