The thing about a statement like this is that, regardless of how correct it may be, it is completely, and flaccidly, useless.
Let's switch the analogy to something like a CPU scheduler.
Say that we have an OS and it habitually lags ass. Tasks quickly begin to accumulate within our OS, CPU utilization drops precipitously, and we eventually hit a deadlock. This is a front and center problem. All of the project's developers have been shuffled into the main hall to address this one issue, because if this doesn't work then we have nothing.
The hall is buzzing with discussion. People are pouring over profiles and usage patterns. Real progress is being made. Then, suddenly, from the back of the hall comes a booming voice.
"It's tasks in, tasks out. We're just taking in more tasks than we're finishing." ...
You'd be able to hear a pin drop. Okay, yes, technically. But...and?