There is a colossal difference between "not particularly good" and "terrible." The former means average and the latter means active detriment to your team.
I don't care about the descriptions, anyways. What's annoying is that the critiques of his play is all hyperbole, and not based on, you know, actual plays. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge the 4 plays is exactly my point.
This is where defining quality matters. Once you get outside the top 7-8 SS, there's really not much difference in quality. Is Heath a gamebreaker, no. Is he detrimental, no. In today's NFL, that makes him an average SS, in line with about 20 other guys.