We could make this a more productive conversation, just not without going into specific capabilities, which is a terrible idea on BODN.
If you want to discuss this in another forum, I'd be happy to get the pertinent information from you and actually figure out what we could have done, could presently do, or will be able to do in the near future for any example you want to throw out.
Better yet, hand me a stack of PMRs and I'll actually figure out how we stack up over a large sample. Yes, that will show us doing fewer, so it would take figuring out how to quantify what you guys didn't do that we could have done... that's a trickier task seeing as how its looking for events that didn't happen. It could probably be done, though.
Someone with a medical degree and access that neither of us is going to get could even figure out differences in medical outcomes based on time differences (including a penalty for a CV-22 pass where another asset then has to spin up), on-board medical capabilities, etc. Hell, you could even look at instances where we would have had to hoist based on terrain where a -60 could have landed but the individual could not physically have done it.
In fact, if anyone from Big Blue is reading, any argument about moving rescue into AFSOC, using CV-22s for some of the PR mission set, or even laying out requirements for a new rescue platform are going to be really incomplete discussions without someone doing that exact homework. If we're going to be making billion dollar decisions, what's a few weeks of a science project?