first of all its not about yards always, its about total fantasy points. McNabb has never done it true, but I need to remind you that the team sat him for two elective games in 2004, he was not injurerd. Kitna has also never sniffed a season like that, as he turns the ball over too much.
McNabb was the fantasy number one before going down last year. Granted he is an injruy risk, and if you feel that way, he bumps down even further. But if you are going to have mcnabb near the top, he has at the end of the top, and before kitna.
Judging from McNabb's body of work and kitna's, there isn't much comparison. Kitna's interceptions ALONE took away just over 7 td's from his total. So he had 23 total, but he really had just under 16 total because of his obscene interception rate. He also lost another nine fumbles, which equates to another 18 fantasy points lost. So thirty one turnovers? are you kidding me?
Your right, that is something that Kitna has done that McNabb has never done. Figuring 25 yards per point passing, -2 turonvers, and 6 pts per td, the difference between the two is around the area of 20 points because of Kitna's turnovers. You would be better off having owning mcnabb hurt and then playing his backup. Granted Donovan hasn't done the 4k thing, but his 2004 season was better than anything kitna has done, and the previous two years were on pace to be monstrous. With two more games, McNabb would have had a higher scoring season than Kitna had in 16. Not to mention that it was easy to get garcia from the wire, and the two combined were a shade under 4k in 15 games (feely played the Falcons game). Point being, Donovan clearly would have broken that threshold. I know these things are a judgment call, and we can't tell the future, but one is clearly better than the other, and Kitna's turnovers are abominable.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.