I agree with this suggestion.
EtG has a "less TTW = more profittable" PvE metagame. This makes other types of decks become unreliable not only because of the win rate but for the speed. If decks with X average TTW had Y gold won in a game, a deck that lasts 2X turns should ideally win 2Y gold.
But the factor to reward isn't the turns. I can play with a rush against a denial/defensive deck, and if I win I would take a lot of turns anyways. What should be rewarded is what you achieve, for example:
Rush: You play more games in the same time, you are indirectly rewarded with no extra reward
EM: Only some stalls have high EM rate, and should be rewarded as they are.
High HP: you achieved to increase your HP, and deserve the reward for that as you currently are
So why are now rushes more profittable than stalls? Because the reward for stalls isn't big enough.
In oetg we opted for having a buttload of small bonuses for lots of things that in general rushes don't achieve, like having a lot of creatures, a lot of permanents, making a OTK, winning with 100% damage on excess (done easily reducing your opponent's HP with SoV), killing more than 5 creatures (rushes don't pack that much CC), etc. The balance will be in progress for at least 2 months until people make statistics of different decks, but it's a way to go.