Traditional management structures have their downsides, but I think they can be done well. I have also seen companies do non-traditional management structures that have just been a huge clusterfuck in implementation. It's all about implementation, I believe. I think it is important to keep metrics so we can see what works best for most organizations.
Whatever the data/metric is, people will pander to it or game it until it is meaningless. Data itself is easier to perlustrate in the future to see different interpretations, but usually the C-suite will see what they want to see and be told what they want to hear.
Metrics, on the other hands are built upon data but are often carrying an agenda with them, they're political (whether it's office or nation politics) tools.
I see what you're saying, but data don't exist in some sort of pure state. All data are collected in a particular fashion. You can get most of the shenanigans you're implying for metrics with data collection as well.
