His premise is that he can run away (jogging) to keep you from stand up grappling him, ergo by the logic of this thread, a valuable tactic.
Though it's silly. The standing man is more than willing to engage the ground-grappler if he stands, and spike him on his head. The jogger, however, will never engage regardless of circumstance, nor is there any chance of victory.
I think bjj guys look at "grappling tournaments" (i.e., bjj tournaments) where the stander doesn't start doing bjj as stalling. However, that's because it's a bjj event, and frankly bjj is still in its early 20's trying to figure out what it is. Is it a guard based supportive game? A submission only focuses game? Or is it a striking-free fight simulator? You see these three personalities all the time (Gi IBJJF'er, EBI follower, or the Old school guys). For the first two, there is little value for a takedown, so of course the stand up guy is a loser. For the third, he is going to say you GOTTA be good at both. Shit, Mario sperry, my favorite OG, trained wrestling and thought guard was unfavorable, and called most guards bullshit for vale tudo.
Now that I think about it, there's a fourth personality since Valley tutu has essentially cease to exist, and it's the mma jits crowd. They at least have the common decency to recognize stand-up is an important part of things, but then you get the occasional desperation move of the guy who lays down and tries to wave his opponent into his guard. We saw how well that worked for Ryan Hall vs sol whatshisface, but imagine how more disastrous that game plan that would have been under valetudo rules where you could jump on somebody's head.
The existence of the mma guy polarizes old school guys. Hell, there's really a fifth category of "street jits", which can become ridiculous (bear hug defenses? Why?). The street jits'ers take a weird stance in my experience that closed guard equalizes takedowns, even though helio graciela did takedowns all the time, and lost to a judoka who rattled his brain with an earth shattering throw and shoulder locked him.
Which of these five "ground based grappling" perspectives you take will change the view of standing v ground. You have like a 2/5 chance of them saying standup is of equal value.
At the end of the day, they're all just rulesets and games we play, and we choose what games we play based on enjoyment. Nothing more or less. If you enjoy doing sport more so than street self-defense, you'll have the resulting ideologies. It be great if we could take all grappling systems and techniques mash them all together and do a top-down best practices approach. But unfortunately none of us are mr. Spock and we choose what we do based more so on enjoyment then perfection. Fucking Human Condition, am I right?