Maybe. I saw this graph online this week, too, and I can't help thinking about the what ifs here.
If Parsons was not here, would opposing offenses play the Packers defense the same way they do now? I think the answer is pretty clearly no. With our limitations at corner (maybe not horrendous, but clearly not a strength), and no Parsons, I think it is plausible teams would hold the ball more and go big play hunting more often. At that point, "quick pressure" would not be as relevant, as Gary and the rest of the pass rush would have more time to get home. We saw this defense work well enough last year with similar personnel (which, in this scenario, would also include Kenny Clark still on the roster) to at least expect average overall results.
Now, this isn't to say that we shouldn't expect more pass-rushing juice out of Gary, particularly in overall pressures (I think he is on par or ahead of last year's sack pace, but he should be with Parsons getting all the attention). It should be noted here that Gary graded out quite well in the run game last year, and while I haven't seen a breakdown of his performance in that aspect this season, it stands to reason he is doing some work there since our front is not exactly full of stout run defenders. So it is not as though his contributions are nil, but if you're paying a guy in the top-15 for pass rushers, you'd like to see him be better than 29th in total pressures.