This statement could be made of nearly any achievement of any type in High School outside of outlier recruited athletes, medalist mathletes, Regeneron Finalists and other very rarified goals.
It is true that being a class officer (with more credit being given to Presidents), being a varsity athlete (with more credit given to team captains - perhaps in another metric), more community service hours will all correlate positively with admission in exactly the way that you suggest with the most involved students beyond a threshold being more likely to be admitted. Just like students above a threshold SAT or GPA also being much more likely to be admitted.
What is different, are the responses that reflect the virtue hierarchy. If a kid wants to volunteer for 100 more hours, get a second or third job, lean into their lacrosse, absolutely no one says “why would you do that? you’re already volunteering 200 hours and there is no statistic that says that 100 extra hours will get you into Princeton. There’s a threshold and beyond that you’re wasting your time!”. No one would say, “that extra job won’t matter! You already have a job, and you already interact with customers, and a second job is beyond the job threshold, and it won’t guarantee your admission to Vanderbilt”. Certainly no one says “you’re already a varsity lacrosse player. Put down the stick or AO’s will think you are a boring, jock drone”. The desire to set ceilings in academics are palpable.
That’s the virtue hierarchy that it really doesn’t take much to see. And it’s also a false hierarchy.