I'm no expert on Google metrics - so I'm not qualified to answer, but in a logical context I would look at it like this:
LINK GOES DIRECTLY TO RELEVANT CONTENT WITHOUT INTERVENTION
LINK = GOOD, KEEP IN INDEX
LINK GOES INDIRECTLY TO RELEVANT CONTENT VIA A REDIRECT
LINK = RUBBISH, NOT POINTING TO RIGHT PLACE, DROP/MODIFY
Effectively, and I stress as a LOGICAL problem, I don't want a link to something being redirected - I want to go direct to the resource, and I would penalise for a redirect (which means not only the link is effectively pointing to the wrong resource, but also resulting in more traffic to achieve the required result).
To square that, a redirect is probably useful if you move a page and want it re-indexed. However there will probably come a point where if you redirect the same resource for two long there may be a pay-off or penalisation metric.
I must stress, however, I know very little about SEO, I know about Apache. As far as SEO is concerned I've always been lucky enough to get sites listed and well placed in search engines by using clean, relevant content with properly formatted pages and targeting specific demographics for the business concerned, but I know others who have more general sites in swamped sectors have an uphill battle.