Aha, I think I see what you have done - did you aggregate each of the years between 2000 and 2008 and use the average points at each week of the year?
Actually I understand it's quite complicated for people who are unused to stats to understand that : I think it should be more explained
the topic is not actually the evolution over the years but the evolution of points within a calendar year
: precisely within a year, the points are higher at the precise moment when the direct entries for slams are gifted.
You could do it within only one year like 2008, but the stat is more precise if you make an average over several years
(the concept of "moving" average here being not necessary : imo you should cut it within one calendar year and not writing any years here but rather only the dates
As StatRacket pointed out, the data set excludes the period when the points were doubled. But even so, that shouldn't necessarily affect the results as presented in these graphs though (unless that means that recent results are weighted more than past ones).
the graph not being about the evolution over the years but within one year, the doubling of the points doesn't affect anything (except a higher weight for recent years but it's completely marginal)