I definitely agree. Timeouts and wins should be seperated.
"Best Win" should not include no-move timeout wins

I have thought about exactly the same thing myself, so I completely agree with you sapientdust! No wins on time should appear as the best wins doesn't matter how many moves there were.
Or another way to solve it: Chess.com could give us an option to decide if a player will or will not be shown as the best win, so that we could decide ourselves if we want the timeout to be shown or not. Then everyone would be happy with their best win info!

Thanks for the support, folks. Much appreciated.
It would be nice if chess.com staff could comment on these forum suggestions once in a while. I don't think I've ever had them respond, which makes me think it's a waste of time posting any suggestions here.

I agree, "Best Win" should not include no-move timeout wins.
When I am checking out a player’s stats, one of the first things I look at is their “Best Win”. I want to see how they played at their “best”. All too often the link is to a win by time out with very few or no moves made, which provides no insight whatsoever.
I feel the same when my own “Best Win” is a game of this nature – it says nothing about what I have accomplished on the board.
The "best win" given for a player's stats should not include wins by timeout, or at least not wins by timeout that didn't affect the rating.
I just 'won' a game against a 2181 player because they timed out without making any moves in the game. It didn't affect my rating, which is good, but it changed my "best win" stat from a real game I won against a 1980 player to this fake game against a 2181 player. This seems like a bug that should be fixed.
I could understand it changing if there were actually moves played in the game, because sometimes poor sports let a losing position timeout, but if there were no moves played, it definitely shouldn't be registered as a win for the "best win" info.