“Reads fine”… in this burner at that particular moment in time, and at an unspecified speed. A transfer rate test is actually the same test as a scandisc “reading” test, but shows you if the drive has to resort to slowdown to read the data, which is more interesting.
PIE/PIF testing is not a way to know if a disc is readable. That’s why you can have discrepancies between what a PIE/PIF test shows and what a reading test shows. PIE/PIF testing is a quality low-level testing (it shows how the drive has to resort to low-level error correction) to compare different burns, and decide for example which is the best burning speed for your media/burner combination, or what’s the best media for your burner. In your case above, I’d be tempted to think that you should lower the burning speed to get the best burns out of your discs.
Also PIE/PIF testing can give indications on what [I]could[/I] go wrong with the disc when played in a different drive, or what area(s) of the disc could fail faster due to degradation.
If your only concern is “does it work now in this drive”, forget about PIE/PIF scanning. Scandisc is fine. If you want indications about how the disc could behave in other drives, though, you have no way to tell from scandisc alone.
Now another thing to know is that not all drives/models report the same PIF/PIF plots with the same disc, and there is no way to tell if the “out-of-specs” error levels of this disc above (as indicated by the yellow and red areas) are due to the burning quality or to the way your drive reads this particular disc. Pioneer drives don’t have a great history as scanners.
Now to your original question: no, verify and scandisc are two totally different things. “Verify” checks that the source data and the data on the disc match perfectly. In theory, this implies that the disc is also fully readable, or the comparison would fail.
“Scandisc” (read test) only tells that the disc is readable, but of course can’t tell you if the data on the disc is 100% the same as the source data.