I understand the caveats. But I'm still yet to hear a tangible upside to Andrew's game versus Hamish's, apart from the year of age difference and the fact that Andrew's combine results were outstanding (as compared to Hamish being in the same gene pool, but unable to test last year due to injury). It seems the established view is 'Andrew is better' - however, I can't help but feel that during Andrew's meteoric rise, their relative values have fallen out of sync. In September, Andrew "bolted", by all accounts, into top 10 contention. After his combine testing he bolted, yet again, to #1 calculations. At least with, say, the Swallows and Kolodjashnijs there was tangible, relatively objective strengths and differences - I'm just hunting for what people think those differences are here.
[edit: also Hamish missed 12 TAC games, which kind of renders the championships moot.]