The problem is you are applying post-hoc analysis.
While a theme was that the outsized returns can come from ideas which sound bad, it doesn't necessarily say that all outsized returns come from bad-sounding ideas.
Not only that, but I think reading the essay will show that the outsized returns are not known until several years after demo day.
Sometimes bad ideas are just bad ideas. In the Venn intersection between bad-sounding-ideas and good-ideas - the 'bad sounding and not good' is a much bigger area.
To me, the entire essay is about making sure that institutionally, the bad-sounding-but-ultimately-good ideas are not left out. Trying to further identify and silo them at application stage would be even more fraught.
While a theme was that the outsized returns can come from ideas which sound bad, it doesn't necessarily say that all outsized returns come from bad-sounding ideas.
Not only that, but I think reading the essay will show that the outsized returns are not known until several years after demo day.
Sometimes bad ideas are just bad ideas. In the Venn intersection between bad-sounding-ideas and good-ideas - the 'bad sounding and not good' is a much bigger area.
To me, the entire essay is about making sure that institutionally, the bad-sounding-but-ultimately-good ideas are not left out. Trying to further identify and silo them at application stage would be even more fraught.