I think the notion that there must be a set number of good, bad, and average of each move is misguided. As someone said, every recovery except one is bad in smash 64, for example. I'd define a move as bad if it leaves a hole in a character's gameplan that can be exploited in some way, e.g. terribly slow jabs allow characters to repeatedly be boxed down/ rushed to death.
I'm not mad, I just dont know why people arent able to understand this, I can give countless examples.
If I told you that I played a sport that I invented, and I got 30 points in the match. Is that good, average or bad?
It is literally impossible to say how the score rates until a second player comes in. lets say this player scores 60 points. Is that good, bad or average? Again, you can't know the answer until you get more and more samples, youd need like, 10 to make an accurate call. All other 8 teams could score an average 100 and then you'd be very wrong for thinking that 60 was a good score.
It is fundamentally impossible to say that Cloud's throws are 'good' unless you compare it to the average of all throws. Since Clouds arguably has better throws than
that puts him in the bottom 17% of the cast.
There is not a finite number of good/average/bad moves in the game, it is perfectly possible for there to be a very uneven split across it. But saying that cloud has good throws is putting him above the majority of the casts throws.
The exact same logic allows me to say that Marths bthrow is a good throw because it does damage, it has a purpose as a positional throw and allows you to chase them in the air. Remeber, if everything is 'good', then nothing is good.