You can use eye test, just don't be an eye test guy when it suits you and a stats guy when it doesn't suit you. If you're calling Kugel a combo, guess what they are both undersized as well.
The article you linked literally lists his strengths, and all 3 of them were related to getting to the basket. His mid range game was considered a weakness. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't call someone a mid range scorer when it's a weakness and all of their biggest strengths are related to being around the basket. His mid range game is a work in progress. By far his best offensive trait is his slashing. It's obvious on film, it's obvious in the numbers, it's obvious from reading the article you linked. His comfort area is the rim, where he attempts 44% of his shots. So no, he is not mostly a mid range scorer. This is 100% factually incorrect. He has scored double the amount of points at the rim as he has in the mid range, and a lot of these "mid range" buckets are floaters anyways. At minimum, if you're going to call someone a mid range scorer it would at least be a strength or defining aspect of his game. If you're going going to call someone "mostly" a mid rage scorer, than they would have to mostly be a mid range scorer which is objectlivey false with Amari Bailey.
And please do not backpedal on this. If you're going to call Bailey a 6'3, mid range scorer, who is a lackluster athlete, and average defender say it with your chest. Don't go "well he does shoot some mid range jumpers and therefore I am not wrong about him being a mid range player" while also being so adamant that he can't be a PG. The main parts of his game are quite obvious. Defense, mentality/competitiveness, and athleticism/slashing on offense. I don't know why you would choose to call him a mid range scorer, when that is a weakness not a strength, and then go on to shrink his size and also call him a lackluster athlete and average defender. It's like you have it backwards. His mid range scoring is the issue, his athleticism and defense is how he shines the most. Read your own article.
My take is that he shouldn't be 30+ spots ranked lower than the other guards in this draft. I think Bufkin and Bailey are both better investments at the end of the first than JHS at the end of the lottery for example. The article actually gives a pretty good breakdown of why I like him. His defense and competitiveness stand out and as the article states this is "widely known". No one besides you contests this, which is fine, but I hope it's not on the basis of shrinking him and making up what type of player he is. His open court speed is fantastic as well as his athleticism and dexterity to finish around the basket. I think he has all the tools to be a great connector and defensive player in the NBA. His PnR play will never be his bread and butter and he won't be a PG who drives the offense in a large way. This limits his ceiling, but he's still very much worth consideration of UTA's last pick.