How much, if at all, do non-cash finishes tell you about a player

[SumZero]

So imagine you are playing a bunch of tournaments with ~150 people in them where only the top 10 finishers get money.

After 10 such tournaments 3 players have the following results:

Player A: 2, 8, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120, 130

Player B: 2, 8, 15, 130, 140, 140, 145, 145, 150, 150

Player C: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, 25, 90

If you could have the money won by one of the players over their next 100 such tournaments who would you choose?

Obviously there is no difference in prize money between 11 and 150, but when you are trying to extrapolate player quality from very small sample size how much stock, if any, do you put on where someone tends to finish outside the money?

[whiskeytown]

personally I'd rather be player B - seems like he has a style of play that either gets him to the money or gets him out early - and he's had more finishes then anyone.

Means he likes to gamble, but sometimes that's how they build the stack.

RB

I'd most prefer the winnings of Player B, he either goes deep or doesn't go at all. Player C seems to have some bubble issues. In the long run he might place more times than Player B, but I'll take 1 first place over 6 10th places any day (assuming normal payout structure). Player A seems more consistent. In a bigger tourney with a slightly more liberal payout structure, I see him getting ITM more times, but busting out sooner. Even if the top half payed in this size tournament, I'd guess that player B still has more money than the other two. Of course, if it's a satellite event, I probably want to be player C.