I'd think that it's more likely that all swords are about as good as any other. If katanas really were junk swords to the point where it made a material difference, Shogun would've used imported western sword designs (pre-isolation) and today's modern katanas would have ended up being just western swords.

I'd have assumed thay "any cuttystabbything will do" applies to basically any kind of sword.

People focus too much on swords, anyway. Pole weapons were the primary melee weapons for most combatants, including samurai, with swords being akin to sidearms.

But there are certainly trade-offs in design. Katanas are good at chopping unarmoured opponents and being sharp. The crossguard of a longsword can and was used to bludgeon an armored opponent, who would be basically immune to cuts. So if I abducted you and forced you to pick a sword from a lineup, then fight someone to the death, you'd want to know who you were fighting and what they had, and pick based on that.

That sounds sensible. Probably really didn’t need the quality we can muster today, just quantity and capacity for repairs.

Now I’m curious and have to explore this further.

Lindy is maybe not the best source. People with knowledge in metalurgy and the use of swords in the historic context would be better.