This is a decent article but beware of term confusion. The author says tight LSA cams have more low end torque but what he really means is that they have more mid-range torque. The low end torque (1500 to 2500 rpm) isn't very good when you have a lot of overlap. The author is looking at the graphs which start in what would be the mid-range for a street engine. So it really depends on what you are trying to accomplish. A race engine with a 5000 rpm stall converter will tolerate a tight LSA cam much better than a muscle car cruising to the Nats with the overdrive engaged and the AC on full blast.
https://www.hotrod.com/articles/camshaft-shootout-lobe-separation-angle-tested-explained/ The confusion with the Low End Torque comments is in how the author relates (or does not relate) the difference between LSA, and ICL. I did not read the article, but have seen several where when talking about Lobe Separation Angle (LSA) the think the cams will be installed "Straight Up" with the Intake Center Line (ICL) the same number as the LCA. This means the author assumes the tight LSA cam will be installed more advanced than the wider LSA cam. If both cams have the same duration AND Installed Intake Lobe Centerline, the Wider LSA cam should have more low end power, but less mid-range (peak torque.)
Mad Scientist made a good point of not getting wound up about LSA. If the cam is designed looking at the specific opening and closing valve events, then the Duration, LSA, and ICL get determined by them, not the other way around. The duration and LSA are just an easier way to describe and compare cams than Open/Close events.
