Here is my two cents:
In all honesty, what you just said is a truth in the manner.
In order for something to be “truly” innovative, it has to be completely utterly fresh.
Beyond all know-how and ability.
Yoyo however is a tremendous thing, there is just too many infinite possibilities with it and thus people will often then be like “Well, thats innovative” because of the idea that there is too many possibilities. What one person sees that they find fresh, another will outcry and say its not.
Then there is the usual debates about what is and what isn’t.
Its come to that point and age in that it just doesn’t matter.
When people start yelling in awe about Riccardo being innovative, I sit back and say “Not completely”. Because like many other yoers before him, those people put the building blocks in order for him to do what he does today.
However, many of the top yoyers are pushing previous ideas and making them entirely new. Should we call that innovative? Example: Should Innovation movement be considered “innovative” even though the ideas they have were from previous blocks of ideas to which they took, destroyed and rebuilt a new?
Its a debate ad nauseum.
Overall, I’ve come to have a belief similar to what Ed Haponik has. I’m sure I am misquoting him wrong but basically it is that when you come to yoyoing, and you think you found something completely new, automatically think its been done. Don’t own a trick or claim it as yours, just show it to the world and see where it goes.
Pretty much I’d say I agree with 90% of what you said.
I heavily clap to Eli Flops opinion whom has the other part down pat. Innovation is broke down into different things really, especially when it comes to yoyoing and everything related to it. The tricks, the styles, the gear, the community…
Lets all keep pushing forward.