Yes, PhilSweet, the displacement of a boat, its buoyancy, represents its potential energy, which manifests through the addition of motion with outgoing waves, as it cannot manifest in lifting ability (apart from planing boats).
I can also accept the other points, although the presence of a "thick" keel, like in van de Stadt's Stormvogel (long ago), would rather suggest a coke-bottle design, which one typically avoids.
Bolger would probably say, "since flat-bottomed boats like Sharpies should always carry the bow a few centimeters above the water surface, ballast (cargo, fish) can only be stored aft, with more draft = possible volume there and not in the middle."
The thickness of the boundary layer is also an important influencing factor for profiles. Therefore, in airplanes, the profile is often not pointed but sharply truncated. The goal is to "suck" the thickened, sluggish boundary layer into the wake.
So, I agree with all the points. What I, as a hobby designer of a flat-bottomed boat, want to clarify is ultimately why flat-bottomed boats (like Michael Storer's Goose), which have a strong upward curvature at the stern (like classic scows), glide very well and with a smooth wake. This does not meet the expectations, not at all, but it is the case.
The fact is that for many years, and still today, flat-bottomed boats have been built with an almost straight bow (up to over 50% of the length), then reaching the deepest point of the hull, followed by a significant upward curvature. In aerodynamics, this would lead to large-scale flow separation and Coanda effects (wandering suction peaks), which in boats, according to the general 15-degree rule for stern curvature, should result in the loss of planing ability.
However, this is not the case. Flat-bottomed boats apparently do not show this or can overcome it with sufficient propulsion.