A few comments about the text:
"Harvest is very swingy". No it's not. It's pretty consistently bad. King's Court is swingy. At best you get triple a good card and at worst it does nothing. Harvest usually gives $2-$4, which is not a huge range of things compared to a lot of other expensive cards.
To me, the biggest problem with Sab is something you don't mention: The attack does not really lengthen the game. On the contrary, the gaining allows your opponent to deplete piles. If you have a purely destructive attack, you want to drag the game out so you can get to the point where you repeated play the attack, and then build up economy and then get VPs.
For Outpost, you don't mention the most important thing for Outpost, imo: trashing. If you have a well-trashed, deck, 3-card hands can be pretty good. Sure it's less reliable than a 5-card hand, but if you have very few "stop cards", there's a pretty good chance of getting something pretty good out of the extra turn.
Oh, and I guess I won't complain about Harvest again. It's absurd to say it's worse than counting house : when you want money, you definitely prefer something that produce $3 or $4 on each play, rather than something that produce 7$ or $0 (and more often $0).
I don't think this is "definitely" true. It's true most of the time, but most of the time you don't really want either, so it doesn't matter all that much. There are so many $5 cards that can get you something like $3 reliably, so Harvest doesn't get you anything you couldn't get elsewhere. But the $0 or $7 can have situations where you actually want it, because it's a uniquely powerful effect.