For what it is worth, I think the LAC rankings should likely be interpreted a bit differently.
This is based off looking at things like the distribution of peer reputation scores, where last I knew, HYPSM were above all the LACs., and then there were on the order of twice as many next-tier universities on a par with the top few LACs. Basically, the national universities are a little more top heavy.
Then the LAC tie nominally at #13 is actually a tie at 13-20. For comparison purposes, it is usually better to take the midpoint of ties, so 16/17. Given the top-heavy observation above, I would suggest the LACs in the #13 tie should be seen as roughly equivalent to the national universities in the #24/25 tie, namely Emory and Georgetown.
Similarly the tie at 58-62 would be like 60. At that point I actually think that top-heaviness has largely gone away, but you start running into the problem of a lot of colleges not really comparable to a private. I think Santa Clara and George Washington are fine though.
OK, so Emory versus Santa Clara, or Georgetown versus GW–I think in some sense that gets Grinnell versus Whitman about “right” (understanding on a fundamental level this is all pretty wrong).
And then I get why someone who saw it as Georgetown versus GW might choose Georgetown absent a cost difference or such. But Emory versus Santa Clara? I could see someone choosing Santa Clara for locational or other reasons.
Again, I am not sure any of this is really that helpful, but I do think one needs to be careful with comparing rankings on different lists.