More simply, it is called Specificity.
So yes, specificity is king. However, there is something to be said for increasing capacity at a joint in question in terms of stability.
Let's say I have a client with an ASL range of 80 deg and a passive range of around 105 deg. This tells us that the athlete has stability up to 80 degrees, but instability from 80-105. So we know we have a software problem. The reason why this might be necessary is say an athlete is trying to leg out a slow chopper in the infield or stretch a single into a double. The increase in length of stride will facilitate increased demand at the glute and hamstring from a contractability perspective and at a length perspective (hamstring). So take the example athlete and if he consistently ranges past 80 degrees of hip flexion without stability, he could have an increase an injury at the joint in question.
Now, running as a modality has a lot of different components to its execution much like pitching (see Eric Cressey). So, with an athlete, I would want to evaluate his symmetry from side to side. Running as a demand for rotation at the T-Spine and Hips along with dynamic, on demand stability at those joints while producing force at said joints (making biomechanics a cool topic of conversation).
A more likely predictor of injury is an asymmetrical presentation in both length and stability of a particular joint. Now, some of this could be an adaptation to demand (say a Pitcher), but that is all the more reason to stay on top of specific care in order to manage the asymmetry. Pitchers have a greater need due to the nature of force production from one side of their body (where as a position player would not have as great of a demand). We know this due to volume.
A starting pitcher for example produces 70-100 high production reps per performance whereas a given position player only produces a fraction of those attempts per game in terms of rotation (both swinging and throwing) and not at near the same intensity levels. This is one of the reasons why pitchers must have increased body care and increased rest in order to recover from such.
The care for the position player is built around managing relative stiffness. These players increase their stiffness in order to move more explosively and quickly to either cover their position or in terms of running bases. This is why the majority of position players will have issues with backs, hips, knees, and less shoulder pathologies. So the athletes need stiffness to perform, but the big key is managing stiffness symmetrically AND find out if they gross discrepancies at a given joint that may increase their risk of injury.
One of the pieces I find very interesting is how everyone likes to point to studies assessing hamstring ROM and injury risk, but fail to find references that look at the relationship between hip IR and available thoracic rotation. Not everything happens in a vacuum. We have to explore beyond one joint as the body works as a system. Imagine if I have an athlete with limited hip IR and a super stiff t-spine. When an athlete cannot get the extra force production from one area of his or her body, he will find it somewhere else increasing demand at that joint or muscle group.
I have no insights into Nick's injury specifically, but these are the elements I look at with my athletes.