I'm not so sure there is such a thing as 'not suited to this league.' I mean, how so?
Level of pressure: some leagues have a culture of dropping off on transition, and getting a shape from box to box, but not in between, which affords creative players more time and space to play their game, but also affords creative players less defensive responsibility
Speed of Transition: added to that, some leagues have a hurly-burly approach to transition, where a lot more long balls are played, a lot more clearances, and a lot more counter-presses and counter-attacks, which means the ball is more or less in constant transition. This favours the athlete over the technician, as it requires a LOT more defensive responsibility from all attackers
Physical Contact: some leagues have strict refereeing where every contact that is less than 50/50 in anyone's favour is a foul, whereas others (England, Scotland, for example) have looser refereeing where contact is expected and only the most serious of fouls will get called. That's why we see a difference in European and PL refereeing. This, of course, disadvantages the less-physical players, and rewards the stronger athletes - whereas continental refereeing would favour the technician and nullify the pure athlete.
Climate: A colder climate favours quick transition football with a lot of running, leaving less time for the creative players to express themselves, unless they can express themselves at high speed. Hotter climates favour a slower pace of game, with more possession and less transitions, which allow the creative technicians to express their abilities - it would also dis-favour the athletes, as they would be out of gas after 20 minutes of running at full tilt in a hot climate.
So there are actual factors that go into how a player plays in different cultures. Those four above are probably the main ones.
