Any more thoughts on why some devotions are acceptable and not others? I personally don't find the need for devotions we use to be pre-schism. One, the separation between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches took place over time so the question of what date we would use becomes problematic in the case of some. Two, the Antiochian model has never been to recreate the Church as it existed in a past point in time, but rather to use existing forms and adapt them for Orthodox use. Three, I don't see the theological problems with these devotions, strictly speaking.
It will probably depend on who answers. Some will say any development after the time of the schism (dated either strictly around 1054 or Lyon II at the latest) is graceless and therefore useless at best and harmful/heretical at worst, even some devotions before were already slipping outside of Orthodoxy. These will vehemently disagree with the "Antiochian model," as you put it.
Others will say that those devotions keeping with Orthodox theology are fine, but those that don't are not. I'm not terribly familiar with sacramentals, so I'll give an example of apparition-devotions: AFAIK Our Lady of Walsingham (arguably pre-schism, but just grant it's post-schism for the example) is completely Orthodox in doctrine, so Walsingham-based devotions are just fine. Our Lady of Fatima OTOH is not (e.g. purgatory, implicit affirmation of Papal claims, etc.), and so Fatima-derived devotions are terribly suspect at best.
I think sacramentals and other devotions would be analogous, so those that don't rely on (or derive from) assumptions at odds with Orthodoxy are okay. An example being the green scapular, being dedicated to the Immaculate Conception, or even more potentially problematic is the brown scapular. OTOH, I think some scapulars may be fine, generally those with little to no promises built around them or devotion to particular Latin dogmas. The Miraculous Medal would fall into the problematic category, being entirely a devotion to the Immaculate Conception - of course, presuming one does think IC is un-Orthodox. Sacred Heart devotions have their promoters and naysayers, probably within and without the "Antiochian model." Some say it offers a distorting Christological devotion, among other reasons, at odds with traditional ones, others say it doesn't also for a number of reasons. Another issue sometimes brought up is that Sacred Heart paintings are often not icons, with people saying only icons should be venerated in such a way. Same goes for Immaculate Heart of Mary, or the much more strange and fringe body-based devotions (an example of which I can't recall, but others may).
It really has to depend on the particular devotion in question, since they all vary so widely with many ranges of theological assumptions.