Hurdle is NOT the entire problem.

that the Rockies take a flier on a tough sign.

the Rockies should take a hitter with their first pick… they’re still likely to get a good pitcher at 32 or 34.

Look at the pitchers the Rockies have taken in the first round since 1999:

1999 – Jason Jennings, debuted 2001.
2000 – Matt Harrington, did not sign
2002 – Jeff Francis, debuted 2004
2006 – Greg Reynolds, debuted 2008
2007 – Casey Weathers, out for the season, but is there any doubt that we wouldn’t have seen him this season?
2008 – Christian Friedrich, seems to be on track for 2010.

However, Friedrich is the only one to start his first full minor league season at Low A ball. Rox Girl made something out of that before the season began.

considering how even when he was drafted the general thinking was that what you’re seeing is what you’re getting as Friedrich was already pretty polished and didn’t have too much more room for growth…

little chance Friedrich was going to be around at 25. . . .

end up with a better pitcher than Greg Reynolds.

every team will win 60 games and every team will lose 60 games. It’s the 42 in the middle that count.

The Rockies 60 wins can come from good teams like the Tigers. Think of going to a Rockies games a spin of the Roulette wheel. If you see a Rockies win..you are one of the rare lucky ones.

That said, I’m not giving this team any more of my money. If the front office has quit trying to even pretend to be a competitive baseball team (and by that I don’t mean winning this year, but I do expect a certain going through the motions..I mean fake it for gawds sake, I’ll take pretending to want to win), then I give up too.

there are scouting reports. The same as you’d see on any major league player: what pitches the guy throws, how good the fielder’s arm is, does he make tough plays? Are his mechanics good or does he take risks? Does he display good pitch recognition? Does he consistently scorch line drives, or are his hits more the grounders-with-eyes type? What’s his velocity on a fastball? Is he a pure dominance type like Stephen Strasburg, who consistently hits 100mph, or more a finesse lefty type that’s going to have to have a lot of luck to make it at the next level? Scouts assemble first-team, second-team and (I think) third-team “All-American” teams to rank the best-looking players in the country.

Secondly, you evaluate quality of competition. Is it a player feasting on a softer division that might get exposed at a higher level? Has that sparkly ERA come from getting wins against easier teams? What school does he play for? Does the school have a history of producing MLB talent? Is he a good player but doesn’t stand out because the team has so much all-around talent (think USC Trojans football team). Is he a good player on a bad team? Etc etc.

Thirdly, it’s observing, for lack of a less cliched word, intangibles. Does he take on a leadership role, what has his impact been on the programme, etc etc? Does he thrive in big situations, or snipe off stats when the pressure’s not there? Does he have a mindset that shows he can respond to setbacks? The “bulldog competitor,” so to speak, which has Leake rated so highly? How’s his work ethic? Is he willing to endure the oftentimes tough life in the minors to keep getting better to get to the majors?

In the end, the leap from NCAA to MLB is astronomical, and to be honest, most of it’s a crapshoot. But hopefully the above gives you some idea as to how they winnow the field.