I used to bring cub scouts to games all the time and you're right, most of the time they were running around and mostly focused on food. I've talked to many scouts and they are all different on what they look for, well, more of how they breakdown certain aspects of a players game. Of course they look for things at different levels, HS, college, Minors, and Majors but they know their stuff. Could they learn and maybe do something different to improve how they evaluate, probably. But, listening to them talk and what they see was and is a very good experience for me as I've learned a lot from these men* (*Disclaimer, I have yet to met a female scout so get out there ladies and show your stuff!). you know what i meant. sometimes they get lost in looking at players physical appearance and athleticism they fail to notice that for whatever the reason the guy cant hit. The work of scouts is the ultimate expression of small sample size. How can they know about a player based on seeing them a couple times? Not really. Their "sample size" is large. They see lots of players all the time. When you've seen thousands of kids over the years it doesn't take much to see the standout. They might only see one particular kids a hand full of times, but the pool they are compaing him agaisnt is quite large. I think a problem comes in the linear ranking of players. I think that is near impossible. However it has to be done due to the draft. I think a second problem comes when they try to determine a ceiling of a player. It's a ridiculus notion not based on anything but "beauty". Third, I think the uneveness of competition, even in college make any ranking of players a difficult task. I suppose if I were to be in charge I'd put them in pools by position or by physical skill sets (the mythical tools) instead of ranking them. I don't know. The entire process is extremely difficult, that's why using objective data will only help the "art" of scouting. EDIT: Scouting is also probably an order of magnitude less important than player development, IMO.