Second Chance: B. Smith). I think you can see the problems: They don't understand how to give good advice in real time, and they often have the wrong agenda in mind (the player's first responsibility is to make the team). They don't understand how to make the player feel that the team loves him, and the same with players and management (which is more valuable than understanding any x,y,z chart). And they're not in control of their emotions, which are their second greatest enemy. In general, in order for good "scouts" (to put it mildly), They need to get a proper education (either college (which these days, means business school, but you can't always get a PhD there), or military in some unit where their performance is evaluated). That's essential to knowing where the game is headed. They need to be hired by an organization that values them highly, because they need to be treated properly, and given the support (and the authority) to use their knowledge to make the right decisions. And they need to be treated differently by their peers. Without that, they're the bottom of the barrel, and everyone will know it. And even in a professional sports organization, it's not enough to just be good at talking about players. You have to be good at doing, and someone who has been around awhile (as Scouts must be in some kind of job) is better able to spot the players who will turn out to be future stars. A: The key thing with scouts is what you said - they need to be in control of their emotions. This is perhaps best illustrated by reading this story of how the NHL's St. Louis Blues lost their scout (Pesce) because he was crying during a scrimmage: While Scouts are there for a variety of reasons, the common thread is that they provide an alternative point of view. Scouts see through the prism of what they know, how they've been raised and how they have a vested interest in their team's success (and not seeing it fail). That being said, because of their personal agenda, they may be more likely to ignore the value of less desirable assets (their own feelings in the draft for instance) or what may be deemed low value talent elsewhere. If you can bring a scout on staff who has a track record of getting it right and isn't too much in their own way, they could provide some great perspective. At the same time, I have found that not every scout will fit with every organization so you'll want to vet a few to ensure you have that right fit. A: Some teams do hire scouts specifically to look for players from a specific geography, perhaps because they can be sure of the quality of player. For example if you are in the US East, hiring a Canadian scout would help you find those players. For teams in the US West however, this might not help, the best player from Canada in the WSH might not be the best player in Canada, they might be just as good or even better in the WHL or Quebec. Having said that you need to know a little about the players you are interested in. For example where are they from? You could have a scout from a university in Alberta but if they are a guy who plays in the WHL, they would only have 3rd line or defensive center experience so that scout might be a waste of money. (this is an extreme example and most people would not spend time checking out 3rd line guys, so do not take this as how to actually scout). When the Canucks lost Brendan Morrison for a season and a half due to a freak accident, our scouts were out of the country checking out guys in Switzerland, Sweden and Slovakia (not sure why they did this but it shows there was a need to find players from these places). I know because the GM had a brainstorming session and some of them suggested they should make an offer to some of these players as they were good players who had a good chance to stick in the league (ie not go back to Junior or get traded). This does not change the fact that you need to know what you want when you look for the players you need. Not just one or two players but a system or coach that fits with a style of play that has been shown to work. There is not much point in drafting a forward if you have no room for them unless you can move someone and need the room. The reason I have focussed on the WHL is because it provides the most evidence we have of how players play in their peak years when they get to a certain age. There is very little on the US college system but there are enough people out there who seem to know what they are doing that it helps us to know where the NHL level talent is. And of course there is the draft. All other forms of scouting is done to fill in gaps. Look at the Oilers. The problem with an amateur scouting system is the problem of the overzealous scout or people who just want to sign every little unknown - just ask any GM of a small team or a player who got picked before his time. I do hope you do not use Wikipedia as an accurate source as I know it gets criticized for that. In the end, you need scouts who have a thorough understanding of the WHL, their countries history and that they know how to use the knowledge that they get to find the players that will help you win. A: There is a specific method for evaluating talent based on research by Thomas Golem and his PhD Thesis. It has changed how hockey talent is developed in Sweden and will change how Canada thinks about developing hockey talent. The basic premise is that the best youth hockey players in a county will become NHL prospects if they reach certain criteria or targets as players. The goal is to have a system to identify and train future NHL talent based on the most promising of these "best" players in each country, not the average player. From the abstract, available here: A mathematical model to assess talent in young players was developed. It is designed to reflect the most appropriate and representative assessment of young players in their own region of origin, by combining objective and expert information with official records of league results. Based on this information, different measures of performance have been constructed. The most promising young players are identified on the basis of their performances and a probability is assigned to each player. This probability should be seen as a measure of risk, since the actual playing time of each player may differ according to how well he plays.