infielddad, Almost forgot that I said I’d reply to this. So here goes my 2 cents worth.
PEDs are always an issue in scouting. Can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard “He must be off the juice” when describing a player who has gone downhill. Not sure the approach to scouting would change without PEDs, it would just exclude that area a lot more. Players would be considered clean in most every case.
1.) PED's have been a factor in the evaluation of draft eligible players for many years.
This is true to a certain extent, but it is not fail proof. A scout can form opinions which may or may not end up true. I think this will become even more important in the future if stringent testing is done in professional baseball. Scouts are always looking for projection in players. A high school player on steroids would not be highly projectable.
2.) With the advent of testing in Milb, there has been an increased need to determine if PED use before the draft could be substantiated as impacting performance.
Absolutely important, I’m hoping they can somehow allow testing for all draft eligible players. It might be another step in the right direction.
3.) When PED's have been involved or suspected, the scouts have to project the player's skills when PED's may be minimized or removed by Milb drug testing.
Yes and this is impossible to predict.
4.) There isn't college or high school testing which eliminates PED's as a factor for consideration.
I’m not sure about this
5.) One must anticipate that just as the Dodgers have a scouting report on LoDuca, there are likely many scouting reports about players in past drafts that discuss PED's in similar ways.
Yes, for sure, but call me stupid, I don’t see very many of the top high school players that I would suspect as using steroids. Then again, when kids are young it’s hard to identify things as easily. At that age there exists such a large variance in physical maturity.