Scouting Reports and personality makeup

[jaybird2001wi]

As I have read Moneyball by Michael Lewis and also as I glanced on some of the excerpts from the Mitchell Report (Gagne, LoDuca, etc.), I have come to the realization that Scouts not only look at the physical makeup of a player, but also the personality makeup of a player to assess their risk to a team.

It makes me wonder what has been said out there about any or all ballplayers who are the subject of trade inquiries or free agent pickups. From what I learned in Moneyball is they basically threw out any player who had an "inkling" of doubt based on their mental makeup to minimize their risk for the Athletics organization.

But has anyone ever heard or seen any documentation on any players who were deemed a "risky" pick or deemed a "non-threatening" pick only to go to the other extreme once they began their professional careers or once they changed teams via trade or free agency? I have often wondered if some scouting reports have indicated that "Player A" has an alcohol problem or "multiple personality" problem or a "headcase" problem which has caused "Player A" to slip to the 10th to 20th round only to prove the scouts wrong.

Does anyone know of a website where I can take a look at these "scouting reports?" Does anyone know if any current Brewers had this problem?

[DHonks]

in my 3 years assisting in the Fall League, the one organization to always send quality humans was the A's. I also liked the Blue Jays and Dbacks players'. The Reds, Dodgers, DRays, and Phillies often lacked in high character players. The only Oakland farmhand that was really a distraction was Barton.

[jaybird2001wi]

I can see the DRays getting the "character issue" guys (ie: Toe Nash, Elijah Dukes and early Josh Hamilton).

[TooLiveBrew]

Does anyone know of a website where I can take a look at these "scouting reports?"

I have no idea, but if I had to guess, I'd say that the teams probably wouldn't want that kind of stuff as 'public access'