This was such a strange article. It actually works pretty well to kind of poke at some of the epistemological issues that come along with scouting amateurs, but its focus on Gordon meant taking a big pass at those big ideas in exchange for ... something else. In any case, there's a big question in the middle of this that he straight passes on.
When Gordon was picked, not even two months ago, he wasn't regarded as an overdraft by any of the usual sources. In that time, he's signed and held his own in an aggressive early assignment for an 18 year old.
It's a really odd thing for Stoltz to call in the support of some scouts he talked to and who supported his overall "meh" evaluation without answer the question of what, precisely, he thinks happened in the not-yet-two-months. I'm open to the idea that it's something. But it has to be something for this to be worth writing, doesn't it? That he showed up and all the tools just play a little less loudly then they did on the showcase circuit. That his solid performance so far should be even better. Instead we get "It’s funny how things change so much right after the draft, though."