I think what OP means is, spookiness comes out of the fact that one particle that can be separated by huge distance from another particle, and both particles being in superposition of states, observing one particle can affect the state of another.

It is not about state, that you do not know, but state that is not yet there.

When one particle's state decomposes from superposition of states to a single state, given the assumption of quantum theory, it also affects the state of particle that is physically separated from the particle. That is the spookiness.

If we assume that the quantum particles are always in superposition of states, the question is how can one particle's observation can affect another particle at distance.

If you take out, indeterminate state assumption, then it is indeed missing the point of 'spooky action at distance'.

Yes but I think what you both are missing is that this example is meant for laypeople. Nobody has ever claimed that this is literally entanglement and I can say from first-hand experience that it's useful to bridge the gap to actually understanding entanglement.

Well, I am layman regarding in general, particularly physics. I get what you are saying, but the analogy lose the point of what makes entanglement nonsensical and spooky for anybody, layman or not.

As I said before, if they had an analogy of balls which does not have a color and when you see one ball and it gets color and the other ball which was in contact with it become colored magically too, it would be fine. I am ranting and I am sure educators can come up with better analogy.

The point is, spookiness is important for understanding the significance of why this is big deal at all and some people think that should not get lost in translation.