Caveat emptor-- the following opinion is totally theoretical, I've never run a team in an extreme hitters' park. But control in Colorado is a complex problem as I see it.
Regarding per inning run prevention-- walks don't have park effects, they're the only thing that is about the same home and road for Colorado. So on that level booger would appear to be right; a staff that allows a greater percentage of its offense against in the form of walks (as opposed to hits and homers) should have a smaller increase in that offense allowed in Colorado than at sea level.
However, in terms of staff management-- in Colorado you will throw about 20% more pitches than you otherwise would, so you have to construct a staff that can handle that. You can neutralize that with some combination of quality (20% of a lower number is still manageable); stamina (either by emphasizing that rating or carrying 12 or even 13 pitchers); or control (if you spend a very low number of pitches per plate appearance, 20% more PA won't kill you). Needless to say, if you sacrifice quality for control and/or stamina you won't gain ground on the number of pitches problem. So a low-control, high-splits pitching staff is a double-edged sword; all those 5-pitch ABs will add up.
I guess if I could run a pitching staff of guys with 90/90/90 in stamina/VsL/VsR in Colorado I would, allowing some 50s and 60s in control. When you find 8 of those guys available in one world, let me know. But unless I have 12 position players so good and versatile that I can run 13 pitchers, I think that trading control for splits/pitches among ordinary pitchers is probably neutral at best.