green posted: Here is a story of a talented player that feels he his getting the shaft in HS. The player, a starting infielder, was suspended from practice for a week. At that point, the team was a .500 club. The less talented player that filled his spot fit well into the line up. The team won their two games that week against teams they expected to lose against. The more talented player never earned his spot back and the team went on a 5 game winning streak and in the end almost winning a very good HS division.
The "more" talented player got spot time for the remaining season. Every stat would suggest that the more talented player was better than his replacement. He is a better fielder, hitter, stronger arm, and faster. The reality is he is a crappy teammate. He plays for himself, talks down to his teammates, and generally disregards the coaches.
In essence, the team was better with a more talented player on the bench than on the field.
What did that have to do with defining talent?