Are great players born or taught?

Sad to say but you cannot put perfume on a pig and take her to the show!!!
If there is limited talent you can improve to a point but there is something about throwing over 90mph or hitting ropes.
Take any kid at five or six year old and throw them a ball or ask them to throw to each other. Within 5 minutes you can separate the high potential from the average.
As in tennis,golf,track,basketball, etc its in the genes

I definantly believe you are born with it. My two sons are perfect examples of this, my oldest son got all the baseball ability and it was evident at an early age. My youngest, and believe me I tried to make him into a ballplayer, cant walk and chew gum, God love him.

Steve
I agree. Athletics are the supreme illustration of Darwinian Theory that identifies the physicaly and emotionaly superior folks from birth, for each type of activity. We were created equal but we are not all the same.

As someone in the used car business once said, "You just can't polish a doo doo."

I think it takes equal parts of both to make a good/great baseball player - genetics AND intense skill developement. More important than both may be the intuitive drive to compete.

Great question!

I believe that there are those born with natural ability - which helps a great deal.

However, those with great ability cannot reach their full ability without proper instuction. Even Tiger Woods had to learn how to swing the golf club the right way. After that his natual abilities took over and took him to the top. There is a mechanical side of baseball and you have to perfect it to rise to the top.

I do believe there is too much emphasis on the 'playing' side of baseball at a young age. At some point the right mechanics has to be mastered.

I also believe someone without alot of natual ability can go a long ways in this game with the right mechanics.

Just my thoughts.

I agree with those who go with the natural ability.

However, I have seen late bloomers first hand. Still think they were born with it rather than trained. It's odd when those who have it sometimes find it.

I've seen great athletes that can throw & hit, and I've seen great athletes that cannot throw & hit. The lesser athlete has a chance to progress farther in baseball relative to some other sports because I think it requires a much higher percentage of skill development. JMO.

Theirs a lot of people with the ability to play at the pro level, but not much that will put the work in.

I think it's much more than ability vs instruction when talking about being successful in baseball. I do think that most player's that do well in college and beyond were born with a natural ability. I also think their parents usually provided opportunities to play with and against the best players in their area, supported them emotionally and physically, and often obtained that "extra" instruction. Then as a couple posters have referred - I've seen very few "great" baseball players in HS, college or beyond that were without that X factor. That includes heart, drive, work ethic, and desire. You may have that rare kid that didn't have all of those "extras" growing up, but they'll almost always have the natural ability along with the X!

i have seen average athletes outplay better atheletes time and time again
some athletes although not great have a superior mind and have learned to control themselves have better mechanics better plate discipline. can get themselves into the zone faster and better
especially in baseball he who focuses better plays better

I have to go with the born with it talent.

All the best instructors in the world can't give you the five basic tools.

Ask yourself

Would you as a parent be willing to give up any natural ability your son has - all of the five tools - and exchange them for superior training?


On the flip side

Would you give up all the instructors your son has ever had in exchange for your son being handed all the five tools?

I can see a lot more parents answering yes to the second one than the first one.

Great Players are not born.
Great Players are not taught.
Great Players are DRIVEN.

For me the truly talented players are born with the gift---drive and good coaching fine tunes the natural talent as they mature

In the words of the immortal "Radio", as portrayed by Cuba Gooding Jr.,...

Bofe

you can't make chicken salad out of chicken **** (sensored by ME)

Since I don't see your #1 and #2 questions directly addressed...

#1. Great Players I beleive are born but, as several have said...Baseball is very much a learned skill. You can be the best athlete alive - truly - and if you've never played the game you will not be able to learn baseball skills as quickly as Football or basketball.

#2. No, and I've seen people throw lots of money away trying. You can make him a good player - even a college player - but not great.

Generally speaking innate talent, athleticism, the titanium rotator cuff (read billy wagner) etc. those separate the professional prospect from the good college player. Check college stats - even 4 year starters with super careers (SEC other major conferences) are overlooked without that "Athletic potential"

This debate can go on forever. There is no pat answer. Baseball is way too complicated a sport/game to think one (or even two) factors alone determines a good or great player.

Michael Jordan. (Great athlete; couldn't play baseball at the major league level. Make that minor league level.)

Yogi Berra. (Great HOF player, certainly not a 'gifted natural sthlete' in the classic sense.)

Phil Nekro or (insert any great knuckleballer here). Great major league player, but great athlete?

Ricky Williams: Amazing running back, but what were his long term chances with the Rangers? Anyone recall his early scouting reports?

Bo Jackson. Deion Sanders. Two different stories supporting the great athlete/great(or at least MLB 'good') ballplayer theory.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve:
Take any kid at five or six year old and throw them a ball or ask them to throw to each other. Within 5 minutes you can separate the high potential from the average.

I defy anyone to predict - with any credible percentage of accuracy - who will be a ball player in HS by looking at them at 5 or 6YO. That is just laughable.

Predicting their later performance based on watching them at 9/10YO is just as laughable. I look back at the 14 kids who were allstars with my son at 10YO. About 12 of these kids were touted as fantastic, would be the stars in HS, heads & shoulders above the rest, bound to play in college, etc. These opinions were expressed by many, not just their individual dads. And by some ex-pros, even.

Of those 12 allstars who were "can't miss", half were washed out by HS. Either they didn't make the HS cut, or the game took them out before they even reached HS.

Lost track of one of them.

Three are highly unlikely to have much impact at their HS and appear unlikely to be starters during their four years. One is mediocre.

One is likely to be a starting pitcher as a junior.

None of the aforementioned players has played for any of the top tier select teams.

Of the two who were not considered as good as the rest, I have lost track of one as they moved years ago. The other plays for one of the top select teams in Texas (nationally known club) and has gone higher on his HS team than the rest.

So, how well did the predictions turn out?

-----
It takes some of both.
IAGG, you can add Nellie Fox to that list. Not considered gifted, not given much of any chance to be successful. But a HOF'er in the end.

Looking back I think you'll find alot more pro players who were allstars in LL and HS, than pro players who were not allstars.

We had a discussion last evening about this. I asked my son, are players born or taught.

His answer was "savvy". don't know if that answers the questions or not.

One particular player came into the discussion. This player is a college catcher. You don't read much about him, if I mentioned his name many wouldn't know. But young son predicts him to be a major leaguer, because he has "catcher baseball savvy", which sets him apart from being just a good college catcher.

I think it goes back to mans cave dwelling days where there were no instructional clinics, personal trainers, or agents. Just a man with his spear and stone.

There were those in the clan who killed more game, those who directed them to the best locations, and then there were those who were lunch for whatever they were hunting.

It was still a team, you just didn't want to be the one that had to lay down a sacrifice.

In todays baseball world you can refine and improve your game to a certain level but when you break it all down you were born with a certain level of god given talent. How you used those talents is where the "drive" came in.

Texan

I disagree.

Sometimes what make you a great 10U player isn't what makes you a great adult player. Example: Speed is moderately important at 10U.
As an adult, it is a must to make it.
Fielding and throwing are the major tools in 10U. Hitting is as an adult.

Bottom line; completely different critieria for 10U verse high school.

So Savannah, since you disagree, you think you can tell at 5 or 6 YO who will be a great baseball player in HS or beyond?

Give me 18 normal 5 or6 year olds in a group and lets toss the ball. I will pick the 9 kids that can catch, run, and throw with dexterity and athleticism. Tex gets the remaining 9 to coach 24/7 for a month. For my money the more athletic team will prevail every time. Give me 9 Ted Williams !!!
Steve

Tex do you believe the Longhorn quarterback Vince Young was coached into the history books????

Interesting arguments about the little leaguers.

You are forgetting one major factor - being born with talent does not mean you have to DISPLAY that talent at the age of 5 or 10.

There are late bloomers.

You can't teach a 93 fast ball - but that doesn't mean the kid will be at the top of his game by age 5 - or even in high school.

In the sport of baseball, you need skills (taught) and you need talent (can't be taught).

You also need a third thing. To quote Michael Jordan "All great athletes have a mean streak". I sincerely believe this.

I agree that you are probably born withy the ability (ie motor skills even body type etc). However it can often take years to develope those natural talents. I totally disagree with Steve and the 5 year olds thing. How many 5year old studs are still playing ball after they reach college age. It takes a lot more than natural ability. Almost every kid on my sons Rookie Ball team is history. No longer in sports. Scouts rarely waste time on young players because so many things happen that end their ball playing. Most players don't reach their full potential untill they are in their 20s.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve:
Give me 18 normal 5 or6 year olds in a group and lets toss the ball. I will pick the 9 kids that can catch, run, and throw with dexterity and athleticism. Tex gets the remaining 9 to coach 24/7 for a month. For my money the more athletic team will prevail every time. Give me 9 Ted Williams !!!
Steve

The point, Steve, is that you don't know who the future Ted Williams are at 5 or 6YO.

Who cares which of your "teams" of 5 or 6 YO's wins? Heck, 5 & 6 YO's don't need to playing organized sports to begin with...

I repeat, you cannot predict with any accuracy which 5 or 6 YO's will be great players when they are in HS or beyond.

itsagreatgame ...

quote:

I think it takes equal parts of both to make a good/great baseball player - genetics AND intense skill developement.

I like the concept but I can tell you that in our family, no athletic genes were passed on to our son ... and especially not from his dad's side of the family. I love my husband to death but even he will admit that he falls into the 'he who can, plays; he who can't makes a good manager/coach'**

TR ...

quote:

For me the truly talented players are born with the gift---drive and good coaching fine tunes the natural talent as they mature

It isn't often but I agree with you on this one 100% (not that my agreeing with you really matters, I just wanted to throw that in )

**Disclaimer: I am in no way insinuating that all of our fine coaches who post on this site are athletically challenged ... it is just try in our family.

Hey, let's not throw pitchers into the athletic discussion -- You can learn to pitch and not necessarily be a great athlete -- though many are.

To quote a movie line (can't remember the movie ..."that ought to get em going"

The movie was "Miracle on Ice" and the quote was supposed to be from Herb Brooks (Kurt Russell) the coach.

mrmom ...

Okay, I know you are baiting us and I'll good naturedly take the bait ... many of the best young athletes on the baseball field were the pitchers, and many of them played multiple positions, not something you saw the average position player doing. But the question isn't are great ATHLETES born or taught ... but are great PLAYERS born or taught.

Anyway, cute post by you and a great way to get some of us old fogies going on a slow January morning.

Texan

I agree with you that you can't predict with accuracy. Otherwise scouts would be buying a lot of PowerRanger toys for some very good t-ball players. I did want to illustrate (example-)that we see a chubby small shortstop that fields great for a 10U kid. He makes good throws to first and hits the ball hard everytime the 10U pitcher throws his SAME fastball. We overlook his medium or slow speed.

On the otherhand, the "real prospect", the 10U kid predicted to be 6'1" or larger with a slender athletic build that runs like the wind; always puts the bat on the ball, but, because he doesn't field too well or hit the ball in the outfield yet, he isn't the 10U hero.

Sorry if I misunderstood. Guess we were saying pretty much the same thing, just coming from different angles.

Great players aren't born, but great prospects certainly are. The greatest players are usually those prospects who have the unlimited ability to be taught.

I think there are a lot of big leaguers whose natural abilities keep them in the game but won't be considered great because they can't/won't learn at the rate that the great ones do.

For young kids looking to play varsity ball, I believe they all have a chance to be "great" high school players because at that level knowledge and determination really can make up for pure athleticism.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve:
Tex do you believe the Longhorn quarterback Vince Young was coached into the history books????

Interesting point. Did you see the interview with the Texas coach? When asked what they did to make Vince Young great, his reply was that they supported him and got out of his way. According to the coach, they were over coaching him. When they stopped, Young blossomed.

God-given talent without proper training is nothing more than potential.

So first talent, then training in that order.

But I agree with Texan...

Of the 14 players that played on all four LL All Star teams with my son, starting with the 9-10's, then going on to play 11-12's, only two are still playing baseball.

Of the four Babe Ruth All-Star teams at 13-15 and 16-18 there is only two players still playing from all four teams, both pitchers, one of them my son and the other on his college team. It's ironic of those players remaining my son is probably the least gifted athlete of them all, but he is a player.

It takes a lot more than talent. Without a burning desire to play this game at the highest level of competition means that talent will become nothing more then unrealized potential.