Is "It" Talent or Skill?

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:
Stallions would have the body, the looks, and other physical attributes. They have a lot going for them, but it is entirely possible the Donkey has more talent/skill.

Here is the million dollar question…

Is Dustin Pedroia more talented or skillful?

If we stick with the animal metaphors you could say Pedroia is like a pit bull on a poodle. He reminds me sort of an infield version of Lenny Dykstra. He has an uncanny ability to square up pitches of all types in clutch moments and has great range at 2nd base. He is very clutch. Clutch is more talent than skill. He is the exception to every rule. He barely comes up to Jeters shoulders. What suprises me is he was drafted so high, 2nd round 2004. Theo is a genius.

quote:

Originally posted by Dad04:
He is very clutch. Clutch is more talent than skill.

I hate when I'm wrong

Good call Dad04

I think there are many, many players that have talent and skill. You do not have to be a 5 tool player to be a MLB player. Talent combined with skill, skill combined with talent, projection, and as suggested luck plays a big part of the picture.

But IMO, very few really have the "it". "It" is something that you may see when a player is 14 and "it" is still there when he is 17,25, 30. The creme de la creme. The one guy who stands out above all others, regardless of his size. You don't see it often, but when you do, it hits you like a revelation that you have never seen anything like "it" before.
JMO about "it".

He is very clutch. Clutch is more talent than skill. [/QUOTE]

BINGO!!!! After watching/lurking all of you reply, This Quote hits it right on the head with me. I agree with most all of the posts... I started this discussion because I am torn about my son's current stage of development. He is working weekly with Professionals to raise the level of his game. Son is a "talented" hitter. He can't throw "gas", but is very skilled with his throwing mechanics and mound presences. Needs major improvement with his foot speed... Has great Knowledge of the game. Student of the game...Talented or skilled?

quote:

You do not have to be a 5 tool player to be a MLB player

Some top prospects reports:


"Like a lot of power hitters, former 1st rounder still has some holes in his swing—in his case, high and inside, and against offspeed pitches low and away. He struggled after the trade and again in winter ball when pitchers fed him soft stuff in hitter's counts. Though he has some feel for the outfield, he has below-average speed and range with fringy arm strength"

"Player's power may not fit the third-base profile, as his swing from both sides is geared more toward line drives. The Big Club would like him to be more aggressive to exploit pitches he can drive. He's fairly slow and has modest athleticism."

" 2nd Rounder's approach doesn't lend itself to drawing a lot of walks. He has below-average speed, though he's by no means a baseclogger."

" Some scouts wonder how 1st rounder's new stance—he lowered his hands in the Cape—will translate to wood. He's a fringe-average runner and his range doesn't stand out at shortstop."

"Strikeouts remain the biggest concern for 1st rounder. He's still learning to recognize the spin on offspeed pitches and to lay off fastballs up in the zone. He has a late hitch in his swing that counteracts some of his bat speed. He has an awkward running style."

"1st rounder has a tendency to lunge at times at the plate and can get tied up with hard stuff on the inner half. He's a below-average runner whose quickness and range have been called into question."

Talent or coordination in most cases is not always natural. A kid thats goes home and plays outdoors all the time - it doesnt even need to be baseball, just running around and being physical - will have more coordination ( talent ) then the kid that stays indoors. I believe high level hitting is skill - talent can get you through LL. Fielding is more talent. jmo

I think we are confusing the word "talent" with "natural ablity".

If you say "John is a talented player", that is different than saying "John has talent".

How about, "John is a skilled player" versus "John has good skills"?

It was stated earlier, but "IT" is what you perceive "IT" to be!

I think Yogi Berra said it best in the AFLAC commercial:

"If you don't have "IT", that's why you need "IT"!

those defintions are from a book

Those definitions answer the question.I am surprised people get that confused. One is natural and the other is acquired through training, Neither is finite . All people have different levels of talent but it is inherent in the individual. Skills are acquired by specific practice of the skills. More talent usually means more skills given the same practice, effort etc.

This is a very easy question to find a definition for, but a very difficult question to apply to a player. I have known a few kids who are in HS now since they were 8 years old. One could always hit an inside pitch a mile and one could always hit the up and away pitch a mile.
They are now sixteen and they still do the same thing. Is it talent or skill? Now if they switch and can hit both pitches it is definitely skill. But when they hit the same pitch a ton that they did as 8 year olds I lean to talent. Even though it is a skill. Very confusing, to me a least.

They failed to acguire the skill to hit all pitches. That is something they can work on and improve. if they can't they lack the talent to do so.
Some people have talents to do some things and not others.
People say that kid is talented but what they mean is he shows a lot of skill and yes he is talented.

Great topic here!

I don't think the story ends with just talent and/or skill. I'm not sure any of us know what the recipe for success is.

When Peyton Manning and Ryan Leaf were about to get drafted, the talk was, which one will be the better QB. They both were extremely talented and skilled and they both seemed destined for a long successful NFL career. But we all know what happened. Manning is as good as any QB ever and Leaf was a total bust.

So there is a lot more going on here than just talent and skill. Why is Reggie Jackson 'Mr. October' and Dave Winfield 'Mr. May'.

Even in High School, there are kids who you trust to pitch the bottom of the last inning with a one run lead and there are kids who you would never want pitching the bottom of the last inning with a one run lead. At that point, the coach is hardly thinking about which kid is more talented or skilled, he's picking the kid that can 'get it done'. And that kid might be the 2nd, 3rd or 4th most talented and/or skilled kid.

I would say success is a witch's brew of things like talent, skill, confidence, ability to adapt, intelligence, passion, ability to focus, savvy for the game, courage, strength of will, preparation and probably many other things as well.

Each one of the above can be the most important depending on the situation. I remember watching John McEnroe totally lose his cool after a bad call then regroup and place a perfect serve for a crucial ace. His ability to regain his focus after adversity was tested the same way a pitchers focus would be tested when he throws the perfect pitch on the corner but doesn't get the call.

In the end, the one thing that should be measured above all else is production. Talent, skill and all the other qualities that go into the makeup of a player are just tools to be used by him so he can produce. And the tools he uses to produce should be less important than his production.

Dear Old Dad,

quote:

If we stick with the animal metaphors you could say Pedroia is like a pit bull on a poodle.

I've always called these players Pit-Yorkies. The bite you in the ankles and don't let go until they win. One of my favorite posters growing up (wish I still had it) was a smaller animal being swallowed by a larger animal. The smaller animal had the bigger animal by the throat yelling, "Had enough yet?"

quote:

Originally posted by Dear old Dad:
Great topic here!

I don't think the story ends with just talent and/or skill. I'm not sure any of us know what the recipe for success is.

I was wondering when someone was going to bring this up.

I've always viewed "It" in a similar way to D.O.D. It's kind of that special ability to create wins in a way that seems to transcend the talent and skills. When we discuss It in my circles, we find the only way to really define It is with the two lists: The "It's" and the "Not It's".

Anybody want to take a cut at them?

quote:

Originally posted by dswann:
So the ingrediants for success for a given sport
.
.
.

One last question. Is bowling a game or a sport ?

If in StL, MO, baseball and bowling is a religion.
Might be the only place in CONUS!

I had the pleasure of speaking to a old timer scout one night at a Junior College Regional game. He told me that he loves the kids from the Midwest(non tropical states) because every time he sees them they seem to get better--where the kids from those warmer states by the this time--- what you see is what you get.

I have liked those baseball players 'who have something to prove'. As an example: Josh Hamilton

quote:

I had the pleasure of speaking to a old timer scout one night at a Junior College Regional game. He told me that he loves the kids from the Midwest(non tropical states) because every time he sees them they seem to get better--where the kids from those warmer states by the this time--- what you see is what you get.

Bob,
It has been our experience that getting better is not a regional thing. Some we have seen that improved the most from one year to the next come from California, Florida and Texas. I do believe that the kids from the north and midwest could be considered to have more upside due to lack of repetition, but that does not necessarily mean they will get better. We have seen kids from the north and the midwest that don't get any better from one year to the next, just like everywhere else in the country. Getting better does not often happen by accident. It can happen due to increased size and/or strength, but that is not exclusive to any part of the country. And yes, there are great athletes all over the country. Typically the bigger the state, the more great athletes/baseball players within that state. That is why states like Illinois and New York have more players drafted than states like Mississippi and New Mexico.

Is Greg Maddux more talent or skill?
Jamie Moyer? David Eckstein? Manny Ramirez? Willie Mays?

Who is the most skilled... Is it the naturally talented or the one who spends every minute learning his skill? Did the most skilled player ever, learn more than than all the others or was his talent so great he picked up the skill without as much effort?

We all know the difference between talent and skill, but in athletics the person who runs the fastest is labeled the most skilled sprinter. The most talented hitter is labeled the most skilled hitter. True talent and true skill is in the end defined by results! In that way they are they are often the same thing. IMO

There have been a few Canadians who were are and will be MVPs in MLB.