TRUE or FALSE? You either have "it" or you don't

Call me cynical, but if there is an "It" -- personally, I am of the belief that "It" is the combination of some visible tangibles & more important intangibles that are not readily seen -- I suspect that most the people who are convinced they can spot It, don't have a real clue what it is. Hence, the reason for inventing beer & bar stools.

This is a pretty neat discussion with many great perspectives already.

As many of these posts illustrate, "it" in baseball isn't always something we "know when we see it."

My perspective is baseball is a game of repetition, coupled with a game of adjustment, coupled with some unique mental elements, all put into the body, and heart, of a talented athlete.

What seems to make "it" so hard to define, scout and quantify is players mature in both their mental and physical approach from LL, to HS, to college and beyond.

Especially beyond HS, my view is "it," for the majority of players is the combination of the ability to do the repetition in a way which improves the skill everyday, coupled with the mental ability to never be satisfied, while also being able to make the adjustments in what is done repetitively to be successful as the level of competition improves.

Both Willie Mays and Micky Mantle, for instance, struggled mightily, for awhile, in that last adjustment period from AAA to MLB.There was little doubt each had the "it" if the "it" was talent.

In my perspective, what make it so hard to identify the "it," as PG  illustrates, is the mental side of that ability to adjust when velocity is 80mph, to 85 mph, to 90mph, to 95mph, to 95mph coupled with movement and command. Repetition alone won't get a hitter there.  Talent alone won't get a hitter there. Combine talent, repetition and the mental ability to slow the game and adjust...that is "it" for me in baseball.  I think "it" changes and develops every step of the way. Often times "it" is coached and confidence develops but there are  times "it" is impeded by some coaching, for sure.

In the vast majority of players, I just don't think we can tell if they have "it." . Before college, I think someone with skill can select the few at the very top with the type of talent to be "it," but they  cannot identify factors which get measured in other ways, including the ability to adjust, to know if that talent translates to "it."

 

Can you explain what you mean by the above? 

IMO, the most athletic players on the team usually ARE the pitchers who may also be the ss, and the catcher, and the DH, as well as play most other positions.

 

Very few players really show "it" at an early age in physical appearance, but sometimes someone can pick them out by their uncanny sixth sense to understand the game at an early age.

 

Just being able to throw the ball well, play position well or hit the ball well doesn't mean that the player has 'it".  There are other things (as mentioned above) that go into possessing "it".

 

Not all players have "it", IMO. Examples might be that Bryce Harper has it, so does Trout, Stanton, Cabrerra, Justin Verlander, David Price, Cano have "it" too.  They definetly stand out above their peers.

 

I guess it is all in ones definition as to having "it" means to an individual.

 

 

 

Trust me when I say you didn't offend me with that comment.  But at the same time, I really don't get it either?

 

Virtually every pitcher at a high level (college and above) I know was a very athletic and good baseball player (and other sports) at the HS level and below.

I think there are exceptions that are noteable... I do not mean to offend either... But if you are big and have a power arm, they dont really care about your 60 time, your quickness with a DP, or your ability to lay off sliders.

 

I am sure you are correct that the majority of pitchers are atheletic. But I do not believe that is a pre requisite as it generally is with position players.

 

I thought everyone knew pitchers are goofy, lol!

Actually we have seen several pitchers that would be considered over weight.  Some of them, due to other things, project very well.   You see the arm action and the athleticism and a lot of "baby fat" and you try to invision that player without the baby fat.

 

Then you see the competitiveness and willingness to do what it takes and BINGO, the fat kid haes IT in your opinion.

 

The very first time I saw Chris Perez, he was a soft bodied kid with a very good arm, probably about 14 years old.  I liked him a lot as a "Backward" projection" type. meaning he was going to be a big boy and a strong boy without such a "soft" body. Then he played for a team that won the Big Jupiter tournament later on. Chris pitched well in the tournament helping to get his team to the championship game. The catchers on that team could not stay and play in the championship game. Chris Perez told the coach that he would catch that game. He caught a couple of the hardest throwing pitchers in the country that game doing a great job and helped his team win the championship. That was the moment I know Chris Perez had IT!

 

In the interest of honesty, this was one time I was proven correct. There have been other times when I was dead wrong.  But when a pitching prospect already committed to Miami, wants to catch a whole game in order to win a game, that might not be smart, but it sure is impressive. It told me a lot about that kid!

 

 

Do you realize how athletic a pitcher has to be to pitch?  Try it in 100 degree heat. 

 

Pitchers have their own set of athletic rules to follow. And not every guy that is big and throws hard has "it". Either does the big skinny kid either.  Just as those that can hit may or may not have "it" either.

 

Most ML pitchers ARE good hitters, but ML hitters can't pitch for meal money.

Goofy?

Baseball is a game where "it" is simply different for each player. At one age a kids "it" is enough to set him apart. And at another age that same "it" will not. You can dominate a game with your arm. Your bat. Your speed. And at another time and level of the game not have "it." There are so many factors at play here there is simply no way to really know until it all plays out.

There is a certain level of ability that makes it clear by the Jr Sr year of HS. On one end of that spectrum there is the Josh Hamilton type and the kid who simply clearly has no tools.

In between that there is simply what you can clearly see and what you can't see. Heart, determination, passion, work ethic, perseverance, genetic make up that can always develop late and defy past experiences. The light going off. The light coming on.

Confidence coming and confidence going. Being in the right place at the right time with the right people and being in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong people. "It" is so many things. And for some only one that makes the difference. Experience can tell you a kid has potential at an early age. It can also tell you a kid is a long shot at an early age. But it can never tell you for sure if he has "it" or doesn't.

As long as your in the game you have a shot to have it.

This is really all I am saying...

 

Geesh!

I still don't get "it".

IMO, most players at the ML level are average, they all don't have the "it" factor.

 

Again, it might be in the interpretation.

 

FWIW, coaches and teams DO care about pitchers specific skills, just because their skill isn't measured in 60 time, the DP, or the ability to lay off sliders does not mean they aren't athletic. 

floridafan,

Pablo Sandoval would be  illustration #1 on why I come down on the other side of your comments.

I'm not sure that you can practice and prepare your way to having "it".  I know of a lot of kids that put in an incredible amount of time and loved the game but the truth was they did the work just to keep their head above water.  Does't mean these weren't great kids...I respected them more than most however I wouldn't say they had... "it". 

 

As for the pitchers comment...while I will give you that there are some rather robust pitchers out there (some pretty big DH's and corner infielders too), I would bet dollars to donuts that most HS pitchers could hold there own at any position until the game moved them to the mound exclusively.  Pretty broad strokes there floridafan...can you tell I'm a pitchers dad? 

 

There are only two things you can't teach: desire and physical ability. If a player has the desire, the mechanics, and the physical ability, he will go very far. If a player has desire and mechanics, he can go very far.

 

You can't teach "it' either.

"It" is a combination of many factors. You can teach portions of "it."

I guess I can understand why someone would say that.  But to me, it means we have different definitions of "it." 

I guess you all don't understand my humor...

 

And we were takling about "it". My point was that some pitcher have "it"even when they do not look like they have "it".

 

The humor goes to the hitter/pitcher duel, and hitters at times remark that pitchers are goofy. All in fun here guys and gals. I did not mean to ruffle any pitcher parent feathers! LOL!

TRUE... It athlete with "it" is the one head and shoulders above everyone else. No matter what sport he plays, he's better or one of the best at it. Can learn very quickly anything new. That's what "it" is.