PDA

View Full Version : Age Old Debate



Ltlabner
08-31-2006, 09:15 AM
If you had to chose between the two players described below, who would you rather have on your team? I'm not talking about a whole team made up of these players, just the one. The heart of the question is the age old issue: tallent or effort.

A) A modertaley tallented player with projected low top out on success BUT he has Pete Rose-eqsue drive, is there earley and stays late every day and absorbs what the coach/trainers tell him. When you look up "driven" in the dictonary you'll see his picture there.

OR

B) A mega-tallented super stud with gifts, skill and game galore. They "project" to be wicked successfull on the ballfield. BUT, he has horrible work ethic, is surly, has a primia-donna attitude and has to be catered to so he'll be coaxed out on the field.

So it's the age old debate, tallent or effort?

HumnHilghtFreel
08-31-2006, 09:26 AM
If I could clone Ryan Freel 8 times I would. You have to love the guys that go out and give it their absolute all every single minute they're on the field.

At the same time though, having a ton of effort isn't always going to win you ballgames. There has to be a perfect infusion of talent and hard work. I think if you had a team that was majority column A, then one or two of the column B prima-donnas could be stomached.

Hard work gets you there, but talent pushes you up over that edge.

So I guess my answer is situational. But if I was starting a team though, I would take the guy that's going to work his butt off every day.

redsmetz
08-31-2006, 09:29 AM
Yes.

Okay, a team is a collection of individuals. You need some of each. If you look at the BRM, you see guys who were boppers (Bench, Perez, Foster), the guy who hustled (Rose), power and speed (Morgan, Griffey), light hitting defensive specialists (Concepcion & Geronimo).

You have a good bench. In both '75 and '76, you had some terrific guys coming off the bench.

Look at the make-up of the 1990 WS Championship team. Also a mix of player types.

And pitching - not sexy, dominant pitching, but good "meat and potatoes" pitching. Nobody who was up around twenty wins, but a number of guys who can get your 12-15 wins.

This team has starters with that type of balance and ability overall. I like our starters next year, assume Phillips slides over to short and we fill the 2nd base slot. I like the balance with some of our platoons (Aurilia, Freel). We need consistancy and maybe some shaping up to last the long, long season.

But my "yes" means you need both and more.

dabvu2498
08-31-2006, 09:31 AM
Both? :confused:

Ltlabner
08-31-2006, 09:36 AM
Both? :confused:


You're needy........ :p:

mth123
08-31-2006, 08:55 PM
I'll take the talent. I love the Rose's and Freel's of the world as much as anybody, but there are lots of those that never make it. The talented guy can always grow-up like a Gary Scheffield did or they can be good anyway like Albert Belle.