Defining "Talent"

[Gabjon]

I don't know if I necessarily agree with such a narrow generalization of talent...a lot of semantics if you ask me. Are you saying players such as Steve Kerr or a John Paxon were legit NBA players because of your apparent definition of talent? Some (including Kerr himself) may argue otherwise. :noidea:

I think they meet my definition of talent. Athletic ability is not confined to the MJs of the world, also elite shooting ability is not a skill and cannot be taught.

 

[SWC75]

The problem is most of the evaluations of a player's "talent" are based on what he did in high school against players who lacked his size or athletic ability, (which is not "talent"). We see guys who dominated in high school all the time who have trouble adjusting to a faster game played by bigger, quicker people, (DaJuan Coleman) or guys who can run and jump but not play basketball, (Rakeem Christmas), all the time. It's actually the saving grace of college sports, which is dominated by budget, facilities, location, type of school and recent winning tradition. if everyone turned out to be no better or worse than they looked in high school, the same handful of teams would win all the time. We've got that in football because the sheer number of players needed but even there the Floridas, the Texases and the Ohio States have down years and schools like Syracuse can beat them because our players turned out to be better than thought and theirs not as good.

That said, we've not really lost to a bad team all year and we've beaten some good ones, so the situation isn't all that dire. As said before, we just need to start making some shots.

 

[orangecuse]

I think they meet my definition of talent. Athletic ability is not confined to the MJs of the world, also elite shooting ability is not a skill and cannot be taught.

That's interesting, but it's strictly your own thinking and opinion. Shooting ability/skill is no way an innate quality (the premise of your argument when it comes to talent) so, I ask you, how did the great jump shooters come about? If not taught, initially, prior to spending the exhausting amount of hours on their craft honing their skill, etc., you're implying something that is just not valid imo. I doubt universally either.

 

[Gabjon]

That's interesting, but it's strictly your own thinking and opinion. Shooting ability/skill is no way an innate quality (the premise of your argument when it comes to talent) so, I ask you, how did the great jump shooters come about? If not taught, initially, prior to spending the exhausting amount of hours on their craft honing their skill, etc., you're implying something that is just not valid imo. I doubt universally either, as you also claim.

Reggie Miller shoots the ball in a way that is technically incorrect yet he is one of the greatest shooters ever and he is clearly a basketball talent but he is not an elite athlete his shooting "talent" is what made him.

 

[orangecuse]

Reggie Miller shoots the ball in a way that is technically incorrect yet he is one of the greatest shooters ever and he is clearly a basketball talent but he is not an elite athlete his shooting "talent" is what made him.

There are always exceptions to everything, and you choose to conveniently use a perfect example. Again, just more semantics...as you could easily say his shooting skill (regardless of technique) vs. talent is what made him...

 

[Sgt Cuse]

I think talent level is determined by most people from the rankings coming in. Also related, seems to be who was trying to get the recruit. If the recruit was sought after by UK, Duke, Indiana, etc. - it makes me feel we have brought in a recongnized good player. A third determinant may be if the recruit was someone that JB coveted.

By these indicators I think our recruiting has had an uptick. DC2 was coveted by UK, MG came from Duke, Buss had an offer from Indiana. MCW, Rak, and DC2 were all McD AAs. Ennis seemed to be JBs pick, and BJ looks like JBs darkhorse selection. On top of that, a lot of these big time recruits seem to come in knowing it will take a little time - like MCW and Grant.

So now that I think we are going toe to toe with the big boys in getting the players we want, my expectations for the results of the program have increased.

 

[stuckinbig11]

Coach Orange: This has been an interesting thread to read. Too bad some folks used it to denigrate some players. As demonstrated in previous games or seasons, the players all have talent and varying degrees of athleticism. Some have better natural instincts than others--nobody can teach instinct. Some have demonstrated good shooting skills, but virtually everyone is now off their game in that department--likely for different individual reasons. Each player needs to go back to square one and rebuild those skills step-by-step to identify the flaw and correct it. Then, just go out and play.

 

[Gabjon]

There are always exceptions to everything, and you choose to conveniently use a perfect example. Again, just more semantics...as you could easily say his shooting skill (regardless of technique) vs. talent is what made him...

Just to be clear I think shooting in an open gym or in drills is a skill being able to apply that skill is a game situation with game pressure is a talent. There are a lot of guys who can shoot in practice but not in a game situation or a big game situation unfortunately we seem to have a few of those guys on our team

 

[Quazzum69]

Like everything in the universe, talent is relative. High school players are all ranked according to other high schoolers, so it may not always be the best predictor down the road (especially for lower ranked kids).

The problem with Syracuse, I believe, is that we recruit athletic ability and body-type first, and skills second. So we get players that are highly ranked because they are so much more athletic than their peers, but once they get to college, everyone is more athletic and the advantage goes to players that have superior skills (shooting, dribbling, etc.). The truly gifted athletes of the world can still get by on athletic ability in college, but SU can't quite get those top-ten players.

The end result? An inflated recruiting class filled with long athletes that sometimes struggle in college against players with good athleticism and good schools, as well. We do have great talent but unfortunately not Larry Byrd talent.