What is talent? (Vince Carter related)

[elementally morale]

At first I was going to say that the most talented basketball player I have ever seen was Vince Carter, but then I had another idea.

Can you guys tell me what talent is?

When talking about talent, I see 'natural talent' and 'natural ability' mentioned all the time. But what is 'natural ability'? Is being tall considered talent? Is having huge hops more talent or more hard work? (Think of Barkley for example.) Is 'having a feeling for rebounding' an instinct (i.e.: talent) or mostly hard work? Or is it standing reach and hops? Is it agility?

What do you consider 'putting in the effort'? Is it a natural ability to be able to put in more work than others? I mean... can ANYONE put in more work than ANYONE else? I'm not sure it is mathematically possible... So putting in the 'extra hours' must have something to do with 'ability'.

Is being a smart player (like Nash) talent? Is it ability? Is it mostly due to hard work? Is being capable of deciding what you should work on a kind of 'talent'?

Are we sure that everything taken into account, the likes of Vince Carter and Rasheed Wallace are more talented than guys like Kobe Bryant, Shaquille O'Neal and Tim Duncan?

So what is talent?

(And please don't turn it into a Vice vs. Kobe debate, thank you.)

[DLeagueWannabe]

Great Post.

I never understood what talent actually was. But it seems that on these boards, talent has a lot to do with athletic ability. A lot of the posters on these sites chastise GMs for drafting prospects on potential, yet most of them fall in love with guys just for because of there so called "talent". Just my 2 cents.

[globarticles]

ey man, talent is potential brah. its what god gave ya thats impossible or cant be obtained easily by others. like yo brains, mentality, athletic ability, etc. Like if i give you 10000 dollars to startup ya business and I give another guy only 2000 dollars, ya would have more potential to be more successful than that guy brah. But ya could end up losing all dat by not developing it, not being smart nuff or even by bad luck brah. the other guy can be richer than ya at the end.

I hope ya get the picture brah. some got lotsa athletic ability but they can easily lose it all by not maintaining it, not developing it, not smart enuff to use it or just simple injury brah.

[elementally morale]

ey man, talent is potential brah. its what god gave ya thats impossible or cant be obtained easily by others. like yo brains, mentality, athletic ability, etc.

Are you sure that things like mentality and athletic ability cannot be worked on, especially when one is younger, brah? Is the ABILITY to work on 'raw talent' considered TALENT itself?

Fill me in, brah.

[artificial]

Talent I would say is the ability to do some things exactly how they are supposed to be done, and do so naturally. Whether it's with effort or not, practice or not, that's not so important IMO.

When you go to play ball for the first time with your friends, there are some kids that will play the will pull a layup without any previous instruction. And then there are others that will need practice and instruction to do it.

Let's say a math problem: some people just catch the essence of problems faster than others, and are able to write clear, simple solutions. It's irrelevant if they had to put a lot of work to their solutions (or not): most people won't be able to propose such beautiful solutions.

Some people just seem to have the ability to do some things, and leave you thinking "that's exactly the way it has to be done".

What impressed me more about a prime Carter, is that his impossible tomahawk dunks looked incredibly natural, to the point they even looked easy because of being executed so naturally. I don't care if he spent years practising that move, because I'm sure other NBA players have as well, and yet Carter's dunk usually looked more graceful. And I hate the guy.


Is the ABILITY to work on 'raw talent' considered TALENT itself?
I personally consider it a talent, and the most precious talent anyone can have.

[L.Kizzle]

Are you sure that things like mentality and athletic ability cannot be worked on, especially when one is younger, brah? Is the ABILITY to work on 'raw talent' considered TALENT itself?

Fill me in, brah.
Talent is just being able to do something right of the bat. For example, say a cat can just pick up on the piano like he's been playing forever, that's talent. But then, you might have some one who can play piano and look at that cat like "man, it took me years to play piano and you can pick up on it like that."

I don't know.

[Pursuer]

I don't think work can give you to have a LeBron James body(Karl Malone with with perimeter player's speed).

['Toine=MVP]

I think talent is basically just ability. It includes natural abilities, developed ones, athleticism, and skills.

Ray Allen is a talented shooter. Kidd is a talented passer. Carmelo is a talented scorer. Howard is a talented shot blocker. Al Jefferson is a talented post player. Vince Carter is a talented dunker. Tony Parker is a talented penetrator. Kobe is a talented finisher.

Generally the most talented players are the ones that have the most talents. So LeBron James is maybe the most talented player in the league because he can defend as well as anyone, he can run the floor as well as anyone, he can finish as well as anyone, he can penetrate very well, dunk very easily, etc etc. He isn't really a highly talented shooter though. Kobe is probably equal or almost as talented as LeBron in many areas, but greatly exceeds his talent in shooting, so many people would say Kobe is more talented overall.

I think that size while important in the NBA is not really considered talent. Although, it is considered when evaluating other talents. Dirk is a very talented shooter for a big man. Shaq was very quick for a giant human being. Iverson was a very talented scorer for a player under 6 feet. Basically you get extra credit for being talented at something you are not expected to be talented at based on your size. You don't get credit for doing things that should be easy based on your size, but that really only applies to very few players. Like Yao Ming isn't considered a really talented rebounder. He might be good at it because he is 6 inches taller than everyone else on the court many times. Dennis Rodman and Charles Barkley on the other hand were considered very talented rebounders because their height made it unlikely they would be so good at it.

[elementally morale]

Talent is just being able to do something right of the bat.

That is 'raw talent' I would say. But is not 'fulfilling your potential' some kind of talent? I mean... there are several really smart kids in school and some of them end up being really dumb adults, the majority will do OK, a few will be exceptional and a selected few will become Stephen Hawking or John von Neumann.

One may say Vince Carter had more talent than, say, Michael Jordan... but at the end of the day, MJ is MJ and Vince is Vince.

I really have a hard time understanding talent at the age of 36. When I was younger, it all seemed a lot simpler.

[elementally morale]

I don't think work can give you to have a LeBron James body(Karl Malone with with perimeter player's speed).

Of course not. But it can give you Steve Nash. Nothing to be ashamed of, IMO.

[elementally morale]

Let's say a math problem: some people just catch the essence of problems faster than others, and are able to write clear, simple solutions. It's irrelevant if they had to put a lot of work to their solutions (or not): most people won't be able to propose such beautiful solutions.


When I was 10 or 15, I was considered to be talented in arts and languages. I did OK in school and my math skills were not 'bad', but others thought I would not make a scientist. My picture of myself was the same: I thought I would end up being a writer/musician of some sort.

And I am a physicist, and not that bad at it. To some extent you can learn things, it seems. But is that ability talent? What should I call it? Luck? I may as well call it having been lucky, after all it's true.

['Toine=MVP]

...I don't think talent really takes player psyches into account. So while Michael Jordan was probably considered more talented earlier in his career, he might be considered better in his last 3 years in the league (with the Bulls), as some people think he took his drive to a whole new level.

Someone like Vince Carter can do many things as well as anyone, but many would argue his psyche has impeded him from becoming a really good NBA player.

Decision-making, drive, heart, etc. matter A TON in the NBA, but I don't think they are considered talents, nor do I think they should be.

[elementally morale]

Decision-making, drive, heart, etc. matter A TON in the NBA, but I don't think they are considered talents, nor do I think they should be.


Talent to you is 'natural physical ability' then?

[Brunch@Five]

talent to me is synomynous with potential. To fulfill that potential/talent you need to put in work. Also, if you're more talented than someone else, you reach the same level with less effort, and your ceiling is higher.

['Toine=MVP]

Talent to you is 'natural physical ability' then?

No, read my other post. It is developed physical abilities as well, including athleticism and other skills. Nash is a talented passer because he sees the floor very very well and is able to dribble to the area where he needs to be to make the pass. The fact that he makes good decisions might make him a better player, but it doesn't factor in to his passing talent.

[elementally morale]

No, read my other post. It is developed physical abilities as well,

Development has a lot to do with your mindset and hard work, right? So what is talent? Putting in the work when you are young and before you are shown on TV?

Serious question.

['Toine=MVP]

...Let's say half the games LeBron decides to give full effort on offense and defense and half the games he clearly plays passively and admits he just didn't want to try. Is he less talented those days? Is he less talented overall because he doesn't always try hard? Of course not. It is a physical skill-set. People are disappointed with guys who can be amazing at times but seemingly don't care enough to play at that level all the time. They are considered wasted talents.

P.S. The LeBron example was hypothetical.

[elementally morale]

talent to me is synomynous with potential. To fulfill that potential/talent you need to put in work. Also, if you're more talented than someone else, you reach the same level with less effort, and your ceiling is higher.

That's exactly what I thought at age 25. On a sidenote: How old are you? (I'm curious.)

['Toine=MVP]

Development has a lot to do with your mindset and hard work, right? So what is talent? Putting in the work when you are young and before you are shown on TV?

Serious question.

Sure. If someone is driven as a young person and works hard to develop physical abilities, then he has certainly made himself more talented. If he chooses to tank it as an NBA player that has nothing to do with his talent level.

Increasing ones talent is not a talent in my opinion.

[Brunch@Five]

That's exactly what I thought at age 25. On a sidenote: How old are you? (I'm curious.)

21. Work ethic I believe is something you learn, depends on how you're brought up. Work ethic is essential to fulfill your talent, but is not a talent itself.

[elementally morale]

Increasing ones talent is not a talent in my opinion.

I don't know what to call it then. Is being able to select what you are really talented in considered talent?

I mean... if Shaq would have decided to become an actor, we would call him not that talented, right?

[elementally morale]

Work ethic is essential to fulfill your talent, but is not a talent itself.

What is it then? Ability?

If it is ability, is it natural? Or you have to work on being able to put in the work to improve your talent?

I'm not kidding with you, sorry if I may come off as someone doing just that.

[Brunch@Five]

What is it then? Ability?

If it is ability, is it natural? Or you have to work on being able to put in the work to improve your talent?

I'm not kidding with you, sorry if I may come off as someone doing just that.

work ethic is a pattern of behaviour. Like etiquette, honesty etc

['Toine=MVP]

I don't know what to call it then. Is being able to select what you are really talented in considered talent?

I mean... if Shaq would have decided to become an actor, we would call him not that talented, right?

what? do you mean not that talented at acting? i think we are only talking about basketball talent right? because we could say he is not that talented at acting right now. but maybe he would have become a great actor, and then we would consider him very talented at acting (long shot).

maybe you mean if he chose to act instead of play basketball we would not consider him a talented basketball player. well, that might be true. but it would depend on how good he would have been at playing basketball in that scenario. if his post moves were worse because of that choice, he'd be a less talented post player.

[elementally morale]

work ethic is a pattern of behaviour.

So it is totally up to you to decide whether your work ethic will be 'great' or 'bad' then? Or is it sheer luck?

[artificial]

When I was 10 or 15, I was considered to be talented in arts and languages. I did OK in school and my math skills were not 'bad', but others thought I would not make a scientist. My picture of myself was the same: I thought I would end up being a writer/musician of some sort.

And I am a physicist, and not that bad at it. To some extent you can learn things, it seems. But is that ability talent? What should I call it? Luck? I may as well call it having been lucky, after all it's true.
Haha, I knew I liked you for some reason. I was considered to be talented in languages -and still want to think so- (although I was never considered talented in arts besides writing). Still, I love writing and know 3 languages fluently. And when I was around 10 I clearly remember crying because I simply didn't understood math.

Despite all that I'm close to getting my college degree in math :lol

Not sure I understand what you mean by ability talent here. But overall yes, I do think as talents as luck of some sort. And the talent to fulfil your talents, that's the one talent everyone has to believe they have, despite clear cases of people who don't.

[elementally morale]

what? do you mean not that talented at acting? i think we are only talking about basketball talent right? because we could say he is not that talented at acting right now. but maybe he would have become a great actor, and then we would consider him very talented at acting (long shot).

maybe you mean if he chose to act instead of play basketball we would not consider him a talented basketball player. well, that might be true. but it would depend on how good he would have been at playing basketball in that scenario. if his post moves were worse because of that choice, he'd be a less talented post player.

I mean both.

Had he chosen acting as a profession, he may have turned out to be an average actor. And then at age 25, being a lot slower and weaker you would have given him a basketball. He would play like a tall O'Neal but not like Shaq.

So him having picked up acting as a career option made him less talented as a basketball player? Is the ability to decide which sport/other activity to choose 'talent'? AI could have been great at Football. LBJ, too. Or Shaq at boxing, possibly.

But I'm done with stupid questions like that. I will listen to others' opinions instead. Thx for answering.

[jamal99]

I think talent is basically just ability. It includes natural abilities, developed ones, athleticism, and skills.

Ray Allen is a talented shooter. Kidd is a talented passer. Carmelo is a talented scorer. Howard is a talented shot blocker. Al Jefferson is a talented post player. Vince Carter is a talented dunker. Tony Parker is a talented penetrator. Kobe is a talented finisher.


I think that, let's say Howard is talented shot blocker only because he's so athletic, same for Carter's dunking ability, would he be able to do it without his athletic ability? No.
I agree that his dunks look better than some other equally athletic guy, but main part of that is athleticism.

Ray Allen's shooting, Kidd's passing, Carmelo's scoring (that's little bit athleticism based) are very little (to none) are based on athleticism. While Al's post playing, Tony's penetrating and Kobe's finishing ability are more based on their athleticism. It requires some other natural abilities tho...

['Toine=MVP]

I think that, let's say Howard is talented shot blocker only because he's so athletic, same for Carter's dunking ability, would he be able to do it without his athletic ability? No.
I agree that his dunks look better than some other equally athletic guy, but main part of that is athleticism.

Ray Allen's shooting, Kidd's passing, Carmelo's scoring (that's little bit athleticism based) are very little (to none) are based on athleticism. While Al's post playing, Tony's penetrating and Kobe's finishing ability are more based on their athleticism. It requires some other natural abilities tho...

yeah, but that analysis doesn't help. i am saying all that stuff adds up to talent.

[elementally morale]

because I simply didn't understood math.

Wait... Haven't you just said you were talented in writing? :oldlol:

:cheers:

[Brunch@Five]

So it is totally up to you to decide whether your work ethic will be 'great' or 'bad' then? Or is it sheer luck?

Like the other things I mentioned it depends a great deal on the social environment you were raised, how your parents raised you and what kind of experiences you made in your childhood.
I don't believe that people are born "good" or "evil", "lazy" or "hard-working" (for lack of a better word), but everyone has certain predispositions.

I'm a fairly talented trumpet player and am pretty certain that I would not have reached the level I've reached in trumpet playing had I picked the flute or guitar instead.

[OhNoTimNoSho]

wow an interesting thread on my ISH? no way....


Its a good question, what Im thinking is talent is this innate set of parameters which can be converted into ability though hard work. Having inherent athletic ability: things like long reach, explosive step, or being light on your feet are all talent. A player will go and practice and he will convert these attributes into skill. I guess talent is like raw ability which you just have by the grace of god.
Even mentality is a talent. You can't tell me that having a Jordan or a Chris Paul mentality can be taught. They are just annoying ass OCD dudes that took their obsessive personalities and directed it towards basketball. Even Vince at one point displayed drive, which is a talent, but no one knows what happened and he lost it.

So to sum it up, talent is a set of qualities which you are born with. If you don't apply to anything it'll never turn into ability. You also can't pinpoint talent, or its just really hard. There is also a distinction to be made between being a talented basketball player and being a talented leaper, shooter, or rebound or something. Steve Nash is a talented ball player, he took the talent he had and converted it into ability which allows his to succeed on the court. Rodney Carney on the other hand is a very talented leaper, but he cannot convert that into basketball ability, so he is not as talented of a ball player. In relation to other nba players of course. Vince carter is a talented leaper, shooter, passer, and overall ball player. Possibly as talented as anyone, ever. He also converted it into ability. But unless we get some kind of machine and get inside his brain and follow his career from his rookie season till now, we will never know why he lacks drive or desire.

[elementally morale]

Like the other things I mentioned it depends a great deal on the social environment you were raised, how your parents raised you and what kind of experiences you made in your childhood.

It is called having been lucky, then. You didn't choose your parents, did you?



I'm a fairly talented trumpet player and am pretty certain that I would not have reached the level I've reached in trumpet playing had I picked the flute or guitar instead.

Do you consider the selection of the instrument a talent of some sort?

[shadow]

I think when you're talking about guys at a pro level, especially the elite ones it's very hard to distinguish talent from hard work. Because everyone is talented to some extent and everyone also works hard, though some more than others.

IMO It's easier to pick up talent at a lower level. At a higher level it probably doesn't matter that much when you factor in players' hard work. Let's face it, LeBron, Wade, Kobe, even slackers like McGrady and Carter work damn hard at their games. They're all talented guys. The biggest difference between them is that the former work harder, stay in better shape and so have separated themselves from their peers. You could argue Vince and McGrady are more talented in some respects, especially McGrady, but it really hasn't done much from them towards establishing them as anything more than mere footnotes in Baksetball history.

['Toine=MVP]

I mean both.

Had he chosen acting as a profession, he may have turned out to be an average actor. And then at age 25, being a lot slower and weaker you would have given him a basketball. He would play like a tall O'Neal but not like Shaq.

So him having picked up acting as a career option made him less talented as a basketball player? Is the ability to decide which sport/other activity to choose 'talent'? AI could have been great at Football. LBJ, too. Or Shaq at boxing, possibly.

But I'm done with stupid questions like that. I will listen to others' opinions instead. Thx for answering.

I guess I am saying it doesn't matter how potentially talented a player might be. If LeBron James was severely injured as a baby, and was never able to walk, we would not consider him talented. It doesn't matter how much potential baby LeBron had. If you have the physical skill-set, you are talented, no matter how you got there. If you fail in the NBA or whatever other area of life despite your physical skill-set, then you can be considered a wasted talent (whether it is because someone is an alcoholic or just doesn't try or whatever other psychological reason).

[Brunch@Five]

It is called having been lucky, then. You didn't choose your parents, did you?




Do you consider the selection of the instrument a talent of some sort?

You could call it luck, I'd call it destiny :cheers:
Choosing the right instrument is not a talent but luck. Although I'd consider it a talent to recognize talent in someone else, as my eventual teacher told me a trumpet would fit me more than another instrument. If you want me to go into detail I could even tell you why I'm less talented in playing trombone for example, even it's in principle a similar instrument. Has to do with certain predispositions of my body :pimp:

[Bano114]

Great Post.

I never understood what talent actually was. But it seems that on these boards, talent has a lot to do with athletic ability. A lot of the posters on these sites chastise GMs for drafting prospects on potential, yet most of them fall in love with guys just for because of there so called "talent". Just my 2 cents.

GM's make the mistake all the time of drafting needs over talent. ALWAYS DRAFT BASED ON SKILL.

Its happened all the time. Look Sam Bowie being taken over Micheal Jordan. Jordan was obviously the most Skilled player in that draft even before he was drafted people knew that. The only person in the country that rivaled him was Len Bias and he wasnt even drafted first either(what happened with him was a unseeable situation).

[elementally morale]

You could call it luck, I'd call it destiny

I'm aight with calling it destiny. It doesn't depend on what you call it. :oldlol: (I think it doesn't... but who knows?)

On the other hand... if you were destined to become a great trumpet player, too, then you can get no extra points for your decisionmaking and hard work, can you? Aaaw man, these things get tricky.


I'm so sad my thread got deleted (the one where I was 'Jeff aka insidehoops' for like an hour). I have it in a downloaded version, but it would be just great to be able to show it to you at this point. Have you read that thread by any chance?

(I'm off for supper, will be back in like an hour.)

[Brunch@Five]

I'm aight with calling it destiny. It doesn't depend on what you call it. :oldlol: (I think it doesn't... but who knows?)

On the other hand... if you were destined to become a great trumpet player, too, then you can get no extra points for your decisionmaking and hard work, can you? Aaaw man, these things get tricky.


I'm so sad my thread got deleted (the one where I was 'Jeff aka insidehoops' for like an hour). I have it in a downloaded version, but it would be just great to be able to show it to you at this point. Have you read that thread by any chance?

(I'm off for supper, will be back in like an hour.)

I don't remember that thread, no.
I don't that you cannot control your destiny though, there are always people that succeed despite a bad social environment, and people that fail in spite of a good social environment.

[cotdt]

What about a player like Chauncey Billups, whose coaches say he has no talent, but plays very effective basketball from hard work and high basketball knowledge? Does he really have no talent, or does he just have less talent than other All-Star players of his caliber?

Then we have Jordan Farmar. He is exceptionally fast and has amazing ball handling skills, athleticism, and is a good finisher. He is clearly very talented. Yet he is a below-average point guard. Why?

['Toine=MVP]

He is clearly very talented. Yet he is a below-average point guard. Why?

psychology. he doesn't have it upstairs. the fact that time after time people refer to wasted talent, tells us all we need to know about what talent is and what talent is not. farmar has a great physical skill set (what we refer to as talent), but is lacking something in his psyche (that we consider outside talent).

[Johnni Gade]

Talent is atletic ability

[MannyO]

Ive been wondering the same thing. When I asked people said it is a "natural overall skillset" or something like that. All these "talented" high school kids Im wondering what makes them talented?

[elementally morale]

lacking something in his psyche (that we consider outside talent).

You do. I consider it talent. So after all I think Farmar is not that talented. He has great physical abilities, though.

[elementally morale]

OhNoTimNoSho


Just wanted to let you know I liked your answer a lot. :applause:

[halffttime]

talent - ball handling skills, shooting skills, decision-making skills, etc.

ability - being fast, jumping high, being strong, etc.

the x factor - determination, will to succeed, strive to be the best, etc.

carter had talent and ability, but IMO now lacks the x factor. there was at a time in his career (early-mid raptors days, early nets days) when he had that hunger. every now and then he'll show signs of that determination that he once had, but he never brings it with consistency anymore.

kobe has talent, SOMEWHAT of an ability, and DEFINITELY strives to be the best. i say he he has somewhat of an ability because let's face it, athletic-wise he's no carter, but his talent and determination makes up for that lack of natural ability.

and of course, jordan had the trifecta. he had the talent, the physical ability, and the mentality to WANT to be the greatest. i will say skill-wise, i think kobe has an advantage over jordan, but the other aspects of jordan's game more than makes up for it. carter HAD what it took to be great, but lacked the will. carter could easily step out on the court on any given night and drop 30, but to do it with consistency and efficiency is a whole other thing.








..i just had to go there :lol

[elementally morale]

...i just had to go there :lol

It's OK, you did it in a nice way. :rockon:

[ProfessorMurder]

I think talent is subject to opinion... Varying with every person, hence why there's been so many answers in this thread.

Natural 'Raw' Talent to me is just something you can try, and be better than average (or better than you should be given the situation). Take me and basketball. I never played until I was in 4th grade. I tried out for a rec team, and was the best, without training/work/instruction. It's something intrinsic that you either have or don't. (You could be genetically or environmentally predisposed to it)

Ability(to me), is interchangeable with talent. Ability is simply being able to do said thing. Without being able to do something, there won't be a talent. (If you're blind, you won't have the ability to become a talented sniper.)

Having a skill/talent/ability could stem from your natural talent, but it could also be manufactured. But improving/taking some talent to the next level has to be done with work ethic/perseverance/luck. Who knows, maybe I had the same talent as a young Vince Carter, but he worked to improve and I didn't.

Having heart/determination/work ethic, I wouldn't classify as a talent... But they are attributes needed to expand talents.

That's my take on it anyway.

['Toine=MVP]

You [think that psyche is not part of talent]. I consider it talent. So after all I think Farmar is not that talented. He has great physical abilities, though.

Then there is no such thing as wasted talent? If talent is just the sum total of everything, then the best player in the league is the most talented, the worst player in the league is the least talented, and so forth. If someone can't make it as an NBA player, they are less talented than that.

Vince Carter (for example) did not waste his talent, he just didn't have enough talent?

I don't think many people use the term talent that way. If they did, no one would ever say a player wasted his talent, or anything like that. If not becoming an alcohol is a talent, then Vin Baker did not waste his talent by becoming an alcoholic. He actually just lived up to his talent, as that is what you'd expect to happen based on his set of talents. Vince Carter lived up to his talents the same way, because based on his lack of heart or determination or good decision making, he could never have been expected to do any more than he did.

If I am correct in stating your opinion this way, then it is an interesting thought, but you are trying to re-define the term talent to mean something other than what it means to the vast majority of people. I might be wrong in my attempt to define talent in the way that the world generally perceives it, but that is what I was attempting to do.

I believe that the vast majority of people happen to believe that it is possible to waste talent. So there must be some factor outside of talent that causes one to waste it. I am calling it psyche, but there might be a more precise term for it. You are bothered by the widely accepted use of the term talent (maybe bothered isn't the best word), and want to change the accepted meaning of the term to include every factor than can account for performance. Am I right about that?

['Toine=MVP]

Having a skill/talent/ability could stem from your natural talent, but it could also be manufactured. But improving/taking some talent to the next level has to be done with work ethic/perseverance/luck. Who knows, maybe I had the same talent as a young Vince Carter, but he worked to improve and I didn't.

Having heart/determination/work ethic, I wouldn't classify as a talent... But they are attributes needed to expand talents.

That's my take on it anyway.

I think that is the way people use the term talent. Some people are defining it differently, but when you ask a person whether player X is very talented or somewhat talented or not very talented for a NBA player, almost everyone will give you the same answer. And that answer would be based on your definition. If you ask how good a player is, you'll get a wider variety of answers and certainly the ranking of players based on talent will not match up with the ranking of players based on how good they are.

[elementally morale]

I don't think many people use the term talent that way.


You are right.

But how do you use the terms 'space' and 'time'? I can assure you that the way most people use those terms is not the same a few scientists use them. I'm not sure about you, but many people would be surprised that time is not a 'given' and that it depends on speed.

So how people use a term is only important to me when I want to understand what people are talking about or when I want to tell them something in a way they do understand. But when I'm on my own thinking about something I don't care too much about people's opinions. I do before and after, but not while 'doing my thing'.

But you are right: not many people use the term 'talent' the way I do. That is the reason why I asked this question here. I wanted to know how you guys use the term.

[elementally morale]

If I am correct in stating your opinion this way, then it is an interesting thought, but you are trying to re-define the term talent

correct



to mean something other than what it means to the vast majority of people.

for inner use, yes. In the sense that I would want to change the way people think of talent, no.

I hope that made sense.

['Toine=MVP]

Okay. Well, that wasn't totally clear by any of your other posts.

[elementally morale]

Well, that wasn't totally clear by any of your other posts.

Of course not. If I tell you WHY I'm asking before you answer... that may change your answer. That I did not want in this case. So I gave you the info, only a bit later. :cheers:

['Toine=MVP]

Of course not. If I tell you WHY I'm asking before you answer... that may change your answer. That I did not want in this case. So I gave you the info, only a bit later. :cheers:

true. i probably wouldn't have even posted if i knew that's what you were getting at. so i'm glad i didn't know earlier. :applause:

[elementally morale]

true. i probably wouldn't have even posted if i knew that's what you were getting at. so i'm glad i didn't know earlier. :applause:

It made sense though.

I read many interesting viewpoints, PLUS you guys read many interesting viewpoints PLUS some of you had to make a bit of an effort to define something you use quite naturally.

I think it was great, and I'm happy for everyone's contribution. Yours as well.

[Solid Snake]

1) There's no such thing as destiny. That's gets into the realm of fate, which is dangerously close to the man-made concept of the ill-fated idea of religion. There is no god.

2) Choosing what craft to hone your skills at is not a talent. I don't see how that's a serious question (I've seen you ask the question several times in this thread, "So person X choosing craft Y is a talent?" Insinuating that the act ifself of choosing that craft was a talent).

3) Luck, I'm willing to go with. People's bodies are made different. Some people's bones are more dense than others (a fact you can't change, unlike muscle mass), and some people's mindset is different that may make them work harder at certain things (mindset can be changed, but would take an external stimulus to trigger this event happening). In other words, I'm taking the long way to say that talent is a natural ability you possess, but I don't call it luck, it's nothing. If anything, call it coincidence, that's if you consider it a "coincidence" that that rock happens to be placed at this position on earth, as opposed to that position, or that leaf landed left of the tree, as opposed to right. I don't consider any of that as Luck or Coincidence, it simply just, is. Same as natural talent.

[OldSchoolBBall]

I view basketball talent differently than most people. I view it as an innate feel for the game, an innate creativity. Others view it more like "athletic talent" (e.g., VC, Lebron, Shaq etc.). There's some overlap there, but, for example, Larry Bird ranks VERY high on my "most talented players ever" list, but he would barely rate on others' lists because they're almost exclusively talking about athletic talent. Guys like MJ, Barkley, Magic, Bird, Dr. J represent the pinnacle of basketball talent for me, while for others guys like Carter/Lebron/Shaq would. Size is the one athletic/physical attribute I can see making a case for when discussing "talent," but I tend to not look at or care about stuff like leaping ability, speed etc. That stuff helps, but that's not "talent" - that's stuff you were born with. Basketball is a creative game; the most talented players are those who evince the greatest level of creativity imo.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I look at all of the things that seem to come naturally to a player, including physical attributes.

For example, the fact that footwork, post moves and passing skills came natural to Shaq at 7'2", 340 along with a great basketball IQ and incredible athleticism makes him rank among the most talented players ever IMO.

But perhaps the most talented player ever is Wilt because he showed at various times that he could do just about anything. Whether it was scoring at will with easy dunks, effortless unorthodox shots like his finger rolls, controlling the glass with a natural feel for rebounding matched by very few, blocking almost any shot he wanted or making Sabonis-esque passes with ease later in his career. Then you consider the size, strength and athleticism.

And yes, Bird ranks very high and the list, as does Magic Johnson. They had a feel for the game and did certain things that you can't learn too frequently. Particularly with their passing and in particular, Bird who made some of the most difficult shots.

Jordan obviously is high up as well because of his athleticism, feel for the game and the skill to do what he wanted. For example, nobody improvised better in the air than Jordan and you can't teach that. He just reacted better than just about anyone and when he was challenged he couldn't do something, he did it.

Guys like Sheed and VC are high up there as well, but I'm not sure they're as high as the guys I mentioned. Sheed, for example had all of the skills and athletic ability, but he either did have the desire or IQ to use it best. Similar to Carter, but I think Sheed wasted even more potential. He could do everything. He had a very good post up game, great length and defensive instincts, great shooting touch and range, solid passing ability and excellent athleticism.

Based on talent, Carter should have atleast been on Kobe's level, but he was never as talented as Jordan. Michael clearly had a better feel for the game, particularly defensive instincts and he had more speed and quickness.

[no0]

can someone explain to me how VC showed more athletic ability than kobe? i'm not being a sarcastic **** here. i'm just clueless.

[gts]

nice thread great comments... this is ISH right?

to me talent is something that is fluid, liquid constantly changing depending on it's owner's use of it..

as an example kobe has talent, he had it from the day he picked up a basketball most likely, but he also groomed that talent, refined reshapped it as his body grew and continues to do so even today, his game is ever evolving to make the greatest use of his athletic and learned basketball skills... talent is a combination of things, natural, learned and critiqued, but to me it is not anyone thing, it is the combination of things the end product but an end product that will be different under different situations/inputs.. i don't think we can define talent in any one way..

as mentioned before Bird had talent so did Magic... two totally different games two totally different players with different skills but both with incredible talent

[globarticles]

Are you sure that things like mentality and athletic ability cannot be worked on, especially when one is younger, brah? Is the ABILITY to work on 'raw talent' considered TALENT itself?

Fill me in, brah.
ay ya dont get it but its okay brah. imma explain it to ya.

Everybody got raw talent for everything brah, just not in the same amount. Even da worst singer has talent to sing, just not as much as mariah carey.

[elementally morale]

ay ya dont get it but its okay brah. imma explain it to ya.

Everybody got raw talent for everything brah, just not in the same amount. Even da worst singer has talent to sing, just not as much as mariah carey.

Thx, brah. I always knew I had talent in figure skating, even though I really su(k at it. But it's nice of you to confirm I have talent. Not as much as the average person on Earth, but it still is TALENT. I knew this, I knew this. I'm so relieved now. Thx, brah.

:banana:

[elementally morale]

1) There's no such thing as destiny. That's gets into the realm of fate, which is dangerously close to the man-made concept of the ill-fated idea of religion. There is no god.


Well, prove it.

Not here, but I can make you a thread where you can show me proof there is no god. You will have a tough time, because I will show you in 5 easy steps that believing there is no god is just another belief and in fact believing in man-made science is just another belief (even though it is a different approach).

I'm a scientist by training, but I can debate that god-thingy with you. I also have no god.... errr... dog in this fight, but to make a bold statement like you just did is a bit premature as far as our knowledge as humans is concerned.

[playtetris]

elementally morale is the most talented poster on ISH's NBA forum :D

[elementally morale]

Insinuating that the act ifself of choosing that craft was a talent


What makes it insinuation?

It is decision making. You need a level-head as well as some intuition to make it work. You have to take an in-depth look at the details but you cannot lose sight of the big picture. Decision making is not easy, especially if there is more than one thing to choose from. :oldlol:

GMs had better be talented at decision-making, right? Coaches had better be talented at running a team, right? Choosing which player to play when, which play to run when... deciding all that is some kind of talent.

When deciding the same things about yourself (i.e.: decision-making) why cannot that be called talent?

[aau]

great thread e m . . . . i hope you're not done with it as
i'd greatly appreciate your response to the following:

what is talent? . . . . is it the same as athletic ability?

athleticism to me is running , jumping and throwing

everybody can run , but everybody can't run "fast"
everybody can jump , but everybody can't jump "high"
everybody can throw , but everybody can't throw "far"

what makes usain bolt faster than everyone else
what made jordan jump higher than everyone else
what made elway throw farther than everyone else

is the difference talent level? . . . what about

run fast and change directions
jump high and hang in the air
throw far and hit a target

many claim that usain's the world's greatest athlete
. . . . . . . . no doubt he's insanely talented

but what if he had to run while dribbling a ball thru traffic
what if he then had to throw the ball and hit a moving target
and to finish the event , he then had to vault over a 10 foot pole

i know , , they're not answers
just questions and things that came to mind

for reasons that i'll elaborate upon your response , my initial
answer to the question "what is talent" . . . . i say it's

.

.

.

Hidden

[IInvented]

Rasheed Wallace = most talented basketball player ever

[elementally morale]

Rasheed Wallace = most talented basketball player ever

Thanks for your contribution.

[aau]

cool enough e m

i'd still like to elaborate on this topic especially after last nite when
my son (soph) played his 1st varsity game , his 1st game ever
running the point and played extremely well . . . to the point
i feel a lil prophetic because he did things i'd never seen
him do before , , , obviously he's been hiding talent

funnily
as he was leaving for school this morning he received a text from
state champ , crosstown rival and the soon-to-be LA City POY
Dwayne Polee Jr telling him . . ."you're losing your next game"

kid is like my nephew . . . i played against his dad and his uncle
graduated from my alma mater a year ahead of me . . . now
if y'all wanna see talent youtube the name D P Jr and look
for the hilite reel "mattsballislife" or som'n like that
kid is rediculous , , , , , has stupid hops

anyway , the reason i say talent is hidden is because while you
may be looking at the end result where it's on full nba display
somebody or some thing (beit coaching or competition)
had to bring it to the surface . . . well i coach at the
level where that talent gets brought to the surface

high schools , colleges and pros simply reap the benefits

a guy that can run fast (talent) can run even faster if taught
the proper technique (skill) . . . . a guy with bounce could
jump a lot higher and longer if given the proper training

perfect example in closing , anyone with ath.ability can do it
i know because i taught it to my son and he's no leaper
by any stretch . . . . i'ma tell you a simple way to
jump , adjust your body , and hang in the air
in other words , i'ma show you a way to fly

.

dribble from the wing into a reverse layup

do it again , but this time when you plant your foot to leap
STOP and HOLD that pose . . . your jump foot should be
planted and ready to explode up and your raised knee
should be flexed just a bit above your waist . . . .

now start over , only this time when you plant your foot and
explode off the ground . . . as you approach your apex
bring the opposite knee to the same level as your
raised knee (like a seated position) and force
yourself to glide from one side to the other

man , i kid you not , i taught my son this a couple of years ago
he's been killing folks with not only the hanging reverse layups
but the jump , absorb contact and finish front side as well

with polee jr on the schedule twice this year , he's definitely
going to need it cause he know dwayne will text message
that crap into the seats and tell him about it afterwards

.
.

i know how folks are today so i've contemplated bringing my son
to the board for a long time now for fear of bragging or jinxing
i'd always said once someone other than myself mention his
name i'd do it , but even then i neglected to do so . . . .

but after last nite i just said fug it . . if you guys are interested
i'd gladly share with you his progression thru high school
that you can follow him and polee at maxpreps.com

[Brandon Roy]

Nice thread, elementallymorale.

I think there is so much more to talent than natural athletic ability. People can't convince me that Josh Smith is more talented than Larry Bird. Yeah, jumping is a cool talent, but what about hand-eye coordination, timing, court awareness, etc.?

Just look at pure shooters. Some guys practice for hours on end and can't make a jumpshot to save their lives. Other guys haven't shot in years and they can shoot better than 90% of basketball players. I don't know how to qualify that talent, but there is definitely some type of talent there.

[MannyO]

cool enough e m

i'd still like to elaborate on this topic especially after last nite when
my son (soph) played his 1st varsity game , his 1st game ever
running the point and played extremely well . . . to the point
i feel a lil prophetic because he did things i'd never seen
him do before , , , obviously he's been hiding talent

funnily
as he was leaving for school this morning he received a text from
state champ , crosstown rival and the soon-to-be LA City POY
Dwayne Polee Jr telling him . . ."you're losing your next game"

kid is like my nephew . . . i played against his dad and his uncle
graduated from my alma mater a year ahead of me . . . now
if y'all wanna see talent youtube the name D P Jr and look
for the hilite reel "mattsballislife" or som'n like that
kid is rediculous , , , , , has stupid hops

anyway , the reason i say talent is hidden is because while you
may be looking at the end result where it's on full nba display
somebody or some thing (beit coaching or competition)
had to bring it to the surface . . . well i coach at the
level where that talent gets brought to the surface

high schools , colleges and pros simply reap the benefits

a guy that can run fast (talent) can run even faster if taught
the proper technique (skill) . . . . a guy with bounce could
jump a lot higher and longer if given the proper training

perfect example in closing , anyone with ath.ability can do it
i know because i taught it to my son and he's no leaper
by any stretch . . . . i'ma tell you a simple way to
jump , adjust your body , and hang in the air
in other words , i'ma show you a way to fly

.

dribble from the wing into a reverse layup

do it again , but this time when you plant your foot to leap
STOP and HOLD that pose . . . your jump foot should be
planted and ready to explode up and your raised knee
should be flexed just a bit above your waist . . . .

now start over , only this time when you plant your foot and
explode off the ground . . . as you approach your apex
bring the opposite knee to the same level as your
raised knee (like a seated position) and force
yourself to glide from one side to the other

man , i kid you not , i taught my son this a couple of years ago
he's been killing folks with not only the hanging reverse layups
but the jump , absorb contact and finish front side as well

with polee jr on the schedule twice this year , he's definitely
going to need it cause he know dwayne will text message
that crap into the seats and tell him about it afterwards

.
.

i know how folks are today so i've contemplated bringing my son
to the board for a long time now for fear of bragging or jinxing
i'd always said once someone other than myself mention his
name i'd do it , but even then i neglected to do so . . . .

but after last nite i just said fug it . . if you guys are interested
i'd gladly share with you his progression thru high school
that you can follow him and polee at maxpreps.com


Nice post. I felt it was very helpful and I wanted to ask your advice on like footwork and such. I would consider myself quite an athletic player (not in a cocky way) but in game situations I fail to use it. I find myself playing way below the rim and not finishing consistently. I am 5-10 i dont know my vert but I got my first dunk like a week ago. Have any tip on using my athleticism in games? Thanks.

[elementally morale]

bump
just because i still find this topic interesting

One more bump. I'm curious what you guys think about it now.

[elementally morale]

One more bump. I'd like to know what you guys think of this now.

[Ikill]

This is interesting i guess its just the natural ability i don't think athleticism and skills have anything related to talent. If you take a bunch a kids that don't how to play basketball there is going to be some players that stand out these players have natural basketball instincts court vision, first step, good footwork things that can not be taught. Why is lebron james so much better than josh smith theres no clear advantage lebrons more of a basketball player. Two other things that i think are related to talent are natural finishing ability just having a good touch around the net and ball handling i know you can work but theres players that look so much better at handling the ball there just smooth.

[Toizumi]

Some people are physically gifted and that's a talent..

There's something more important though.. most NBA players have been playing from a very young age. When kids practice (in any sport, at every level) there are always 1 or 2 that stand out. In some cases they just practice harder and put more effort into playing the game.. but in other cases they just have 'it' - They have great courtvision and they can find the open man or they know how to position themselves for the rebound. They just pick up things quicker than the other kids or excel in some parts of the game. This is talent.

Why is a player like Love or Howard already a great rebounder when he enters the league? They worked on their rebounding from a young age, yes.. but a lot of players have right? They also have the physical attributes and a feel for where to position themselves. More so than other kids, players. They just have 'it'. Rebounding is one of their talents.
Talent alone will not get you that rebound though, you have to fight for that board.. Effort, determination and hard work is very important too.

Vince has all the talent in the world. He's physically gifted, has a good feel for the game. He could (can) do it all... at a high level too. We all know it.. seen it. right? Something is just not there though, the last piece is missing and it's the determination, the confidence, something. But the talent was definitely always there.

[elementally morale]

Are you guys sure that a certain mindset cannot be regarded as talent? After all, not all mindsets are teachable, especially after a certain age.

[miamiandorlando]

ay ya dont get it but its okay brah. imma explain it to ya.

Everybody got raw talent for everything brah, just not in the same amount. Even da worst singer has talent to sing, just not as much as mariah carey.


sweet avey:cheers:

[Toizumi]

Are you guys sure that a certain mindset cannot be regarded as talent? After all, not all mindsets are teachable, especially after a certain age.

wiki

Talent means the skill that someone has quite naturally to do something that is hard

Going by that definition, I'd say yes, having discipline is a talent. Staying disciplined is hard for most people, but some just have it in them... It can be taught, but only to a certain extent.

[zORi]

Talent I would say is the ability to do some things exactly how they are supposed to be done, and do so naturally. Whether it's with effort or not, practice or not, that's not so important IMO.



I think that pretty much sums it up.

[me_]

To me_, talent is when a guy picks up a basketball with no practice and kicks another guys ass in a 1v1. Skill is when that guy practices enough to come back and beat the first guy

Also, you can be a naturally gifted shooter. Or you can develop a nice shot by working hard and practicing.

[DCL]

talent is having the natural ability to do certain things that most regular folks need years of training to acquire. heck, maybe they might train their entire lifetime and still never come to that understanding. but a talented person just gets it somehow rather quickly. kinda like singing or drawing or playing sports. some kids are just so far beyond their years and you know they haven't even lived long enough to understand the process but somehow they got a natural gift. practice may had played a certain role in helping make them become better, but they had extra mental/intellectual advantages in the first place.

[elementally morale]

BUMP

It's an old thread but there are always new ideas.

How would you define talent?

[andremiller07]

Talent to me is not athletic ability and things you can easily work on, but what comes natural to you, being able to do instinctive things that not many others can.

I look at it if you take away a player athletic ability and that player can still be very good due to a natural feel for the game and solid skills than I consider him to be talented.

E.g. Andre Miller is highly talented, the guy moves at a snail pace, has no jumpshot and can do just about whatever he wants on the floor due to a good feel for the game, understanding of how to use his body and a amazing ability to get into gaps.

Ginobili is another one, magical passes, can get into the lane whenver and just make plays you don't expect.

So in summing up talent to me is the natural ability to do things which does not rely on athletic ability but rather great instincts and feel for the game. Things you can't teach on a basketball floor to someone are talent.

Just because someone is not athletic does not mean they are not talented, in far more cases less athletic people that make it to the a high level in sport tend to be far more talented but obviously are not as good due to athletic ability being a beyond insane weapon.

Thats just my take but I could also see the other view where you include athletic ability as part of talent.

[stevieming]

Personally I think talent is more how a person reacts to a particular sport.

Shaq was made for basketball but he would be crap at football and tennis. His height, power, strength all suit him best for basketball.

Roger Federer has amazing hand to eye coordination and footwork which makes him GOAT at tennis, but he'll probably be no good at weight lifting, doesn't have the core strength, he could weight train for his whole life and probably never win an Olympic medal.

It's about how natural a sport comes to you, how it suits your body and your physical attributes best.

I never played rugby until I was 14, made school team after one game and played at a high level. I had a great feel for the game and scoring, good pace and strength and balance. The game was easy for me, knew what to do with the ball instinctively, how to beat my man and how to defend my man but got a back injury and gave the game up at 21, lost my love for the game from the injury.

I started playing basketball at 17 and been playing it non stop for the last 17 years, I've put endless hours of training and still I am nowhere close in terms of the level I was at in rugby. I am just an above average rec ball player. Even if I rewind and started playing at 7, had all the best training, I still won't be making pro in Europe.

Vince had talent man, he had oodles of physical talent. But he never bothered to tighten his handle, he didn't work tirelessly on his J, he didn't get a post game like Kobe, he didn't bother developing his footwork more like Kobe.

Physically he had more than Kobe, but mentally he wasn't on the same level.

Sometimes I think you can put mental attributes as talent as well. Kobe's drive, determination and dedication is rare.

Just like in tennis, Rafa's tenancity and mental strength. Dude is a mental giant, when the going gets tough he grits it out. Being mentally strong is so important in tennis, you have to consider that a talent!!

Where as in football, it's 90 minutes and you can hide on the pitch. You've got the team to fall back on, but in tennis the game is only over when you beat your opponent and there's no one else apart from you. So in football, being mentally strong is not as important, apart from when you have to take a penalty in pressure situations. (Look at England - pretty much always mental p *******...es)

[Burgz V2]

to me talent is any physical gift that is translated into production. if there is clear physical gifts and no production then that would be just potential.

[Jailblazers7]

I think it goes beyond athleticism. For example, James White and Jeremy Evans are great athletes but I dont consider them talented basketball players.

I think talent always comes to mind for me whenever a player can make something difficult looks easy. Isiah throwing a full court bounce pass, Vince spinning off a defender and gracefully dunking on someone, Lebron's passing out of a double team, Nash's off balance shots and floaters, etc. There is an amount of skill involved when I think about talent.

[eurobum]

Talent is, by definition, "natural" talent. From Oxford Dictionary:



talent |ˈtalənt|
noun
1 [ mass noun ] natural aptitude or skill: he possesses more talent than any other player | [ count noun ] : she displayed a talent for garden design.
• people possessing natural aptitude or skill: I signed all the talent in Rome | [ count noun ] : Simon is a talent to watch.

Funnily enough in terms of etymology it has to do with value of the talented. Makes sense.

ORIGIN Old English talente, talentan (as a unit of weight), from Latin talenta, plural of talentum ‘weight, sum of money’, from Greek talanton.

I digress.

[DatAsh]

Everything you mentioned is something for which a player may have a variable amount of talent.

Athletic abilities could be the result of talent, hard work, or a combination of both. What differentiates one player's talent from another's is how much work that player had to put forth, in comparison with the other player, to achieve the same end result.

The same can be said for any sort of on court "skill", like rebounding, scoring, passing. If two players work the same amount to improve their scoring ability, the more talented player will be the better scorer in the end.

Intelligence is no different.

[Eat Like A Bosh]

I define talent as being blessed with a natural instinct for the game or physical gifts. Something that isn't what you work on hours and hours in the gym, you could think of this like having good genes. Just something that's naturally gifted to you.

[elementally morale]

I define talent as being blessed with a natural instinct for the game or physical gifts. Something that isn't what you work on hours and hours in the gym, you could think of this like having good genes. Just something that's naturally gifted to you.

Is a tendency to work hard a natural instinct? Does work ethic have anything to do with your genes? It may.

[Eat Like A Bosh]

Is a tendency to work hard a natural instinct? Does work ethic have anything to do with your genes? It may.
Like people said, Talent definitely goes beyond athletic abilities or physical gifts. If you take away a player athletic ability and that player is still pretty good due to being natural at this game, then he is.

For instance, Shaq's unique size, strength and remarkable mobility for a guy that big could be considered a talent, also he stated in his book that he didn't start really playing basketball till high school, can't remember correct me if I'm wrong. It's evident that he picked up the game very quick despite not playing it for very long. For anyone with a fantastic natural instinct to the game, who learns that quick, can be considered talented. Ok, Shaq was a bad example, since his size was his major selling point, but I hope you get my point.

What you described is just being a hard worker. Having a great work ethic doesn't necessarily mean you are a natural. For example, say if I touched basketball when I was born, was playing since 3, practiced like 20 hours a week in the gym each week while in school, and still failed to make the Varsity Team in HS. Do I have a great work ethic? Heck yes. Am I talented? No not really.

[The_Yearning]

Personally I think talent is more how a person reacts to a particular sport.

Shaq was made for basketball but he would be crap at football and tennis. His height, power, strength all suit him best for basketball.

Roger Federer has amazing hand to eye coordination and footwork which makes him GOAT at tennis, but he'll probably be no good at weight lifting, doesn't have the core strength, he could weight train for his whole life and probably never win an Olympic medal.

It's about how natural a sport comes to you, how it suits your body and your physical attributes best.

I never played rugby until I was 14, made school team after one game and played at a high level. I had a great feel for the game and scoring, good pace and strength and balance. The game was easy for me, knew what to do with the ball instinctively, how to beat my man and how to defend my man but got a back injury and gave the game up at 21, lost my love for the game from the injury.

I started playing basketball at 17 and been playing it non stop for the last 17 years, I've put endless hours of training and still I am nowhere close in terms of the level I was at in rugby. I am just an above average rec ball player. Even if I rewind and started playing at 7, had all the best training, I still won't be making pro in Europe.

Vince had talent man, he had oodles of physical talent. But he never bothered to tighten his handle, he didn't work tirelessly on his J, he didn't get a post game like Kobe, he didn't bother developing his footwork more like Kobe.

Physically he had more than Kobe, but mentally he wasn't on the same level.

Sometimes I think you can put mental attributes as talent as well. Kobe's drive, determination and dedication is rare.

Just like in tennis, Rafa's tenancity and mental strength. Dude is a mental giant, when the going gets tough he grits it out. Being mentally strong is so important in tennis, you have to consider that a talent!!

Where as in football, it's 90 minutes and you can hide on the pitch. You've got the team to fall back on, but in tennis the game is only over when you beat your opponent and there's no one else apart from you. So in football, being mentally strong is not as important, apart from when you have to take a penalty in pressure situations. (Look at England - pretty much always mental p *******...es)

/End thread.

[wagexslave]

Talent = Natural born potential, whether physical or mental

Nothing more.

Talent means nothing unless it's utilized.

[elementally morale]

What do today's posters say? What's talent?

With the new UMVP this question gets a lot more interesting.

[Marchesk]

Talent = 10,000 hours of practicing the right way in any given field, according to Malcolm Gladwell.

He may allow for some exceptions when it comes to physical attributes. Obviously it helps that Shaq was naturally so big, and yet still athletic.

But take the GOAT. He worked as hard as anyone, and had an immense competitive drive. Jordan is the best all-time because he wanted it more than everyone else and worked harder on different parts of his game. There have been plenty of dudes who were 6'6 and could jump.

Curry is a talented shooter because he's worked so hard on his game, particularly 3 point shooting. And he's figured out a better way to shoot. Curry is a pioneer. Is that talent?

[elementally morale]

Talent = 10,000 hours of practicing the right way in any given field, according to Malcolm Gladwell.


Is the ability of being capable of putting that much effort into anything considered talent? Or being able to choose the field you are about to be putting the effort into?

[Marchesk]

Is the ability of being capable of putting that much effort into anything considered talent? Or being able to choose the field you are about to be putting the effort into?

Ever watch the movie Gattica? "There is no gene for the human spirit."

That's probably bull shit, because some people (maybe most of us), don't want to put that much effort into any one thing. But some have the drive, and more importantly, are able to stay motivated when the rest of us say, screw it, this ain't worth it.

Gladwell talks about how as a teenager, he was one of the best middle distance runners in Canada, and he was working out with someone who went on to be in the Olympics, but he decided it wasn't worth it to keep putting in that kind of effort, because he had other interests.

But I know that he's not quite right about talent, from my own experience. Take track and field. Some people are naturally good at certain events, and not others. I know this from experience. No amount of training was going to make me into a sprinter. And no amount of hard work would give a sprinter the ability to be a good miler. Different percentage of fast/slow twitch muscle at play.

[Marchesk]

It sounds crazy, but Usain Bolt would get destroyed by world class milers in the 1500 meters. State champion high school milers would probably beat him. No amount of hard work would give Usain Bolt the ability to run a sub 4 minute mile (not that most high schoolers ever do that, but to be world class ...).

So there is something to talent, at least when it comes to things which require specific raw physical ability.

[elementally morale]

Ever watch the movie Gattica? "There is no gene for the human spirit."

That's probably bull shit, because some people (maybe most of us), don't want to put that much effort into any one thing. But some have the drive, and more importantly, are able to stay motivated when the rest of us say, screw it, this ain't worth it.


I'm Hungarian. Back in the day there were two Hungarian swimmers, Krisztina Egerszegi and Tamas Darnyi, who won everything. They have like 9 Olympic Golds combined and Darnyi was unbeaten for like a decade.

What's more important to me though is noone remembers who the second best in Hungary (or in the world) was at the time. The runner-ups put in the same amount of effort, I'm sure.

Many kids put in the effort to become successful in the NBA. Few make it.

Do we call the winners 'more talented' when looking back?

[FKAri]

What do today's posters say? What's talent?

With the new UMVP this question gets a lot more interesting.

Haven't seen you post in forever. I remember you because your username gave me a mindfukc.

Anyway, talent is easy to see, harder to define, and harder still to quantify. Is X more talented than Y? One can never know.

Some things can be learned at a young age that are nearly impossible to learn as an adult. Early childhood (often up to the age of 5) are very impressionable and malleable years in the development of a person. It can make it seem like a person was born with that ability when in reality they simply picked it up very early in life (and I'm not considering time spent learning/practicing here just how early it happened). Does that count as talent? Can talent only be what you're born with? I don't know.

[BenchMob]

At first I was going to say that the most talented basketball player I have ever seen was Vince Carter, but then I had another idea.

Can you guys tell me what talent is?

When talking about talent, I see 'natural talent' and 'natural ability' mentioned all the time. But what is 'natural ability'? Is being tall considered talent? Is having huge hops more talent or more hard work? (Think of Barkley for example.) Is 'having a feeling for rebounding' an instinct (i.e.: talent) or mostly hard work? Or is it standing reach and hops? Is it agility?

What do you consider 'putting in the effort'? Is it a natural ability to be able to put in more work than others? I mean... can ANYONE put in more work than ANYONE else? I'm not sure it is mathematically possible... So putting in the 'extra hours' must have something to do with 'ability'.

Is being a smart player (like Nash) talent? Is it ability? Is it mostly due to hard work? Is being capable of deciding what you should work on a kind of 'talent'?

Are we sure that everything taken into account, the likes of Vince Carter and Rasheed Wallace are more talented than guys like Kobe Bryant, Shaquille O'Neal and Tim Duncan?

So what is talent?

(And please don't turn it into a Vice vs. Kobe debate, thank you.)

I would like to make a rough breakdown into percentages. Also I think when it comes to natural physical talent. The significance of each category depends on the position and type of player. So if you are a center. Height and size should matter more than to than a guard.

Physical natural talent = 70% (Height and Wingspan, Speed, Agility, Hand-Eye coordination, Size, Durability, Hand size, Vertical, etc.)

Instincts & Bball IQ = 15% (X and O's, Understanding of timing and flow, general feeling of the game, defensive and offensive positioning, being savvy , etc.)

Character = 15% (work ethic, killer instinct, ability to handle pressure, etc.)

[elementally morale]

Haven't seen you post in forever.

I was lurking. Didn't have much to say for a while. :cheers: