skill vs. talent

[Josh Ozersky <josh_ozersky@xxxxxxxxx>]

It's an important distinction.  I remember first
thinking about it in the late 80s, when someone made a
reference to Larry Bird's skills deteriorating.  I
thought that was dumb -- skills can't deteriorate.  In
fact, skills can deteriorate, as the mind and muscles
which implement them no longer allow execution (e.g.
the chess master's inability to concentrate as he once
did, or the aging forwards tired legs and stiff back
keeping him from hitting his shot.)

Still, the distinction is one well worth making. 
Skills, to my mind, are the acquired techniques, both
fundamental and advanced, which constitute the
player's craft.  The most basic of these are shooting,
dribbling, and passing, but they would also include
any "trick" moves a player might practice, such as
Iverson's carry/crossover, or George Gervin's finger
roll.

Talent, on the other hand, consists in physical feats
that can be neither learned nor duplicated.  Shaq's
ability to dunk on three guys, Iverson's ability to
make fallaway three-pointers, John Stockton's
peripheral vision:  you can't teach these, and you
can't coach them either.

That, to me, is the difference between skill and
talent.  Bird was the most skilled player I ever saw;
Shaq is the most talented.  Michael Jordan had the
greatest levels of skill and talent I ever saw in one
player.

Josh 
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com