Which is More Important: Baseball Skills or Athleticism?

I was watching the Tigers and Twins last night on the tube and I heard Rod Allen talking about how the Twins organization prefers to go after ballplayers rather than the better athletes. Initially, the comment puzzled me. I mean, in order to be a ballplayer, doesn’t one need to be a good athlete?

After a moment, as I waited for the finish of my Samuel Adams BlackberryWitbier to placate my palate, I realized Allen was right. Brandon Inge is, without a doubt, the best athlete on the Tigers roster—dammit, he just looks like a ballplayer. If anyone doubts his athleticism, just watch him play third base. He gets to balls at which most third basemen only manage to wave as it passes them. If he has four errors this early in the season, it’s because that athleticism enables him to get to balls others can’t—or don’t in an effort to avoid misplaying a ball.

Yet, much as I like Inge, he is far from being the best ballplayer on the roster, as evidenced by his anemic numbers at the plate the past two years—low .200s. Granted, this year he’s worked hard, changed his stance, has a new approach at the dish, and he’s being rewarded: he’s been hitting above .300 since the season began. Whether opposing pitchers can figure out how to get him out, and whether he can make the appropriate adjustments to remain effective, remains to be seen. He has the potential to be a better than average ballplayer, if he can maintain his offensive output.

On the other side, you have Miguel Cabrera, who looks anything but like a ballplayer, who lacks foot speed and possesses little of the grace of a natural athlete. Yet this kid can hit not only for power (which is his forte), but for average, too. He was hitting over .700 the first week of the season. Opposing pitchers can only hope to contain him for a game; it’s rare that he’s ineffective for an entire series. He’s scuffling a bit now, but he carried Detroitfor most of last season, after a slow April as he learned American League pitching, but he’s quick to figure out what pitchers are doing and make adjustments. He’s also made some spectacular plays at first base but still has a lot to learn when it comes to letting second baseman Placido Polanco make the play in the hole instead of relying on the pitcher to cover the bag while he makes the play.

And speaking of Polanco, he’s another ballplayer who exhibits little athleticism but who almost always gets the barrel of the bat on the ball. He can hit behind the runner almost at will and sprays the ball to all fields. He’ll never hit twenty homeruns, but he can hit with occasional pop. Defensively, he’s solid—went more than a season without committing an error in 2007-08. Polanco, in my mind, is a ballplayer.

All of which led me to consider which is more important when assembling a major league team: ballplayers or athletes? Personally, I think you need a little of both, but frankly, I think I’d lean toward assembling a greater number of ballplayers. I look at a team like the Yankees and I see more gifted athletes than I do ballplayers, and they haven’t won a championship since 2000. Does that prove my point? I’m not sure. I think, with so many athletes on their team, Joe Torre was the best manager, and his loss, in my opinion, is costing them wins.

I’m curious: What do you think is more important—athleticism or baseball skills?