Team players vs. competitive players

[teammom2]

I agree with your descriptions if those are the extreme ends of the spectrum. Most players will be in the middle. Hopefully having a desire and drive to win while also staying humble and remembering the team. I don't think the 2 types of players are exclusively one or the other.

 

[coachjwb]

Interesting discussion, but I guess I disagree with the notion that this is a continuum. I supposed it's in how each was defined, but it implies that a competitive team player is less competitive than a non-team player, and vice versa. These are both important traits of players, and no doubt that many players tend to lean one way or the other, but any time you try to stereotype people into certain groups, you make generalizations that just aren't true for a lot of the population.

 

[BT3100]

"To win. Nothing else matters, and nothing else will do." - Sandy Koufax

 

[CoogansBluff]

Interesting discussion, but I guess I disagree with the notion that this is a continuum. I supposed it's in how each was defined, but it implies that a competitive team player is less competitive than a non-team player, and vice versa. These are both important traits of players, and no doubt that many players tend to lean one way or the other, but any time you try to stereotype people into certain groups, you make generalizations that just aren't true for a lot of the population.

And that was a question to be asked, whether it's a continuum, or whether those traits are independent of each other. I do think some players have both, so there is some independence. It's just my observation that players often are just a smidge more one or the other.

It's similar to a thing that I noticed when I was very involved in tennis. I was around a number of elite junior players. I often asked them why the liked tennis, how they got into it. Some would say they tried team sports when they were younger but were drawn to tennis because of the one-on-one competition, the fact that it was all on their racket, didn't have to depend on anybody else, they were highly competitive, loved trying to improve their ranking, etc.. But others seemed to 'tolerate' the individual aspect of tennis and talked of how their goal was college tennis, when it became a team sport and winning/losing actually meant something (to them).

I don't know which type made a better college player. Both probably did just fine, as long as they had a little of the other quality. Bu if you're totally one or the other, maybe not so good.

 

[BobInMadison]

I think these are non exclusive traits.
Some kids are more team oriented than others, some more competitive than others. A particular girl could be both or neither.
It make sense that some girls will show more of one trait than another.
DD 3 is very competitive, but is also pretty much a team player. Consider circle time. No pitcher should want to leave the circle. Any pitcher not competitive enough to want the ball is probably hurting her team.
If DD is pitching badly and is taken out of the circle, she might whine to me later, but she will understand. OTOH if she is pitching well and the team loses because an inferior pitcher is put in the circle, she will be quite unhappy.

 

[Easton33]

And that was a question to be asked, whether it's a continuum, or whether those traits are independent of each other. I do think some players have both, so there is some independence. It's just my observation that players often are just a smidge more one or the other.

It's similar to a thing that I noticed when I was very involved in tennis. I was around a number of elite junior players. I often asked them why the liked tennis, how they got into it. Some would say they tried team sports when they were younger but were drawn to tennis because of the one-on-one competition, the fact that it was all on their racket, didn't have to depend on anybody else, they were highly competitive, loved trying to improve their ranking, etc.. But others seemed to 'tolerate' the individual aspect of tennis and talked of how their goal was college tennis, when it became a team sport and winning/losing actually meant something (to them).

I don't know which type made a better college player. Both probably did just fine, as long as they had a little of the other quality. Bu if you're totally one or the other, maybe not so good.

I would say one is easier to quantify than the other and thus gives an impression one has more of a certain trait than the other. You can hear comments and see actions but you can't know how one player feels about her team and what to what extent she would sacrifice for her team. So the outwardly more competitive (Type A to the max) player may be just as willing to sacrifice for the team as the other player. She just shows the one trait more than the other because she can show how she feels about her team.
I think a good example here is a girl I have on my team. You would think by all outward signs she is your labeled "competitive" player. Sometimes I think I should pat her down to make sure she isn't carrying a switch blade or something. She is not overly friendly with anyone, she almost seems like she dislikes everyone on the team. She works hard to do better and definitely checks her progress vs other pitchers and makes sure she is on top. Honestly I thought she was the one kid that would leave because she wanted more competitive team. (We do fine though) Anyway, on several occasions she has made comments here and there about how much she loves her team and turned down some offers from other programs to stay with her team. Totally unexpected and made me proud of her. I did not know she felt that way and I am sure I do not fully grasp how dedicated she is to her team. She would be your definition of the competitive player but she is more of an introvert and doesn't show her team player side often.

 

[Greenmonsters]

And that was a question to be asked, whether it's a continuum, or whether those traits are independent of each other. ......

Two different spectra IMO. Team First Player v. Me First Player and Competitive v. Non-Competitive

 

[BobInMadison]

Think about some of the all time great team players.
They also worked harder than anyone else and were ultra competitive.

Examples:
Bart Starr
Pete Rose
Larry Bird
Magic Johnson

And many others.

 

[Momo'sDad]

I'm thinking along the same lines as GM - that a better discussion would be team first vs me first players and highly competitive vs less competitive players. It's your working hypothesis, true, but I think you may have lumped too many overlapping characteristics under each label you chose. In TB and HS, I think there are players out there who will aggressively dive for every ball they think they can reach, while there are a lot more players who won't. Likewise, there are players who are more concerned with organizing team bonding events - sleepovers, parties, movies, etc - than they are with making sure that they don't ever leave the field with a clean uniform. Some players will link their self-worth in part to their softball field performance, while others will link more of their self-worth in part to their relationships with teammates and coaches.

Each type of players can bring a lot of value to any program they're a part of, but that doesn't necessarily mean that every program will be a good fit for them or vice-versa. And as players grow and their skills and personalities develop, the best fit for them is also likely to evolve.

 

[Mocoso]

Im not keen on trying to shoehorn kids into TEAM vs COMPETITIVE... reality is that a great player needs to have BOTH traits but if Im going to have a rotten apple I much rather it be one that is on the extreme side of TEAM than competitive...I dont need a selfish brat that expects or demands things... its pure poison to a team and a sure recipie for a losing season...

To answer OP:
are these characterizations helpful? I dont think its helpful as a black and white bucket but as general spectrum when assessing players maybe
Do you see players who resemble this? I see every kid have some traits of both and the ones that are ALWAYS the bigger problem are the overly competitive ones... its not an individual sport.. I dont need shortstop running to second base position to steal glory type of players....
The team player who could be more competitive, or the competitor who could be more team-oriented?
For every team player that needs to be more competitive, I see 9 players that need to chill and be more team oriented but then again all I have to do is listen to the parents to realize where the selfish attitude is coming from...