On the other hand not having Michael Jordan-like talent would be a good reason to discourage a teenager from practicing basketball for hours a day at the expense of their studies.
Jordan didn't have Jordan talent as a youth. He didn't make his varsity team as a sophomore. But I heard he was always the first one in and the last one out of the gym. The hard work seems to have paid off.
Potentially yes. But I would not agree in all cases. Does the teenager enjoy the activity? That could be reason enough for him to pursue it. And there's shades of grey here we're not addressing... OK so he doesn't have Jordan's innate talent, but does that necessarily mean he has no chance at all of pursuing a pro Basketball career? Of course not. There are many still valid and useful skill levels between the two extremes of "not fit for the NBA" and "Michael Jordan".
"not fit for the NBA" is not extreme, it is normal. Anyone who plays in NBA is highly skilled highly above average individual.
Certainly. But if we're viewing the scope of the spectrum under discussion as covering the skill levels of the people who play in the NBA - which was pretty clearly my intent in that instance - then they are the two extremes. I'm not sure how anyone could interpret my statement as meaning that the group of elite athletes playing pro Basketball in the US are not exceptional. But if that needed clarification, fair enough.