What makes a good coach?

Jack Daniels in his book, "the Jack Daniels Running Formula" states that he has coached four types of athletes.  He describes them as follows:

Type One:  Has natural talent and high motivation.
Type Two:  Has natural talent and low motivation.
Type Three:  Has little natural talent and high motivation.
Type Four:  Has little natural talent and low motivation.

In his experience, type one becomes the athlete most successful.  He finds that the type two athlete can be frustrating to coach, and it is possible to sometimes covert them into a type one athlete.  Many coaches hold out for this experience, because they know this athlete has "the potential" to succeed.  Then there is the type three athlete.  These athletes don't frustrate the coach as much as they frustrate themselves.  If you are an experienced coach, you are familiar with this type of athlete.  They try and try, but are never the top athlete.  They often overtrain and frequently become injured.  The type four athlete, often drops out of the sport, regardless of the coaches best efforts to help them succeed.  A lot can be learned from Daniel's categorization of his athletes.  For example, if coaching a type one athlete, success is inevitable.  So much to the point of where the athlete rises above others easily with very little effort.  After all, natural talent can just take them to the top if there are few others with the same natural ability around to challenge them.  A type three athlete however has a different problem.  A type three athlete lacks the natural ability, so in order for them to get to the top, they have to find ways to compensate for their lack of natural ability.  This means training more, working harder, training smarter, and squeezing everything possible out of their coaches.  If you compare the road to success with climbing a mountain, it is easy to see that the type one athlete will most likely get their first.  Who will arrive next, maybe a race between a type two and a type three athlete.  The type two athlete will have the natural talent and the type three athlete will have the motivation.  Motivation is much easier to acquire than natural talent, so based on logistics, the type two athlete should arrive next.  If you are the coach of these athletes, then you should take credit for helping the type two athlete find the motivation to be successful.  And in the case of where second place goes to the type three athlete, then you should consider yourself "coach of the year" because you have helped the type three athlete compensate for their lack of natural talent, which is a very challenging task.  If you sat down and interviewed Jack Daniels about his opinion on the future of these athletes, he will tell you that type one athletes should become professionals.  Type two athletes should become "masters" athletes.  Type three athletes should become coaches, and type four athletes should just participate in the sport for the "health and well being" benefits.

So back to the original question, what makes a good coach?  There is a saying:  "the best athletes don't always make the best coaches."  Why is that?  If the road to success is an easy one, you might end up getting to the top, without actually knowing how you got there.  If you don't know how you got there, how are you going to explain it to other people.