Don't mind me mate, I'm doing an acquisition of skill unit at the moment so I have to be a dick when it comes to using 'correct' terminology
Respectfully disagree. You're looking at this from a physical training perspective. A coach is more concerned with intangibles. The biggest factor in a fighter becoming good is experience. The biggest predictor of success is how much the boxer boxes. A fighter who keeps losing will eventually start winning, thus justifying the coach's sus[icion of potential. You can't know a fighter has what it takes until they've stuck at it a while. Plenty of people come in exceptionally fit or quick, some can hit really hard, but none of that is a predictor that they'll become any better than the ordinarily skilled kid who just sticks with it.
Potential can mean many things. Can the guy take a punch, is he fast, strong, good footwork, good cardio etc etc etc. You'll have to explain how a coach can work out potential from something intangible. A good coach should be able to see potential before a boxer starts having fights. Obviously. But that has nothing to do with potential. No. But it means because of the higher level attributes they have in certain areas they have the potential to be better than most. Hence they have potential.