No. Talent wins the majority of the time even when it's lazy.
You can work as hard as you want. You can have "heart" and "chemistry" but in the end talent wins more than it loses.
You have to define lazy, and you have to specify the activity.
Carl Lewis could probably out-run me every day of our lives without any training. But Cat Osterman would not have been even a decent college pitcher without a certain amount of work required to learn the craft.
As for lazy, what is lazy? A lot of kids we might call lazy are still playing 90 games a year and pitching 200 innings or getting 200 at-bats. So even if they're getting out-worked during the week, that's still a huge investment.
I agree w/ you that the slogan 'hard work beats talent ... ' can't be taken literally all the time. It's designed simply to make a point, or to inspire people. Similarly, I don't know if you can say talent usually wins. Depends on lots of factors.
Softball talent must be developed. So you have this hard work/talent relationship that is hard to define.