I think it requires a certain definition of "lazy" that basically translates to "delegate everything you possibly can" - which we all know can be hard work in itself.
Lazy clevers can be very useful in finding ineffeciencies and automating tasks
IME they are the first people to challenge assumptions about the way things are done, and the least happy with the answer "that's just the way we do it"
I would argue any hard working is not clever by definition. But the ones who are otherwise clever but have a blind spot on the hard working part - they are scary. How efficiently and how far they can get into completely wrong and unexpected direction before stopping to think the overall picture can be mindboggling. The hardworking idiots are useful as long as their direction is contained.
Lazy and clever can be very useful; sit around thinking about the potential break-down of a problem into aspects that generalise broadly and those specific to the work being done.
Spend the time that needs to be spent implementing the generalisable aspects, so that the work never needs to be repeated.
Implement the problem specific aspects (with minimal code) against those changes (and if any similar problems come up in the future, the changes can be made in minimal time and with minimal work).
2x2s can be really entertaining. One I've seen a lot covers the dimensions of lazy-hardworking and idiot-clever. The outcome is
* hardworking-clever: Ideal!
* lazy-idiot: don't need to worry, they'll not usually progress.
* lazy-clever: hmmm. not ideal but may still be useful from time to time.
* hardworking-idiot: bad! They can do a lot of damage
In truth there are usually more than two relevant dimensions.