The study was conducted on basketball, baseball, and soccer. Interesting read, though I wonder how it would apply to football.
The results were most notable for how they differed among sports. In soccer and basketball, the researchers found, adding superstars was productive ā up to a point. But once a team consisted of more than about two-thirds superstars, its performance would begin to suffer, with fewer wins than would be expected, given the caliber of its talent.
But in baseball, the data showed, team performance did not decline, no matter how many stars were clustered on a roster.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/a-tipping-point-for-too-much-talent/
The results were most notable for how they differed among sports. In soccer and basketball, the researchers found, adding superstars was productive ā up to a point. But once a team consisted of more than about two-thirds superstars, its performance would begin to suffer, with fewer wins than would be expected, given the caliber of its talent.
But in baseball, the data showed, team performance did not decline, no matter how many stars were clustered on a roster.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/a-tipping-point-for-too-much-talent/
