[Billy Bibbit]

As I said in the other thread, it's a dumb theory because the very criteria that he uses to decide who is a "gold medal superstar" are already biased in favor of players on great teams. Guys like Bryant, McGrady and Garnett have all played for lottery teams at one point and none of them received any MVP consideration during those respective seasons.

I could summarize the theory in three sentences. Every year that you're a great player on a great team, you get points. If you get enough points, I'll call you a "gold medal superstar." The only way you can be a great team is if you have at least one great player who plays for a great team. It's a tautology.

The Jazz are doing just fine, and if they win a title people will think of Deron Williams and Carlos Boozer as being in the upper echelon of NBA players (and honestly, I'm not sure that Boozer isn't up there already). I might give them a 25% chance of winning a title in the next five years, which is pretty good considering that they don't have a Tim Duncan (edit: and their chances of getting a guy like that by blowing up the team would be much less than 25%). 10 years is too long; there's no way to know whether Williams and Boozer will even be on the Jazz for that long.