Most teams are mixtures of good and not-so-good. They usually don't have an abundance of geniuses but neither do they have villains.
There are teams, however, at the two extremes. The fortunate ones have acquired a sizable number of star performers. Taken as individuals, their members might not be stars but they work so well together they turn the team itself into a star. Such teams are joys to work with and to watch. You can see its members rising above their own individual level to boost the the others and the group as a whole.
The other extreme, however, is anything but inspirational. These teams aren't simply dysfunctional, they're composed of bad people. They might not be the type to rob a corner market but they don't blink at other ethical transgressions. Pettiness and back-stabbing are among their daily habits.
Now here's a question: In most cases, were these two extremes consciously assembled, did they naturally gravitate toward one another, or are they examples of how those who make hiring decisions often choose clones of themselves?