Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a counterpoint: http://pmarca-archive.posterous.com/the-pmarca-guide-to-star... TL;DR Market is more important than team. Of course, trying to estimate the market of something totally new (or sorta new) like Twitter is hard. What market does it enter/disrupt? Social networking? Blogging? Edit: Example is Odeo. Just about the same team as Twitter... Crappy market as it turns out.
I tackled that exact question in a post about my experience on the Odeo team at the start of Twitter. My conclusion was that the phrasing was wrong. What matters most for a product? Market. What matters most for a company? Team. Odeo the product failed because there was no market for it. Odeo the company produced a great win with Twitter because it had the right team to do something like that. A little more depth her…
"A good team, that listens to its customers, is going to find a good market and put together a good product for that market."
This is true. But, Andreeson is looking as an investor-- he invest once a team has settled on a market--- when it's oftentimes too late to change directions so radically. Ev did the sensible thing when Twitter was looking promising-- he effectively put Odeo on the shelf and started a fresh company with a fresh cap table.
A lot of founders don't have that option (after they've taken money) and are forced to pivot within their market. So a good team can be constrained by investment/inertia.