I think the case of Lyndon supports my view that the extent of this supposed "bouncing around" of players is negligible. If that is the best example then what are we all arguing about? I can't think of any negative outcomes from this case. Even his motivation for switching in each case has a clear and reasonable basis.

I reckon that getting the best players in the world, to worlds has value just as getting the best teams in the world, to worlds does. But hey, its all subjective and our views are the result of our experiences plus where each of us sit on the ideology vs. pragmatism scale.