People like telling the story of the team who started going one way and ended up somewhere else, successfully, because it conforms to their idea that some kind of attribute must be a discriminating factor (in this case the team is that factor). But I simply don't know if that's a true statement or not. I'd bet that many times it's just a dice roll whether team X can handle as many pivots that are necessary to make it all in one go. That's from my observations of lots of teams, but it's just a guess.
GP hit the nail on the head: good entrepreneurship means knowing when to hang on and when to iterate. And there are no books for that one.
I think that because our brains love order, and because we're always trying to put order on everything we see even if it's not there, we take lots of cognitive leaps to build some kind of mental model on "what it takes to succeed". With the "great teams succeed" model, the brain has a field day because selection bias and circular reasoning is in full-force. Whatever your model is, however, it should include the role of chance or you're likely to be really disappointed. And life is too short to get so distraught over the part that chance takes in getting started.