[BostonCard]

From a statistical perspective, you cannot argue that a 22-29 (which is what we have) is all that different from a coin flip.  Yeah, we've lost more close games than would be expected, but if you flipped a coin 51 times, you'd wind up with 22 or fewer heads about 20% of the time (per the binomial distribution).  It is hard to argue that this reflects a systematic problem with Dawkins.  I'm not defending him; I think his overall performance over a large enough sample size has been deficient enough to warrant a new coach, but I wouldn't use the "close game metric" as an indictment of his coaching.

BC

[BostonCard]

From a statistical perspective, you cannot argue that a 22-29 (which is what we have) is all that different from a coin flip.  Yeah, we've lost more close games than would be expected, but if you flipped a coin 51 times, you'd wind up with 22 or fewer heads about 20% of the time (per the binomial distribution).  It is hard to argue that this reflects a systematic problem with Dawkins.  I'm not defending him; I think his overall performance over a large enough sample size has been deficient enough to warrant a new coach, but I wouldn't use the "close game metric" as an indictment of his coaching.

BC