[stupac2]

Perhaps this is a pet peeve of mine.  It annoys me no end when I see failed late game execution that squanders a chance to win a game.  But even if Dawkins record is within the acceptable range for average performance, I still expect better.  I expect better than average.

I'm more familiar with football, but my guess is that the argument is similar in basketball. The point isn't that 0.500 is the "average" (that's trivially true since one team loses and the other team wins), the point is that 0.500 is everyone's average. There's generally no such thing as a team that consistently wins close games, and doing so is typically just fluky luck. This argument is backed up using historical data, and I believe is considered very strong in some sports, like baseball.

As I said I have no idea if this is considered true in basketball, but the logic seems to me to carry over just as well from other sports.

[stupac2]

Perhaps this is a pet peeve of mine.  It annoys me no end when I see failed late game execution that squanders a chance to win a game.  But even if Dawkins record is within the acceptable range for average performance, I still expect better.  I expect better than average.

I'm more familiar with football, but my guess is that the argument is similar in basketball. The point isn't that 0.500 is the "average" (that's trivially true since one team loses and the other team wins), the point is that 0.500 is everyone's average. There's generally no such thing as a team that consistently wins close games, and doing so is typically just fluky luck. This argument is backed up using historical data, and I believe is considered very strong in some sports, like baseball.

As I said I have no idea if this is considered true in basketball, but the logic seems to me to carry over just as well from other sports.