Short of that, a Fishers T-Test helps investigate a 2-way table like this. Given 48 wins and 41 losses in non-Crawford games and 2 wins and 16 loses in Crawford games, the p-value for the two-tail test is 0.0013. This means, if we assume that Crawford had no affect on those games (this was random), and we wanted to be 99% sure of our conclusion, we would reject the hypothesis. Crawford is a statistically significant variable when considering the Maverick's win-loss record.

It doesn't mean he causes losses, but I cannot conclude that Crawford is an independent variable. The correlation between Crawford and Mavericks losses is not a random occurrence.

Example: given a purely random distribution and a large enough sample, it is inevitable that one day a terrible basketball team will win all 82 games by more than 10 points a game. Should that prevent us from evaluating how good a team is based on their wins and win margin? No. Because it's more likely that there is a cause behind their success than it is that it was random.

http://www.xkcd.com/882/

History occurs in two ways. Conspiratorially or Accidentally. Your piece clearly shows that numerically this was obviously no accident. So of course there was conspiracy!

Numbers rarely lie. I've always brought up the Miami series when discussion of referee involvement arises. Wade became a superstar at the stripe on phantom calls that generally occurred away from the basket. The players who set records for FT attempts are guys that the opponent wants to put at the stripe at the end of games like Shaq or Howard, not players who are hitting 90% like Wade in that series.

But for me it isn't as simple as examining the individual referee, in this case Mr. Crawford. No conspiracy is as simple as placing the blame on one individual. It's like blaming the president for all the worlds problems when there are so many forces in play. Crawford is just one piece in what is probably a complicated process.

The NBA powers that be have to be considered the major players in this conspiracy as they keep putting refs in situations where they know it creates justified questioning. To believe that they are unaware of Crawford's, and every referees scenario, is short sighted. The NBA is nothing more than an entertainment business and they attempt to control as much of the production as possible.

As a fan of the game and the League, it is a bit tough to swallow to think players can be relegated to be little more than puppets in an elaborate play. However, it is one more reason why comparing championship rings when comparing individual players is irrelevant...