I know you lean toward the chicken little crowd, but still. . . First of all, I don't know why you say those games were draws, they weren't. They won 4 out of 5 of them. There's a difference between winning and losing. While it's also true that you want a team that purports to be a threat to go deep into March to put teams away, the only one of those games (besides Stanford) that I ever really thought they were going to lose was Florida. Maryland, BC, Indiana - they controlled the game for long stretches and let an inferior team creep back in at the end. There's a difference between that and getting controlled by those teams for 38 minutes and then stealing a win.
I understand your point, that we did, in fact, have the lead for the majority of those games, and therefore appeared to be the better team. But you could also argue that since the scores in each of those games ended up just about even, the other team played better than we did for just about an equal amount of the game.
Maybe it is more a question of lack of killer instinct rather than lack of talent/execution, but if so, that's the sort of issue that's going to plague us throughout the year. You can learn how to run better plays or rotate on defense. The inclination to step on a team's throat and end a game going away is innate, it's not something you can coach. I think a lot of it stems from Shabazz's personality. He hits a lot of big shots when we're down and we desperately have to have one. But when we're winning he seems to ease up and take his foot off the gas, get lackadaisical. He doesn't really get locked in until it's absolutely necessary.
It's a dangerous way to go through a season, coasting to wins (if that is actually what they're doing). It leaves the door open for a lot of bad luck -- or in the case of Florida, sometimes leaves us relying on good luck.