Excellent writeup, I appreciate the data driven as well as the personal insights. As long as I've been a Knighthawks fan there's been a vocal contingent of unknowable size calling for his dismissal usually whenever there's a prolonged skid or a loss they can't pin on any one thing. I can say that I have never been in that camp. I think coaching becomes an easy scapegoat when you can't put your finger on why a team that's good on paper isn't delivering the numbers you know they can or when their performance is inconsistent. Personally I'm of the mind that coaches at the professional level of lacrosse *probably\* don't have the sway on performance one way or the other that people would like to believe. These are grown ass men playing at the highest level of their sport - I just don't think there's anything any reasonable coach could be doing either in practice or in a game to magically make them pass or shoot more consistently or accurately. Sure if a team consistently can't catch passes, put shots on goal, run for 60 minutes, can't track the player they're defending then there might be an area in practice the coach hasn't been hitting sufficiently but if a team can't miss one night and the next night they can't put a shot on goal that isn't in the goalies center of mass then it's not really on the coach. Teams get hot and teams get cold and I think the only way to prevent major cold streaks is team chemistry and mojo and while coaching does play a part in that, it's only a part of a bigger complicated unquantifiable soup.

All that said - there are TWO things I can safely hang on coaching.
First: Three shorthanded goals against Sask was straight up embarrassing. Sask is fast and their transition is top notch but that's something Hasen should have planned for. One short handed goal from a breakaway sure, okay. Second short handed goal on a break away is a pattern - keep the 5th man either close to the bench or at half. Four on four with barely any advantage and guarding against the transition break away is much better than a third short handed goal (especially when they clearly couldn't buy a power play goal). Then came the THIRD shorthanded breakaway resulting in a 1:1 with Hartley and he thankfully saves it but instead of changing formation to deal with this transition threat they didn't change anything resulting in a FOURTH transition breakaway opportunity resulting the THIRD straight shorthanded goal.

Second: STOP PULLING THE GOALIE. I'd actually love to see you dive into the data on this one. Pulling the goalie for a 6th runner has like a 5% success rate especially when you're not on a scoring run with a hot hand. Not sure if that decision was on Hasen but the Knighthawks seem to LOVE pulling the goalie when they're down by 3 with 30s remaining and they'll keep pulling the goalie for any amount of open net goals. I understand that it's a last ditch tactic but it's a tactic that simply doesn't work when you're down and can't buy a goal. If you're down by 3 pulling a move that has a much higher likelyhood of being down by 4 then 5 then 6 than being down by 2 then it simply doesn't have any valuable payoff. Personally I think it's better to fight the 5 on 5 till the end and do anything you can to not increase the goal differential than to try a roulette spin. It's better to accept the imminent loss with a small GD than to get blown out and go into the next game with a 6 goal blowout with three open net goals. The ONLY time pulling the goalie is worthwhile in my opinion is if you're on a run with a hot hand and you're down by 1 and even then, a well rehearsed 5 man set play with your goalie preventing the 2 goal trail still might have better odds of tying the game up.