Honest assessment vs. Kentucky

[IthacaMatt]

I don't think we would have beaten them last night, if we had Fab and were still playing. I think Joseph really regressed in the last month or so of the year, and if Dion had trouble scoring against Sullinger, I think he would have had even more trouble getting to the rim against these guys. Without those 2 guys playing really well, we don't win that game.

They were like us in that they played great defense around the rim without fouling (well, except for our game v. Tosu). I thought their guards were the weak link of their lineup, but if Lamb hit a handful of 3's against us like he did last night, that would have been the difference.

 

[orangenirvana]

I really would have liked to have seen if those young Wildcats could have been productive against the greatest zone defense of all-time.

 

[IthacaMatt]

I really would have liked to have seen if those young Wildcats could have been productive against the greatest zone defense of all-time.

I thought going into a matchup with Kentucky, our advantage would be at guard, and that Teague was the weak link, in particular. But, apart from that stretch where they had 6 TO's early in the 2nd half to give Kansas a little life, he played pretty composed. We might have pushed Lamb out farther, but he has been pretty good (underrated) for them all year.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I don't think we would have beaten them last night, if we had Fab and were still playing. I think Joseph really regressed in the last month or so of the year, and if Dion had trouble scoring against Sullinger, I think he would have had even more trouble getting to the rim against these guys. Without those 2 guys playing really well, we don't win that game.

They were like us in that they played great defense around the rim without fouling (well, except for our game v. Tosu). I thought their guards were the weak link of their lineup, but if Lamb hit a handful of 3's against us like he did last night, that would have been the difference.

If we had played them, I would like to have seen JB try James at the 5. We could then have our 3,4&5 out on the arc. If James is shooting well, you gotta guard our guys. I would like our guards getting to the rim w/o Davis there. Would have been fun.

Sent from my Vortex using Tapatalk

 

[longislandcuse]

Dion had trouble in the OSU game but I would venture to say that barely being able to play due to foul trouble was the bigger culprit. He never got a rhythm.

 

[IthacaMatt]

One difference between us and Kansas is that we could run with Kentucky and Kansas damn near got run off the floor when they tried to in the first 10 minutes. That would have been the way to get Dion going.

 

[armory]

I'm as over last season as it gets so I feel quite comfortable that this is an objective unbiased opinion: The way their team was designed I honestly don't think they could've handle the zone.

They were a team built to out-man you one-on-one with size/speed/strength. They let anyone drive to the basket and either kick out or attempt a shot then they would use their athleticism to crash the boards. While the latter still applies against a zone, the former wouldn't, and the zone would have been a nightmare for their offense. "Dribble, Drive" falls flat against a zone. They would have been relegated to mid-long range shots and 2nd chance pts.

On the other end of the court, their primary weapon was Davis' ability to neutralize any inside shots ... but our team had almost no interior offense. The pts in the paint that we did get came from KJ, Dion and Scoop on penetration along with CJ's mid range shots. However... KJ had very a unconventional release that confused defenders while drawing fouls more often than scoring pts, Scoop had a relatively consistent crafty & unblockable floater, and Dion was incomparably adept at maneuvering the ball away from defenders' reach. So, in theory, Kentucky's primary advantage on defense would be pretty well cancelled out.

As for intangibles... UK liked to run, but nobody ran the floor better than we did and we turned the ball over less. It would've come down to, "can Kentucky make enough 3s, or get enough rebounds to give them a large enough possession advantage?"

 

[SoBeCuse]

I thought going into a matchup with Kentucky, our advantage would be at guard, and that Teague was the weak link, in particular. But, apart from that stretch where they had 6 TO's early in the 2nd half to give Kansas a little life, he played pretty composed. We might have pushed Lamb out farther, but he has been pretty good (underrated) for them all year.

Yeah, we would need better ball handlers at the F spots to compete with them and obviously a skilled post presence. Can you imagine Joseph trying to put his NBA dribble routine attempts on Kidd-Gilchrist?! Davis and Jones each get 5 blocks. The zone could do some good work against them and push Lamb out like you say but I honestly think we struggle to score 50-55 points on them with or without Fab.

 

[Knicks411]

On the other end of the court, their primary weapon was Davis' ability to neutralize any inside shots ... but our team had almost no interior offense. The pts in the paint that we did get came from KJ, Dion and Scoop on penetration along with CJ's mid range shots. However... KJ had very a unconventional release that confused defenders while drawing fouls more often than scoring pts, Scoop had a relatively consistent crafty & unblockable floater, and Dion was incomparably adept at maneuvering the ball away from defenders' reach. So, in theory, Kentucky's primary advantage on defense would be pretty well cancelled out.

This is a good point, especially about us not posting anybody up, but I have to say, maybe it was because I went to the game and had a different vantage point, but watching the game on Saturday, it was crazy how many Louisville shots he altered. They ended up taking these horrendously high floaters that had pretty much no chance of going in. It was really impressive how intimidating he was.

 

[HyattsCuse]

I'm as over last season as it gets so I feel quite comfortable that this is an objective unbiased opinion: The way their team was designed I honestly don't think they could've handle the zone...

As for intangibles... UK liked to run, but nobody ran the floor better than we did and we turned the ball over less. It would've come down to, "can Kentucky make enough 3s, or get enough rebounds to give them a large enough possession advantage?"

My objective opinion pretty much hits on that last passage. Unfortunately, I think Kentucky would have absolutely crushed us on the boards after watching the likes of MKG, Davis, and Jones hit the glass. Combine that with the way Lamb was stroking it from outside last night, I honestly don't think we'd have much of a chance. 'Cuse would have to have one of their days where they are hitting everything from the field to offset the rebounding advantage UK would have had.

 

[ForeverOrange]

I agree with this. Also it seemed down the stretch we were not playing good ball, even with Fab, if I had to be absolutely honest, we just did not have the look of a champion. Kentucky had answers at every position, the weakest link to me was Teague, and to be honest in the tournament he was quite steady, didn't try to do too much and let the stars get their shots.

Everyone assumes we would have beat Ohio St had we had Fab to nullify Sullinger, but I seem to remember Sullinger being on the bench for the entire half and the best we could do was tie them. Fab wasn't very affective against Gates, matter fact he got burned quite a few times really bad, so whose to say he would have done much better against Sullinger.

All in all Kentucky played up to their potential, nobody is shocked they won, but if their recruiting and end of the season results remain the same, the college game will lose that feeling of anyone can win it, and that will suck.