We've had frustrating tournament losses before in my time as a 'Cuse fan, obviously, but this was a new and different kind of frustrating. We didn't use our best lineup enough and basically everybody who could contribute on offense was WAY off.
Not having the talent to generate offense against that defense? Fair enough. But Boeheim leaving Kadary on the bench too much? Super frustrating.
Buddy having a bad shooting night because Houston is great defensively? Fair enough. But a couple of those turnovers were cringe-worthy.
Marek getting outmuscled by better athletes? Ok, but with Edwards on the bench? Ugh.
It was so obvious when we went to Kadary and Edwards in the first half that U of H wasn't ready for it. Sampson was screaming and yelling at his team, we were disrupting them at the defensive end, and we were generating some offense and drawing fouls. We were taking them out of a good game plan and comfort zone.
If we stuck with that and fell short, at least we'd know we had no shot. Going out this way feels gross.
I also would have liked to see us focus more on the offensive end with the lineup. The zone wasn't confusing them or denying them opportunities. They were running good stuff and getting decent looks more often than most do against us, but they're just not a good shooting team. So giving up a little length and athleticism on the wing by moving Buddy to the 3 might not have made a big difference defensively, and could have helped us score more.
It's the catch-22 of Jim Boeheim, though. You get all the benefits of the zone, and often get teams peaking at the perfect time, but when you draw a bad matchup in the tourney and need to do something creative, he's too stubborn and can't deviate from his modus operandi.
Unfortunately it's hard to win six NCAA tourney games in a row without breaking character or making some adjustments to survive a bad matchup.
I think at halftime it was clear there were a couple strategies to employ:
1. Maximize minutes for Kadary and Edwards, and have Kadary create offense from his penetration.
2. Aggressively try to get U of H in more foul trouble, especially Grimes. Getting their only real shooter on the bench let's us play different lineups thinking offense first instead of defense first.
3. As a last ditch, let Buddy and JG just start chucking up threes from deeeeep.
But instead Boeheim stuck to his script, which was hard to watch. You had two great defensive teams that were offensively limited. It became clear we were holding them to like 60-65 because they couldn't shoot, but that meant we needed to score 61-66. We needed to think offense first, and that's just not the way Boeheim operates. And they weren't confounded enough by the zone to give us turnovers and easy buckets. If you stop the tape on their possessions just before the shot goes up, they were really effective against the 2-3.
It also makes me wonder about the preparation. That look we see from other teams that clearly aren't ready for our zone? Yeah, that's how we looked against Houston's aggressive man-to-man defense early on. Completely unprepared.
Ultimately, it's hard to watch a game like that and not wonder what the ceiling is on this era of Syracuse basketball. If we're not getting top notch recruits who can create their own offense against elite defenders and/or we're not playing our best lineup or making in-game adjustments, can a Boeheim team compete against the top 5-10 teams in the country on the biggest stage?
I guess our best hope is better recruiting/transfers.