What were the doogman and spadoFS's excuses for why Zach Lavine never even sniffed UW?

Two things that absolutely crack me up are the opinions that are made by watching AAU tournaments (which are glorified pickup games that showcase talent) and summer scrimmage watching (which are also glorified pickup games where the only defensive accountability comes if there's actually people who give a shit about it and care about winning in those settings versus getting their work in). Beach and company put a lot of stock into both ... which is just downright comical.

Nothing was ever as fucktarded as saying that we deserved to be in the NCAAs for winning the conference and then getting bounced by Oregon St with a terrible profile. I somewhat understand Larry Scott saying as much recently that UW should have been in that year ... because that's his job to put out positive PR for the conference ... but being realistic about what is going on is another story. That was a talented team that vastly underachieved throughout the year and in all honesty hadn't done anything (other than winning the regular season title in a BS conference) to warrant a selection. The fact that so many still get butthurt about that one is crazy.

IF it was obvious that Lavine was going to the NCAA after one year no matter what, then I can understand why Romar passed on him given the Tony Wroten experiment. However, to say that Lavine wasn't talented was ridiculous. He's got a very smooth stroke with his main problems being that of most freshman (not knowing how hard you have to work defensively and the nuances of playing basketball at a high level being tied more to what you are doing without the ball than what you are doing with the ball).

Also, the downright criticism and hatred of Miller is ridiculous. His track record as a coach both on and off the court is at a high level. He's built highly rated recruiting classes. He's advanced deep in the NCAAs with two different schools. If your biggest criticism of him is that he "might" be a bit dirty, how is that different than so many coaches in college basketball? If anything, criticizing Miller for "playing the game" more or less just tells you about how much Romar "won't play the game." And that's great if as a program you are prepared to have mediocre results and your fanbase supports such. But given the attendance levels this year and the general "sizzle" around the program, it sure doesn't strike me that most are content with those results.