Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #7: C.J. Wilcox

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #7: C.J. Wilcox

    On a cloudy and humid day in South-central Indiana, today we examine the 7th in this years series, the sharp shooting guard from the University of Washington, C.J. Wilcox. In previous draft previews I've examined 6 other draftees for this year from all over the landscape of college basketball, you can see all of those at this link:

    http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...-2014-Pointers


    Wilcox is a potential trade up candidate into the latter part of the 1st round, or perhaps into the early to mid 2nd round range.....so he is likely the highest rated prospect so far in the series. With so many picks seemingly available for trade after the lottery, I think we need to at least explore who we might target in this area.

    Wilcox is 6'5 in height, with a wingspan measuring at the NBA combine of 6'9 3/4. While he weighed in at 201lbs there, he still has a slim build which seemingly could easily hold another 20lbs or so of strength, which I believe is necessary for him to reach his full NBA potential. His lack of strength and his "old age" of being one of the oldest prospects in the draft would be the reasons he would be available to be drafted after pick 20 or so anyway, as he was born on Dec 30 1990, meaning that he will turn 24 in the middle of his rookie campaign.

    But one franchise might look at that as a negative, where another one would look at that as being able to control him throughout his athletic prime, and getting a more ready made player capable of helping you immediately.....it all just depends on how each GM and scouting staff will look at it.

    Let's take a look at the positives and negatives below:

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Let's do weaknesses first with Wilcox.

    Defensively, while he isn't a total sieve he is far from a shut down guy. His lack of strength is a huge burden for him, as when drivers get angles on him and can drive it at this sternum, he lacks the strength to hold them at bay. Keep in mind however that his entire team at Washington was atrocious defensively, one of the worst overall defensive teams I saw all year on the whole. While he was a culprit in that, it also means that all of his mistakes were highlighted by the fact that their entire system defensively was unorganized, not unified, and not very tied together at all.

    His lack of strength was a big problem, but I do feel like it is one that will be remedied with the proper nutrition and strength program provided for him at the NBA level. I say this because he seems like he has the kind of frame that can take on weight while still remaining in quality shape and retaining his athleticism. He isn't as lanky as a Paul George type body shape, but he has the kind of build you can add on to.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If you are wanting a creative, get his own shot type who can play spot minutes at point and at least be a secondary ballhandler, Wilcox isn't your guy. Instead he comes from the type of players I call "snipers"....a dead red cold blooded shooter. He would fit much better with a more ball dominant ballhandler next to him, or in a system where someone else initiated offense. Having said that, I don't mean to say that Wilcox is helpless with the ball and cannot dribble, it's just that is just more of an old school type pure 2 guard.

    There are 2 kinds of "snipers" in my vernacular, one is a spot up guy, and one is a guy further advanced than that who you can run plays for and who can come off screens in set piece situations. I believe that Wilcox can definitely for sure be a spot up guy, but in time I think he MAY advance beyond that into a guy who can be a player you consciously set up to score. Worst case scenario though, he is a floor spacing 2 guard who can kill teams in transition, in scramble situations, or as a draw and kick option.

    Wilcox isn't an "iso" guy you can throw the ball to and tell him to get his own shot, and he never will be. But I do think he can become a guy who can attack off the dribble a little bit in an advantage situation, such as attacking a long closeout or shooting a pull up jumper after receiving a ball screen. In fact, he is craftier than you think already coming off the ballscreen, showing an ability to hit the pull up jumper over a weak hedge, and even occasionally splitting the hedge and getting into the paint....he just lacks the strength or explosiveness at this point to finish once he is in there if he is bumped at all. But give him 25 lbs and a year, and perhaps he can be more of a weapon than the conventional wisdom thinks at this point.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Wilcox's jump shot is a thing of beauty from a technical standpoint. Tremendous dip, picture perfect "sweep and sway", and a consistent follow through upstairs and a perfect narrow landing down below. He is a model of how current shooting techniques are taught these days. Wilcox doesn't just make shots, but he makes them in a variety of ways and when doing so he swishes more shots than probably anyone in the draft.

    "Exquisite shooter" is what I wrote in my notebook time after time. He has a quick release as well, so he doesn't need a lot of time to get his shot off. And because he has a somewhat narrow foot base, this means he can dribble the ball efficiently for one or two dribbles if he is forced off his spot. What can bother him some will be physical play before the catch, as he will lack strength initially in getting the defense off him, and he doesn't like to have his airspace taken away from him while he is in the air.....as in all other aspects of his game, Wilcox doesn't appreciate contact.

    He also understands how to read the defense coming off screens. Wilcox just doesn't sprint away from his man or just jump over him, instead he sets up his cuts and makes the proper basketball play, and when he catches he can get off his jumper quickly and accurately. To me, CJ would be a nice player to run off screens and set up to score for a second unit, and a great spot up option for teams who spread the floor well.

    With the game flowing in a more pure, freedom of movement finesse type of way, and with shooters being protected more than they ever have been, Wilcox would seem to be tailor made for modern day NBA offensive basketball.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So, what do we have in C.J. Wilcox?

    I think we have a prototypical shooting guard in terms of size, length, and abilities, as long as he is in a good system for him and if he plays with the right kind of teammates. Shooting is at a premium the way the game is evolving, and with the scarcity of NBA 2 guards currently in the league he seems to me to being severely undervalued in this draft. He projects to me to be a big time marksman from deep, a shot maker who can make defenses pay for over helping on others, and a guy you can run plays for. In time, he might be a guy you can occasionally run ball screens for in limited situations, and he will be a major potential weapon in transition situations. In other words, he is a player we don't have in Indiana.


    There is at least some injury history to concern yourself with if you are interested in Wilcox. I am told that in the past he has had some minor issues with shin splints and minor foot injuries....I do not know any of the details. You can assume that any team choosing Wilcox has done their due diligence with his medicals and have cleared him as good to go.

    To me he makes a ton of sense for teams as high as Oklahoma City at #21, Memphis at #22, Charlotte at #24, and on down the line. However, for whatever reason he doesn't seem to be projected that high from what I am reading. Still, I would guess he will go from anywhere between #21 and #43, where the Hawks select in round 2. There is almost no chance he is available at #57, and if he is then there must be some behavioral or medical reason that he would be.

    It is highly unlikely we have the ammo to trade into the first round, but if we did go up that high, he would be a likely target in my mind.

    As for me, I would not trade an existing starter to move up to get this particular player. But here is what I would do: I'd try again to use cash, pick #57, future 2nd rounders, and perhaps Ian Mahimni to try and move up into the early 2nd round in order to snag him. I like his fit for our game, and we have a huge need at the back up wing spots that we need to fill cheaply. I like having a guy to play with Lance and Paul offensively who doesn't really need the ball to be effective, and who is in their same peer group and age bracket. And unlike most other evaluators, I still think he has some upside despite being 23 already.


    NBA comparable: Somewhere between Danny Green and Anthony Morrow.

    This time until next time......

    Tbird
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #7: C.J. Wilcox

    Sounds like a possibe player that could help coming off the bench. A SG who could score that plays with the 2nd unit.

    I have a feeling T-Bird is waiting to post the thread on the player he likes best for the Pacers. I don't believe we've seen a review of that player yet.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #7: C.J. Wilcox

      Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
      Sounds like a possibe player that could help coming off the bench. A SG who could score that plays with the 2nd unit.

      I have a feeling T-Bird is waiting to post the thread on the player he likes best for the Pacers. I don't believe we've seen a review of that player yet.

      You can't get TOO choosy when picking at #57. Likely we will have to move up some to get any of the guys I have profiled so far, with the exception of Davion Berry and perhaps Russ Smith.

      I do think there is a lot of depth to this draft, but there aren't 57 players worthy of the league in this draft, or anywhere close to that number who can help us someday.

      I do like Wilcox quite a bit if you couldn't tell. That would take a more significant move up to the 20-30 range though and I doubt we can get to that range with any realistic trade. Wilcox will be a good pro though at a position that is weak throughout the league currently.

      I do expect us to move up to get a guy we have targeted, and trying to figure out who I think that SHOULD be and who I think it actually WILL be is a big part of the fun of these threads. Or we could just sit at #57, take a foreigner we can stash, and call it a night. We will see soon!

      Tbird

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #7: C.J. Wilcox

        Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
        You can't get TOO choosy when picking at #57. Likely we will have to move up some to get any of the guys I have profiled so far, with the exception of Davion Berry and perhaps Russ Smith.

        I do think there is a lot of depth to this draft, but there aren't 57 players worthy of the league in this draft, or anywhere close to that number who can help us someday.

        I do like Wilcox quite a bit if you couldn't tell. That would take a more significant move up to the 20-30 range though and I doubt we can get to that range with any realistic trade. Wilcox will be a good pro though at a position that is weak throughout the league currently.

        I do expect us to move up to get a guy we have targeted, and trying to figure out who I think that SHOULD be and who I think it actually WILL be is a big part of the fun of these threads. Or we could just sit at #57, take a foreigner we can stash, and call it a night. We will see soon!

        Tbird

        I don't see Bird drafting and stashing a Euro. The Pacers need cheap bench fillers. I have said on numerous times I feel Bird will try to trade up in the 2nd rd to get a player he likes, or possibly buy a pick like they did to get OJ.

        Speaking of OJ, I can see Bird re-signing him. He'd be CHEAP, is athletic, knows the Pacers, and better than anything the Pacers could possibly get at #57. If Bird can't move up, I suppose he could draft n stash a Euro if he can get OJ. I'm bias as I always liked OJ, so I'd like to see him as a Pacer again. JMOAA

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #7: C.J. Wilcox

          I think he is better option to play more in the starting unit than off the bench, mainly because he is not a shot creator, but a good shooter, especially from range, I honestly think Lance is go, I think the best thing is to try and see if we can get a sign and trade for him, not sure how likely that is, but yeah I think possibly doing that and targeting a good role player/starter would be a pretty good idea, Wilkox plus another potential pick would not be that bad of a thing.
          Why so SERIOUS

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis #7: C.J. Wilcox

            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
            I don't see Bird drafting and stashing a Euro. The Pacers need cheap bench fillers. I have said on numerous times I feel Bird will try to trade up in the 2nd rd to get a player he likes, or possibly buy a pick like they did to get OJ.

            Speaking of OJ, I can see Bird re-signing him. He'd be CHEAP, is athletic, knows the Pacers, and better than anything the Pacers could possibly get at #57. If Bird can't move up, I suppose he could draft n stash a Euro if he can get OJ. I'm bias as I always liked OJ, so I'd like to see him as a Pacer again. JMOAA
            Bird did mention at the presser when the trade and cutting of OJ happened something about "who knows, maybe we'll see him back here down the road." OJ's 2nd year was a disappointment, expected he might be able to crack the rotation, but I'd welcome him back on an unguaranteed minimum deal.

            Comment

            Previous template Next
            Working...
            X