Kyle Anderson

BVPN · Post #1 » by **BVPN** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 5:31 am

This guy has been putting up great stats, like Royce white without the crazy kind of, but doesn't seem to be high on many boards. Does he have some giant gaping weakness I'm missing?

Mr.Raptorsingh · Post #2 » by **Mr.Raptorsingh** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 5:34 am

I think he's going to be a great player, personally.

miltk · Post #3 » by **miltk** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 10:09 am

no one is enthusiastic about extreme lack of atheticism, and people think "smarts' has a ceiling.

greenandgold · Post #4 » by **greenandgold** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:26 am

BVPN wrote:This guy has been putting up great stats, like Royce white without the crazy kind of, but doesn't seem to be high on many boards. Does he have some giant gaping weakness I'm missing?

Anderson has a much better statistical profile than Royce White. White shot under 50% from the free throw line in college, and was mediocre from 3-point range. Anderson's been a very efficient shooter, that bodes well for his long term potential.

I also like Anderson's 1.7 steals per game over White's 1.2 steals per game. Basic indicator of quickness.

Anderson also taller than White with a better wingspan. The draft combine will be important for him in terms of putting up some vertical leap and sprint numbers that will alleviate concerns about his general athleticism. He'll jump 10 inches higher than McDermott.

Johnlac1 · Post #5 » by **Johnlac1** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:36 am

miltk wrote:no one is enthusiastic about extreme lack of atheticism, and people think "smarts' has a ceiling.

I'd hardly call it extreme. He's certainly not a taller Wiggins, but he's very well coordinated and skilled. He can certainly do well on offense, and probably be able to play adequate defense if he adds a little muscle.

Dr Positivity · Post #6 » by **Dr Positivity** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 2:06 pm

He should get top 20 consideration. In addition to the lack of explosiveness, a lot of us do not trust his shooting despite the big bump this year. When a guy like Anderson has weaknesses as a slasher, 3pt shooting is essential.

Overall he looks to be a slightly better version of what Otto Porter was a year ago. So how did Porter get to 3rd while Anderson is looking at 20s? Because NBA Draft

Notanoob · Post #7 » by **Notanoob** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 2:53 pm

greenandgold wrote:I also like Anderson's 1.7 steals per game over White's 1.2 steals per game. Basic indicator of quickness.

Steals are not exclusively an indication of quickness, and no one would call Anderson quick. It's an indication of his smart defense and long arms.

Anderson has an excellent statistical profile, but he's very slow and not awfully strong either. Those are basically hes weaknesses. If you think that he's athletic enough to hack it in the NBA, then he's an awesome prospect. If not, you think he's a scrub. He's got all sorts of skills though.

I'm not super high on him myself, I can't imagine he'll be able to guard any NBA caliber athlete, but there is a place in the league for smart guys who can ht nearly 50% of their 3's, especially if they can be point-forwards like Anderson.

nickforthreee · Post #8 » by **nickforthreee** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 8:41 pm

if he can get a quicker release on his jumper i can see him having a Turkoglu (idk if i spelled that right) type career

Mlockhart · Post #9 » by **Mlockhart** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 8:57 pm

I've always liked his game. He needed the ball in his hands to really thrive. Sure, he doesn't have the speed, but in the right system he could be effective. Kendall Marshall can't guard a chair, but he has managed to resurrect his fledgling career with the Lakers. Marshall routinely guards the non scoring threat on defense. Anderson is 6'8 and skilled. If he can consistently knock down that NBA three pointer, there is a place for him.

Grits n Gravy · Post #10 » by **Grits n Gravy** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:27 pm

Dr Positivity wrote:He should get top 20 consideration. In addition to the lack of explosiveness, a lot of us do not trust his shooting despite the big bump this year. When a guy like Anderson has weaknesses as a slasher, 3pt shooting is essential.

Overall he looks to be a slightly better version of what Otto Porter was a year ago. So how did Porter get to 3rd while Anderson is looking at 20s? Because NBA Draft

Wasn't Porter a true 3 man. Anderson I believe is playing heavily with the ball in his hands operating as a point guard I believe. Teams will be thinking if he's good enough or efficient enough to play like that in the NBA. It's highly unorthodox and I would say unlikely that a 6'10 guy is going to be handling the ball for you. They'll be asking themselves, when you take the ball out of his hands what does he bring to the court and my club - basically can he defend a position and does he bring intangibles.

Tave · Post #11 » by **Tave** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 12:11 am

Turning Kyle Anderson into an off-ball shooter would be a crime against the game of basketball. Even if you don't want him to bring it up the floor every possession, you most definitely try to give him as many playmaking opportunities as possible to maximize the strengths of your team.

Why on earth should his height prevent him from playing PG if he's actually better at running the point than the shorter guys on his team?

Joseph17 · Post #12 » by **Joseph17** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 3:32 am

Not a fan of his game. I just don't see how it'll translate to the NBA.

cammac · Post #13 » by **cammac** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 6:28 am

He is a player many GMs will pass on especially ones that aren't secure in there jobs. This is a year of SFs and many will take the safer bet Hood, Grant, Warren (twiner), McDaniaels, Dekker or Young. Who are much safer bets but none have his upside.

He is unique shooting 50% from both 2pt and 3pt line, in reality best PG on any major NCAA team, can rebound, block shots, steals coupled with a high BB IQ. Bird and Nash were never great athletes but were great players while Anderson isn't at that level. Never the less worst case I see him as a 6th man leading a second unit creating all kinds of problems for other team. Best case a smart and motivated Turkoglu who can be a premium PF.

As a Raptors fan I hope he is available at 20th.

No-Man · Post #14 » by **No-Man** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 6:31 am

Anderson is a PF, his role on the offensive side does not change his position, there are plenty of examples of passing big men that acted de facto as PGs.
I think Anderson, with his major improvement as a shooter has the chance of becoming a pretty good player and maybe an All Star.
I believe that when it's all said and done he will be a top15 player out of this class.

shangrila · Post #15 » by **shangrila** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:48 am

A PF? He's too skinny for that, even if he puts on muscle.

I'd say he's a SF and, while I don't know if he'll be a star or even a starter, I could see him having a long career. He's got amazing passing abilities for someone his size and there'll be some team that can use it, not to mention his rebounding and scoring.

I actually hope the Wolves draft him (if they trade down). Being able to bring that kind of versatility off the bench would give ours the kick it seriously needs, while giving you someone who can pass at an above average level once Rubio and Love sit.

No-Man · Post #16 » by **No-Man** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:54 am

too skinny? Anderson is 235lbs with a good frame to add more muscle, he has length (7'2.5 wingspan and 9'0 reach) to play PF and he is nowhere near quick enough to defend perimeter players in the NBA.

His position is probably as a comboforward, but he will be better going forward as a PF (alla Diaw/Odom/Turkoglu) on both sides, he can defend better PFs and he will get more advantages against PFs due to his skills and the mismatches that will create.

I don't see him playing a role at Minnesota, at all, that team needs defense and vets, not another kid that wants to run the show and make plays.

shangrila · Post #17 » by **shangrila** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 8:07 am

He looked skinnier than that, so maybe you're right about him at PF.

And Minnesota needs talent, especially when it comes to the bench. Age shouldn't matter, especially with veterans filling up the rest of the roster.

GANGSTERDOG · Post #18 » by **GANGSTERDOG** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 12:07 pm

Kyle Anderson inside Wiggins body would be LeBron James. Yeah I said it.

Xbox Live/PSN : Gangsterdog

Post #19 » by **Ruzious** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 1:42 pm

shangrila wrote:He looked skinnier than that, so maybe you're right about him at PF.

And Minnesota needs talent, especially when it comes to the bench. Age shouldn't matter, especially with veterans filling up the rest of the roster.

Yeah, I think strength will always be an issue with him, but he does fit in with the Odom/Diaw mold.

Johnlac1 · Post #20 » by **Johnlac1** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 5:10 pm

cammac wrote:He is a player many GMs will pass on especially ones that aren't secure in there jobs. This is a year of SFs and many will take the safer bet Hood, Grant, Warren (twiner), McDaniaels, Dekker or Young. Who are much safer bets but none have his upside.

He is unique shooting 50% from both 2pt and 3pt line, in reality best PG on any major NCAA team, can rebound, block shots, steals coupled with a high BB IQ. Bird and Nash were never great athletes but were great players while Anderson isn't at that level. Never the less worst case I see him as a 6th man leading a second unit creating all kinds of problems for other team. Best case a smart and motivated Turkoglu who can be a premium PF.

As a Raptors fan I hope he is available at 20th.

I won't comment on some of the other players, but as a Wisconsin fan who has seen Dekker in many games the last two years and a number of UCLA games, you've got that comparison wrong. I'm a fan of Anderson, but Dekker definitely has more upside. Simply a better athlete but not as skilled as Anderson. Anderson is more NBA-ready at the moment, but his upside, like McDermott's, is limited.