Every year, several prospects in the draft, outside of the usual spotlighted lottery picks, have the skillsets and intangibles to become significant contributors—maybe not in their first year, but before too long. This year, those, for me, are Notre Dame’s Jerian Grant, Arkansas’s Bobby Portis and Virginia’s Justin Anderson.

As a UVa basketball beat writer, I saw Anderson up close for every year of his collegiate career, both on the floor and in press conferences. I remember him as a ballyhooed (pun intended) prospect who de-committed from Maryland and watched him evolve into the dynamo who still, inexplicably, held a grudge and played some of his hardest games against the Terrapins he once spurned.

He’s one of the most enigmatic and intriguing draftees for several reasons. He has great size, strength and quickness. He finishes above the rim in transition, at times attempting dunks that even someone his athleticism has no business attempting, much less finishing. His passionate defensive play, a rarity for college-aged players, put him on the draft boards of many teams, and the steep improvement of his three-point shooting propelled him comfortably into the first round.

Even if he doesn’t improve his dribbling much, he still projects as a prototypical 3-and-D player, the ideal wing role player archetype, due to his tantalizing size, athleticism and defensive prowess.

Below is an in-depth diagnosis of Anderson’s strengths, weaknesses, and how he’ll fit in Dallas.

Strengths

Physical Gifts

At the NBA combine, Anderson measured 6’5.25” and 231 pounds with a 6’11.75” wingspan, and recorded a 43-inch vertical leap. For reference, he’s almost an inch taller, 10 pounds heavier, and has a longer wingspan than #10 overall pick Justise Winslow, the most comparable wing prospect; not to mention Anderson shot 14% better than Winslow from the free throw line last season.

His physical tools give him outstanding positional versatility. In the NBA, positions are determined by whom you can guard. His exceptional lateral quickness, wingspan and vertical allow him to stay in front of and close out on smaller guards, while also being able to bang inside with bigger forwards and become a viable rebounder.

On offense, his strength allows him to bulldoze his way through defenders and finish through contact.

Defense & Improved Discipline

Virginia’s play style, on both sides of the ball, helped Anderson improve his discipline and decision-making. In Tony Bennett’s system, pace limits the number of possessions and therefore increases their individual value. The trade-off for that discipline was that UVa’s methodical style concealed the advantages of Anderson’s abandon.

UVa averaged 72.2 possessions per 48 minutes, the fourth-lowest rate in the NCAA. For reference, the slowest NBA pace, the Utah Jazz, averaged 92.8 possessions per 48 minutes, according to NBA.com’s tracking stats. Playing at a pace that makes turtles—and querulous sportswriters—impatient (not meant to be a Maryland joke) was unequivocally beneficial to the Cavaliers’ win totals and efficiency, but masked the offensive—and statistical—capabilities of its players.

The same is true defensively. Anderson’s per-game steal and rebound numbers appear low, especially for someone of his athleticism. But in addition to a slow pace, UVa’s “pack-line” defense is predicated on collapsing the lane and limiting gambles in favor of maintaining position.

At the NBA level, Anderson will be asked to play more freely, pressure the ball further out and jump passing lanes to create transition opportunities. If he can combine the discipline learned from UVa’s system with tenants of the more liberal NBA game, he should soon become a formidable defender.

Transition & Passing

As awkward and loose as his full-speed dribble can look, he’s a bulldozer who excels in the fast break. As a junior, he averaged a marvelous 1.52 points per possession in transition. Of course it’s an incongruent comparison for many reasons, but LeBron James, one of the most lethal NBA players in transition, averaged 1.25 points per possession in transition this past season.

Anderson’s shown to be a deft passer in the right situations. He displays unselfish vision in transition, dishing when a defender cheats too far over. He can effectively swing the ball around the perimeter and rarely holds the ball for too long, which—although due, in part, to his own deficiencies—is crucial in modern NBA offenses. He posted a 1.42 assist-to-turnover ratio, which isn’t stellar but is about the same as former teammate Malcolm Brogdon, who is rightfully considered a good passer and ball-handler.

Improved Shot & Offense

There is skepticism regarding Anderson’s massive jump in 3-point percentage, but undoubtedly, he’s worked hard to improve his shot. As much is evident in the significant differences in his mechanics. Before his junior year, his form was elongated and inconsistent, resulting in erratic misses. He’d cock the ball far back over his head with his long arms, and would shoot and land off-balance.

The 2014 offseason was huge for Anderson. He transformed his shot, cutting out the superfluous pre-shot motion and improving his balance. He now elevates well and jumps more vertically, holds the ball in front of his face and more consistently keeps his elbow in and at the proper right angle. He turned into a spot-up weapon for the Cavaliers, and that ability will translate to an NBA that values shooters who can score without disrupting the flow of the offense.

His improved jumpshot helped unlock other aspects of his offense. With defenders drawn closer to the threat of his outside shot, Anderson was able to incorporate jab steps and pump fakes, while not particularly advanced, to open up straight-line drives where he didn’t have to beat his defender with a slick dribble move.

Intangibles

While Anderson could make fans nervous at times with his—put generously—heroic decision-making, Anderson displayed he’s not afraid of the big moment, whether it ends in him as the hero or the goat. As a result of his self-assured mindset, he’s thrown down thunderous dunks, hit clutch shots and stepped up to make big defensive plays that frenzied John Paul Jones Arena.

The mistakes could be frustrating within UVa’s structure that so valued individual possessions; but sometimes Virginia needed a guy willing to break the confines of the system, and these intangibles will serve him well in the more liberal NBA.

Anderson can be a smart player with a tireless motor. By his junior year, he harnessed a more cautious control over his athleticism, although he still displayed a wild streak. Although his numbers might have been lower than they would have been at another program, the “leash” he was on at Virginia made him a better player.

Many players as lauded as Anderson coming out of high school expect early to be the star of their college teams. Anderson’s playing time actually dipped his sophomore year, when he only started five of the team’s 37 games. Rather than pouting, he relished his role, thriving as an injection of energy off the bench.

During his UVa career, Anderson accepted he was not the team’s offensive star and took pride is his defensive effort, an uncommon approach for a college player with legitimate NBA aspirations. A willingness to win, no matter what role he plays, bodes extremely well for the next level, where most college stars have to learn to accept being role players for the benefit of the team.

Weaknesses

In talking with some of my fellow dedicated UVa hoops-watchers, I curiously gathered an interesting range of feedback on how they thought Anderson would translate to the NBA. While most ultimately supported Anderson, the unfortunate timing of those conversations was shortly after he announced his decision to forgo his senior year from our beloved, ascendant basketball program. Maybe traces of bitterness existed, but the weaknesses in his skillset—once downplayed or overlooked—were now magnified.

“So dumb of him. Have fun in the D-League.”

“He improved a lot, but it’s still not 45-percent-from-3-good. He needed to stay another year.”

“He’s gonna struggle big time in one-on-ones [due to his poor ball-handling].”

“I just think he isn’t ready at all… Scouting report: force him to dribble at full speed, and he’ll surely [botch] it.”

“After a year or two in the D-League, I see him with success in the [NBA]… [But next year his confidence will be] damaged by guys who can pick his pocket.”*

To a degree, that’s how the jump works: things you got away with in college won’t fly at the NBA level because the competition is that much better, so weaknesses are more intensely scrutinized. But if bitterness existed in the days after he announced (I have a feeling it did), the points of criticism were based in fact.

*Every one of these quotes is unminced. Editorial: the assertion that Anderson was a D-League player is ludicrous. From day one, he enters the league with bonafide, NBA-level talent.

Ball-Handling

Anderson’s dribbling is both basic and predictable. His handle is mostly limited to bulling his way to the basket with straight-line drives, typically to his left. Occasionally, he can pull a crossover on an off-balance defender, but it’s not yet reliable enough to be more than a situational move. As good as he is in transition, the ball can act as a parachute, slowing down his revving engine.

His rudimentary handle prevents him from effectively creating his own shot, forcing him to rely on teammates to set up his shots. According to DraftExpress, he shot a combined 18-56—or 32.1%—on off-the-dribble shots his sophomore and junior seasons. He lacks a reliable dribble-move—be it a crossover, a spin, a step-back or quick pull-up—to get himself open or get to the basket at will.

In addition, his handle detracts from his decent passing abilities, especially when driving inside. A lot of NBA offenses benefit from drive-and-kicks, but once Anderson puts his head down to drive, he lacks the sleight of hand, despite his strength, to turn and pass back to the perimeter consistently.

However, this is not a death knell for his career. The good news for Anderson is that shooting and dribbling can be taught and improved quickly under NBA development. And, if his revamped shooting motion is any indication, he’s willing to put in the work.

Many guys—even guards and wings—have forged lengthy careers without a strong handle. Current 3-and-D models DeMarre Carroll, Thabo Sefolosha, Danny Green and Wes Matthews all come to mind in that regard.

In particular, Matthews, a new teammate of Anderson’s and a preeminent 3-and-D wing, endured similar criticisms about his loose handle, especially going to his off-hand, and he’s not nearly the athlete Anderson is. But through hard work, he improved. This summer, the borderline all-star earned a four-year, $70 million maximum contract for his skillset, despite tearing his Achilles tendon in March.

Shooting Consistency

It’s not so much “is Anderson a good or bad shooter?” How hard he’s worked to alter his form to cut out excess motion and quicken his release is visible. But the 45.2% he shot as a junior is buoyed by a scorching start to the season.

In the 12 games before ACC play, Anderson shot 60.9%, making 28 of 46 attempts. In his next 14 games, Anderson shot 32.8%, making 19 of the next 58. Even discounting the four games after he returned from his fractured finger and appendectomy, he still shot 36.7%, not even close to his hot start.

While shooters do go on hot and cold streaks, Anderson’s standard deviation is extremely high, and his hot streak is a small sample size against the easiest stretch of the schedule.

Trusting the 45% figure is inherently weighing 12 games against dubious competition more than the 14 (or 10) that followed against better competition, as well as the previous 72, in which he registered 29.8%. His “true” number lies somewhere in between.

Plus, Anderson got great looks. At UVa, he was not asked to create off the dribble or to create for teammates—guards London Perrantes and Malcolm Brogdon did the hefty bulk of that. He fired most of these shots in relatively open, spot-up situations, the highest percentage 3’s there are.

Before too much concern sets in, the biggest predictor of NBA shooting success is actually not the college 3-point percentage. It’s a player’s free throw percentage. Anderson made 78% of his free throws his junior year and averaged 75.2% over his three years, an encouraging indicator.

Over-reliance on 3-pointers

He doesn’t utilize his imposing athletic tools to his advantage enough on offense. He instead relies too much on 3-point shots; 47.1% of his shots were from behind the arc his junior year.

In those last 14 games when his 3-point percentage plunged, 52.7% of his shots were three pointers. His overall shooting percentage in those games was a paltry 36.4%. So when his 3-pointer is wayward, his offensive production suffers. He’s simply too physically gifted for this to be the case.

This over-reliance bled over into summer league play as well. One must be careful in putting much stock in any aspect of summer league, but Anderson took 47% of his shots behind the 3-point line. Although he put up solid aggregate scoring numbers, he lacked consistency game-to-game.

He’s strong enough to back players down, but did not do so often in college. In fairness, UVa’s offensive scheme mutes its players’ offensive production, especially in one-on-one situations. He also lacks a mid-range or pull-up game. As a result, the majority of Anderson’s scoring comprises spot-up 3-pointers and transition opportunities.

His abundant physical gifts give him a significant head start on many of his fellow draftees, but he’s going to have to use them to his advantage more to fulfill his NBA potential.

Wild Streak & Instincts



Anderson’s dribbling is an amplified problem because he will sometimes try to do too much, like split double-teams off the dribble rather than passing or deferring to a better ball-handler.

His wild streak leaves him prone to playing hero ball—following up a big defensive play with a boneheaded foul, taking a difficult contested jumper, trying to force offense. In the following clips, Anderson forces a shot rather than passing to the open roll man or cutter.

This is nitpicking a bit here, but one thing—possibly due to Virginia’s defensive system but worth noting—is, despite Anderson’s physical tools to be a great defender, Malcolm Brogdon was tasked with guarding the opponent’s best player, not Anderson. Anderson sometimes loses his man in off-ball situations, and, for all of his highlight-reel blocks and transition plays, he lacks premier help defense acumen.

Fit in Dallas/Rookie Year Projections

The Mavericks haven’t signed an impactful rookie since Josh Howard in 2003, mostly because they have traditionally viewed draft picks as trade lubricant more than young assets.

In a sense, that Dallas even drafted Anderson speaks volumes about their changing culture. Especially considering the free agency missteps that have taken place since their 2011 title, the Mavericks needed to catch up with the rest of the NBA in valuing draft picks more.

For what it’s worth, I peruse some Mavericks blogs and fan sites, and their sentiment is overwhelming excitement regarding Anderson’s future:

“The kid is 21, and looks like he is ready to play in the NBA… plays defense, can shoot, and hustles. Those are three of the most important aspects of the game for a wing player.”

“He’ll be… the same age [Jimmy] Butler was his rookie season. If we’re looking at a ceiling I think that’s a good comparison. But I think a Danny Green/more athletic Wes Matthews-type player is his realistic potential.”

“I think he has the potential to become a star in the NBA. He was easily the steal of the draft.”

From Kirk Henderson, writer for MavsMoneyball.com: “Everyone here in Vegas [for Summer League] has been really complimentary. That doesn’t mean much, but there’s a collective wisdom aspect when a number of experts all think positively about a player.”

Of course, these fans are under the inverse spell of bitterness: unbridled optimism. That’s okay, and the truth likely lies somewhere between the overly embittered quotes from the Virginia fans and the overly idealistic ones from the Dallas fans.

From day one, Anderson enters Dallas as its most talented wing option off the bench. Even if he’s not thrust into that role immediately, that says more about the Mavericks’ rookie development policies than it does Anderson.

Dallas has little wing depth behind starters Chandler Parsons and Wes Matthews, who may very well be out a significant chunk of the season as he recovers from an Achilles tear. At the wing position, it’s literally Anderson and John Jenkins on the depth chart, although Devin Harris and J.J. Barea will register some time at the off-guard position.

Still, a lot depends on head coach Rick Carlisle’s willingness to play a rookie significant minutes. Carlisle, a former UVa hooper, is notorious for not trusting rookies early. Roddy Beaubois, Shane Larkin and Jae Crowder are past examples of rookies who found their way in Carlisle’s doghouse, but Anderson hopes to buck that trend next season.

Anderson in a lot of ways is the kind of rookie that Carlisle fears, one prone to playing outside of himself at times. On the other hand, Anderson’s intangibles more than offset such concerns.

In his last two years at Virginia, the team went 60-11 and posted a 32-4 record in the best conference in college basketball. On those teams, he was the most visibly spirited player, always yelling to and pumping up the crowd with his massive, muscular wingspan and, when the team was up enough for him to be on the bench, contagiously smiling and cheering on his teammates. That’s the kind of attitude, along with his hardworking, defensive mindset, that coaches dream of. Plus, injuries and a lack of depth may force Carlisle’s hand.

With Matthews likely to miss some early-season time, Anderson may very well be an opening-day starter for Dallas. Additional good news is that Anderson won’t be relied on too heavily to create offense. The Mavericks still have Dirk Nowitzki, Parsons and Deron Williams ahead of him in the scoring hierarchy, and all three of them can put the ball on the floor and set up others, relieving Anderson of that burden and allowing him to primarily focus on being disruptive defensively as a rookie.

If Anderson shines as Matthews recovers, he would be an excellent fit in small-ball lineups in between a healthy Matthews and Parsons, as the Mavericks get later into the season.

Anderson’s athleticism, measurables and drive are already NBA-caliber. Consistency with his shooting and improving his handle—his current limitations—can be taught and improved. Anderson’s NBA future is bright.