NBA Draft Prospects: James Anderson, Oklahoma State

Click here to find all of our 2010 NBA Draft prospect breakdowns.

Stats: 22.8 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 2.4 apg, 2.4 t/o's, 45.7% FG, 34.1% 3PT

Size:

• Listed: 6'6", 195 lb,
  
• Combine: 6'5 3/4" (with shoes), 208 lb, 6'8 1/2" (wingspan)

About Him: Heading into the season, the Big XII was loaded with top NBA Draft prospects and potential all-american candidates. Many people didn't pay attention to the sharpshooter in Stillwater in the preseason, and boy was that a mistake. Anderson made them look foolish, dropping over 22 a game while winning the conference player of the year award and putting himself firmly into first round contention.

Anderson's game center completely around his ability to shoot the ball. At just a shade under 6'6" in shoes, Anderson is tall enough that he can get his shot off against just about anyone, and if he is given space and time to get his feet set and his shoulders squared, he is automatic. His range extends out to about 30 feet (literally) and once he gets going, he is incredibly difficult to slow down. It seemed like once a week during this past season, Anderson would put up 20-25 points in one half. The 34.9% he shot from three as a junior his misleading, as many of those attempts came as forced, low-percentage threes from a player shouldering too much of the offensive load.

Oklahoma State ran Anderson off of screens on just about every possession in the half court. Downscreens, flair screens, staggered screens, ball screens. You name it, and the Cowboys did it to try and get Anderson a good look at the rim. Anderson isn't just a catch-and-shoot player, however. He's always been an effective shooter off the dribble and in the mid-range. He has a solid vertical, but he doesn't showcase it on pull-up jumpers, instead using his high-release point and a slight fade to create space.

As a slasher, he still has some room for improvement. He almost strictly goes left when he is taking the ball to the basket (according to Synergy Sports, 86% of his drives go to his left, and he is right-handed). He's a solid finisher around the rim, and he knows hw to draw fouls and get to the line. In general, when Anderson is putting the ball on the floor, he is doing so to score. He didn't have a great assist-to-turnover ratio (he averaged 2.4 assists and 2.4 turnovers), but given the need for Anderson to shoulder the scoring load and his incredibly high usage rate, this isn't necessarily a negative. In fact, 2.4 t/o's given his usage is a respectable amount.

The knock on Anderson is on the defensive end of the floor. He doesn't have overly impressive lateral quickness, he doesn't challenge jump shooters on the perimeter, he doesn't use his body or strength well defensively, and he got beat far too often by mediocre collegiate slashers. While some of this can be explained away by saying Anderson was saving his energy because of his workload on the offensive end, he's never been a great defender, which will be a cause for worry for NBA teams looking to draft him.

Comparison:

• Best Case Scenario: Somewhere between Richard Hamilton and Ray Allen. The may be a bit of a stretch for Anderson, but the way those two players read and run off of screens and their ability to score on the perimeter is very similar to the way Anderson was used in college. He likely will be less of a primary option than the two former Huskies. Marcus Thornton or Anthony Morrow may be a better comparison right now.
  
• Worst Case Scenario: A poor man's Quentin Richardson, or Q later in his career. A standstill shooter that is on the court to huck up some threes.
  

Outlook: Anderson probably won't be the focal point of an NBA offense, at least not early in his career. While there will undoubtedly be questions about his ability to defend on the perimeter, perhaps the bigger question will be can he adapt to being more of a floor-spacer, spot-up shooter? There's no questioning his shooting ability, but it will be interesting to see how if he can fit in as a role player. Putting him on a team with a penetrating point guard like a Steve Nash or a Jason Kidd could be scary.

Anderson was originally projected as a mid-first rounder, but his stock has been slipping due to some poor performances in workouts. The same thing happened to Thornton last year. Anderson is the kind of player that needs to be in a 5-on-5, organized setting to really be effective. Playing 2-on-2 or 3-on-3, where there is much more 1-on-1 stuff happening, is not the best way to showcase his talents. Teams likely will regret passing on Anderson. I don't necessarily see him as a futureall-star, but I don't think a few 15 ppg, 42%3 PT seasons are out of the question.

Highlights: