MIN

2025-26 Season

KYLE ANDERSON

Minnesota Timberwolves | Forward-Guard | 6-8
Kyle Anderson
6.0 PPG
3.4 RPG
2.9 APG
19.6 MPG
-2.8 Impact

Anderson produces at an below average rate for a 20-minute workload.

Embed this player card

Copy & paste this HTML into any page:

The widget updates automatically whenever our data does.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
-2.8
Scoring +5.5
Points 6.0 PPG = +4.3
Shot Making above expected FG% = +1.2
Creation +0.7
Creation 2.9 AST/g = +0.7
Turnovers -2.0
Turnovers 0.9/g = -2.0
Defense +0.7
Defense 1.0 STL, 0.6 BLK = +0.7
Hustle & Effort +2.8
Rebounds 3.4 RPG = +2.8
Raw Impact +7.7
Baseline (game-average expected) −10.5
Net Impact
-2.8
31st pctl vs Forwards

PBP Credit: Every play is analyzed from play-by-play data. Scorers get difficulty-adjusted credit, assisters get creation value based on the shot opportunity they created, and turnovers are classified by type. Shot difficulty is derived from 1M+ shots across 4 seasons. Full methodology

SKILL DNA

Percentile rank vs 234 Forwards with 10+ games

Scoring 24th
6.0 PPG
Efficiency 27th
53.4% TS
Playmaking 80th
2.9 APG
Rebounding 33th
3.4 RPG
Defense 70th
+8.1/g
Hustle 24th
+8.9/g
Creation 38th
+2.03/g
Shot Making 19th
+3.43/g
TO Discipline 50th
0.05/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Kyle Anderson's first twenty games were defined by erratic swings between brilliant connective orchestration and crippling offensive hesitancy. When fully engaged, his value extended far beyond the traditional box score. During the 12/04 vs BKN matchup, he managed a staggering +14.5 impact score despite tallying just eight points. He completely hijacked the game on the defensive end, relying on elite positional awareness and relentless disruption to shatter the opponent's rhythm. He even flashed unexpected scoring punch on 01/01 vs LAC, dropping 22 points on highly efficient 8-of-10 shooting to drive a massive +15.5 impact. Yet his signature slow pace often became a severe liability. This was glaringly obvious during the 01/17 vs DAL contest, where quicker guards repeatedly targeted him in isolation, creating defensive breakdowns that tanked his impact to a dismal -6.7. Ultimately, Anderson remains a fascinating puzzle; his passing makes him a bench linchpin, but his frequent refusal to shoot open perimeter looks allows defenders to roam free and ruin offensive spacing.

This midseason stretch was defined by a transition to the bench and a crippling offensive passivity that frequently turned Anderson into a spacing liability. During a disastrous Mar 13 vs GSW appearance, he logged zero points and a brutal -9.2 impact score because his total refusal to attack created half-court spacing nightmares. Even when he actually found the basket, his glacial tempo carried hidden costs. On Mar 18 vs UTA, he managed a relatively high eight points and six assists, yet still posted a -5.7 impact because his methodical pace severely bogged down the offense. Still, his elite basketball IQ occasionally salvaged his value on nights his shot completely vanished. Despite scoring just two points on Apr 02 vs DET, Anderson generated a +2.0 overall impact. He anchored the second unit with disruptive length and masterful weak-side help, fueling a massive +11.5 defensive impact mark. He remains a brilliant defensive connector, but his utter lack of scoring gravity makes him a tricky puzzle for any coaching staff to solve.

IMPACT TIMELINE

Game-by-game performance vs average. Green = above average, red = below.

PATTERNS

Boom-or-bust player. Anderson's impact swings wildly relative to his average — some nights dominant, others invisible. Scoring varies by ~5 points per game.

Middle-of-the-road efficiency — shoots 45%+ from the field in 65% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

Defensive difference-maker. Anderson consistently forces tough shots and protects the rim — opponents shoot worse when he's guarding them.

Small downward trend. First-half impact: -1.8, second-half: -3.7. Not alarming yet, but trending the wrong direction.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 2 games. Longest cold streak: 10 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 65 games with tracking data. Shows who guarded this player on offense and who he guarded on defense, with their shooting stats in those matchups.

ON OFFENSE: WHO GUARDED HIM

His shooting stats against each primary defender this season

M. Cisse 48.4 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.29
PTS 14
D. Powell 45.6 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 4
K. Huerter 32.5 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 5
A. Sengun 28.8 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 3
G. Santos 28.6 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2
D. Sharpe 25.4 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 2
D. Green 22.9 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 4
R. Kalkbrenner 22.9 poss
FG% 37.5%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 6
D. Clingan 22.5 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.27
PTS 6
N. Batum 21.8 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.14
PTS 3

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

How opponents shot when he was the primary defender. Lower FG% = better defense.

M. Cisse 48.4 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 4
D. Powell 43.3 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 3
D. Green 33.9 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 8
D. Clingan 28.7 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.17
PTS 5
G. Santos 28.3 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.18
PTS 5
R. Dunn 27.5 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 5
N. Batum 23.2 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 75.0%
PPP 0.39
PTS 9
C. LeVert 23.2 poss
FG% 16.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 2
D. Sharpe 22.8 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 5
R. Nembhard 22.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.27
PTS 6

SEASON STATS

44
Games
6.0
PPG
3.4
RPG
2.9
APG
1.0
SPG
0.6
BPG
53.0
FG%
36.4
3P%
70.6
FT%
19.6
MPG

GAME LOG

44 games played