Kyle Anderson
What does Kyle Anderson actually supply on the floor?
Kyle Anderson's strongest evidenced functions are event creation, creation, passing; the weakest available areas are shooting, rebounding, rim pressure. These are full-season values across multiple teams, so team-specific fit is withheld.
Function profile
2025-26 — eleven separate readings on a league scale. They are not additive.* limited evidence for that function. A dash means the evidence was insufficient — not a zero. Use the separate function strengths to evaluate role and roster fit; do not treat them as one player-value score. POA or switch conclusions require lineup, matchup, and assignment evidence beyond this profile.
Season by season
Every governed season profile on record.| Season | Team | Role | Evidence | Creation | Rim pressure | Shooting | Passing | Screening | Interior finish | Point of attack | Switch coverage | Rim protection | Event creation | Rebounding |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | — | Rotation connector | Mixed coverage | 64 | 56 | 53 | 63 | — | 60 | — | — | 57 | 78 | 55 |
| 2024-25 | — | — | High evidence | 68 | 54 | 55 | 69 | — | 57 | — | — | 61 | 70 | 55 |
| 2023-24 | MIN | — | High evidence | 73 | 55 | 32 | 79 | 52 | 54 | 61 | 58 | 56 | 72 | 51 |
| 2022-23 | MIN | — | High evidence | 73 | 53 | 66 | 83 | 50 | 47 | 46 | 44 | 64 | 73 | 61 |
| 2021-22 | MEM | — | High evidence | 65 | 52 | 48 | 68 | 43 | 51 | 43 | 37 | 62 | 76 | 68 |
| 2020-21 | MEM | — | High evidence | 71 | 60 | 54 | 75 | 46 | 51 | 57 | 60 | 66 | 72 | 59 |
| 2019-20 | MEM | — | High evidence | 71 | 57 | 42 | 76 | — | 58 | — | — | 57 | 72 | 62 |
| 2018-19 | MEM | — | High evidence | 66 | 57 | 45 | 68 | — | 70 | — | — | 60 | 78 | 62 |
| 2017-18 | SAS | — | High evidence | 68 | 66 | 49 | 69 | — | 66 | — | — | 56 | 86 | 73 |
| 2016-17 | SAS | — | High evidence | 65 | 55 | 53 | 67 | — | 54 | — | — | 64 | 78 | 64 |
| 2015-16 | SAS | — | Limited evidence | 64 | 56 | 49 | 66 | — | — | — | — | 52 | 78 | — |
| 2014-15 | SAS | — | Limited evidence | 58 | 51 | 49 | 58 | — | — | — | — | 51 | 66 | — |
What teams depended on him for
Seasons where a team's situation report named him a dependency case.MIN did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Kyle Anderson.
Replacement evidence
Rudy Gobert · Donte DiVincenzo · Naz Reid · Anthony Edwards · Jaden McDaniels
shrunk net 5.2790 over 169 possessions
on floor 795 possessions · off floor 7645 possessions
UTA did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Kyle Anderson.
Replacement evidence
Jusuf Nurkic · Lauri Markkanen · Svi Mykhailiuk · Keyonte George · Ace Bailey
shrunk net -2.7180 over 377 possessions
on floor 717 possessions · off floor 6738 possessions
MEM did not have enough resolved lineup possessions involving Kyle Anderson for a dependable replacement conclusion.
Replacement evidence
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope · Jock Landale · Santi Aldama · Cam Spencer · Jaylen Wells
shrunk net 3.0510 over 160 possessions
on floor 151 possessions · off floor 6980 possessions
MIA did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Kyle Anderson.
Replacement evidence
Alec Burks · Andrew Wiggins · Bam Adebayo · Tyler Herro · Kel'el Ware
shrunk net 5.8530 over 156 possessions
on floor 880 possessions · off floor 6808 possessions
GSW did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Kyle Anderson.
Replacement evidence
Stephen Curry · Jimmy Butler III · Draymond Green · Moses Moody · Brandin Podziemski
shrunk net 6.3440 over 494 possessions
on floor 973 possessions · off floor 7260 possessions
MIN had a supported lineup path without Kyle Anderson: [Mike Conley, Rudy Gobert, Karl-Anthony Towns, Anthony Edwards, Jaden McDaniels] at 7.2 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 1514 possessions. This is an observed option, not proof it is universally better.
Replacement evidence
Mike Conley · Rudy Gobert · Karl-Anthony Towns · Anthony Edwards · Jaden McDaniels
shrunk net 7.2220 over 1514 possessions
on floor 3504 possessions · off floor 4780 possessions
MIN lineups performed 4.4 points per 100 possessions better with Kyle Anderson than without him. The best supported alternative was [Rudy Gobert, D'Angelo Russell, Karl-Anthony Towns, Anthony Edwards, Jaden McDaniels] over 491 possessions.
Replacement evidence
Rudy Gobert · D'Angelo Russell · Karl-Anthony Towns · Anthony Edwards · Jaden McDaniels
shrunk net 0.4570 over 491 possessions
on floor 3890 possessions · off floor 4024 possessions
MEM had a supported lineup path without Kyle Anderson: [Steven Adams, Tyus Jones, Dillon Brooks, Jaren Jackson Jr., Desmond Bane] at 6.5 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 457 possessions. This is an observed option, not proof it is universally better.
Replacement evidence
Steven Adams · Tyus Jones · Dillon Brooks · Jaren Jackson Jr. · Desmond Bane
shrunk net 6.5200 over 457 possessions
on floor 3139 possessions · off floor 5237 possessions
MEM did not have a sufficiently supported observed replacement lineup for Kyle Anderson. The database keeps the functional-loss evidence but does not invent a replacement plan.
Replacement evidence
No replacement lineup is supported by the available evidence.
on floor 3928 possessions · off floor 3003 possessions
MEM had a supported lineup path without Kyle Anderson: [Jonas Valanciunas, Jae Crowder, Dillon Brooks, Jaren Jackson Jr., Ja Morant] at 3.1 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 816 possessions. This is an observed option, not proof it is universally better.
Replacement evidence
Jonas Valanciunas · Jae Crowder · Dillon Brooks · Jaren Jackson Jr. · Ja Morant
shrunk net 3.1360 over 816 possessions
on floor 2493 possessions · off floor 4128 possessions
MEM did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Kyle Anderson.
Replacement evidence
No replacement lineup is supported by the available evidence.
on floor 2205 possessions · off floor 4720 possessions
SAS did not have a sufficiently supported observed replacement lineup for Kyle Anderson. The database keeps the functional-loss evidence but does not invent a replacement plan.
Replacement evidence
No replacement lineup is supported by the available evidence.
on floor 3640 possessions · off floor 3688 possessions
SAS had a supported lineup path without Kyle Anderson: [Pau Gasol, LaMarcus Aldridge, Danny Green, Patty Mills, Kawhi Leonard] at 5.0 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 217 possessions. This is an observed option, not proof it is universally better.
Replacement evidence
Pau Gasol · LaMarcus Aldridge · Danny Green · Patty Mills · Kawhi Leonard
shrunk net 5.0310 over 217 possessions
on floor 2127 possessions · off floor 6078 possessions
SAS did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Kyle Anderson.
Replacement evidence
Tim Duncan · Tony Parker · LaMarcus Aldridge · Danny Green · Kawhi Leonard
shrunk net 6.7910 over 1508 possessions
on floor 2342 possessions · off floor 5383 possessions
SAS did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Kyle Anderson.
Replacement evidence
Tim Duncan · Tony Parker · Tiago Splitter · Danny Green · Kawhi Leonard
shrunk net 10.2680 over 609 possessions
on floor 610 possessions · off floor 6916 possessions
Known contract calendar
Governed contract events naming this player — dates carry their honest quality.Kyle Anderson has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2024 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Kyle Anderson has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2024 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Kyle Anderson has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2022 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Kyle Anderson has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2022 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Kyle Anderson has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2022 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Kyle Anderson has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2022 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. No extension-review trigger is applied yet.
Kyle Anderson has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2018 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Kyle Anderson has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2018 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Function scores, roles, dependence records and contract events are separate evidence. No combined player value, trade value or ranking is computed from them, and none of them is a causal impact claim.