Kennedy Chandler: 2022 NBA Draft Scouting Report
An undersized point guard, Chandler flashed a ton of intriguing skills but battled consistency at Tennessee
College choice has everything to do with what skills a prospect gets to showcase before they declare for the NBA Draft. Five-star point guard Kennedy Chandler chose to go to Tennessee, playing for coach Rick Barnes in the SEC. Together, the Volunteers posted a really good season: they got ranked as high as fifth, went 27-8 and made the NCAA Tournament.
Still, it feels like we don’t know just how good Chandler is or could be. The Volunteers’ offense was split between two guards: Chandler and Santiago Vescovi. That tandem carried Tennessee all season. Both had a nearly 2:1 assist to turnover ratio, shot 38% from 3-point range and were the two leading scorers on an experienced team.
Yet splitting reps — especially out of the pick-and-roll — changed the way Chandler plays. That can be a positive, as it gave the freshman plenty of opportunities to show he is a strong off-ball threat due to his catch-and-shoot impact (he made more than 40% of his dribbleless triples in Knoxville). But it also undersells the impact he can have running an offense on his own, a trait that is likely Chandler’s meal ticket at the next level.
As such, he isn’t a slam dunk first-round prospect. To some, the playmaking evidence only suggests that he can thrive in a primary creator role, utilizing strong pick-and-roll passing and really good athleticism for a 6’0” guard as proof that he was deserving of more than what he got at Tennessee. Others will see a lack of a proven resume in high volume for an undersized point guard, a position where you better be certain about a prospect’s positive impact if he’s to receive a first-round selection.
Intertwined in any conversation about Chandler as a prospect is one about the value of undersized guards in the NBA. What outlier skills do they need in order to compensate for their size? Is the league trending away from a positive impact there due to the level of skill being developed at an earlier age among bigger guys?
Chandler’s specific athletic profile is actually pretty solid. He’s an above-the-rim finisher who blocked eight shots this season despite being undersized. He’s active defensively on the perimeter and uses that to propel him to transition. The statistical profile indicates a strong defensive presence. Of the players to have his assist to turnover numbers, shoot 38% from 3 and have at least 2.2 steals per game, three others have made it to the NBA over the last 15 years: Jon Konchar, Terrence Williams and TJ McConnell.
Where the debate over Chandler comes in is to what degree his athleticism, defensive impact and off-ball shooting can really compensate for how he’ll get picked on at the other end. A lot of that answer is dependent on swing traits like pull-up shooting range and a mid-range game that would turn him into a high-volume pick-and-roll prospect without holes in his arsenal.
The polarizing nature on Chandler’s draft stock, and why he’ll be mentioned anywhere from the lottery to the second round, is due to the variety of outcomes on those two evaluations. His pull-up range was not very consistent throughout the year, but there were flashes of success and many will point to the effective shooting off-ball as an indicator that he’ll add it on-ball.
The runner, an important skill for undersized guards to master for NBA scoring, has its flaws but there were plenty of instances in the film where Chandler looks so comfortable taking them. Betting against Chandler adding that to his arsenal — and drafting him lower just because he doesn’t have it mastered at 18 — could be underselling on a high-upside creator over a nitpicky reason.
If only we had a few more pick-and-roll reps, a little more high ball screens in the diet at Tennessee, we could feel a little more comfortable in projecting Chandler’s role. We want to be impressed by the glimpses of feel and playmaking, the above-the-rim athleticism for his size as a potential outlier trait, and the upside of his three-level scoring.
But the absence of consistent volume on the first, the lack of impact definitively caused by the second and the total question marks surrounding the third make it difficult for us to attach a first-round grade to Chandler that we feel comfortable in.
Perhaps this is more of a philosophical discussion than anything else, but we have issues valuing a prospect without consistent range to 3-point land off the bounce.