RealGM

*Player can be from any time (all-time), and the offense can be across all/different eras. Elaborate, if you wish. Feel free to define "build an offense around," "post offense," and what level of efficacy constitutes "elite" based on your own understanding/preferences. Personally, I'm not trying to be too rigid.

The post-up is a skill that not many players are actually good at. As we now know, many guys in the past (usually bigs) used post-up possessions that they shouldn't have. It's an inefficient play for the vast majority of players. Looking at the best offenses in NBA history, we see that it's more perimeter-driven. BOS in the '50s, Kansas City in the '60s, DAL & PHX in the '00s, GSW, CLE, & HOU in the '10s, etc.

But there are post-up players and team offenses that are the exception.

My nominations, with a small argument/reasoning/justification:

- Wilt Chamberlain

Incredible combination of low-post scoring (with fallaway range) and theoretical post passing (1967+1968: 22.5 AST% RS; 21.9 AST% PO). +5.4 rORtg in the 1966-67 RS. No, his scoring and passing peaks didn't necessarily align, but the more salient point is that he proved both skills were in his toolbelt/locker. Weaknesses: free-throw shooting, and perhaps scoring/passing feel?

- Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Perhaps the best combination of size and skill to play the pivot. Unlike Chamberlain, Abdul-Jabbar could hit his FTs and had better touch and more reliable range, including the most unstoppable signature/go-to shot: the Skyhook. He also spearheaded fantastic team offenses in Milwaukee: +6.7 rORtg in 1970-71, +4.7 rORtg in 1971-72; +5.7 rORtg 1970-71 + 1971-72; +3.96 rORtg 1969-70 to 1973-74.

The LA offenses were great also, but it's hard to detangle his influence from Magic's. IIRC, KAJ was usually the half-court 1st option up until the late '80s. Perhaps someone can elaborate? Regardless, stand-out years for Kareem include 1979-80 (+4.2), 1982-83 (+5.8), 1984-85 (+6.2), and 1985-86 (+6.1).

- Bill Walton

Weaker scoring compared to the others listed, but at worst, the second-best passer out of the pivot. Has proven high-performing offenses built around his post-up game: +3.7 rORtg in the 1976-77 RS and +3.9 rORtg in the 1977-78 RS (58g).

- Adrian Dantley

The smallest player on the list, but perhaps the most incredible combination of scoring and efficiency. Has a more refined face-up attack out of the mid & high posts than arguably all the names listed here. One of the best shooters, foul drawers, and in contention for the greatest touch in the paint. Just a flawless scoring skillset.

The arguments against him are a lack of team offense success and ball-stopping accusations. I personally find it hard to discount him on either of these grounds; his ability and production are just too good to ignore.

- Kevin McHale

Perhaps the most resilient, unstoppable post scorer on this list. Routinely upped his performance against the best competition in the postseason. Has great shooting range, can draw and hit FTs, is a contender for GOAT touch in the paint, and has more effective counters than anyone. There was genuinely no matchup or coverage that could slow him down.

The arguments against are a) a lack of primacy, and b) blackhole/ball-stopping status. Like with Dantley, I don't care for either of these arguments. Much of effective post play is about off-ball finishing. Like O'Neal, McHale was superb at establishing positioning in a spot where he could go straight into a scoring move, like the post-up equivalent of Klay Thompson coming off a screen. Finishing and ball-stopping aren't the same thing.

Additionally, he put up huge scoring numbers and improved AST%/apg on increased usage between after Maxwell went down with an injury and before becoming a 6th man again. We have a 176-game sample between the '86 and '88 playoffs of *healthy* McHale putting up 24.6 ppg on 65.5% TS. His offensive peak coincides with all-time level offenses in 1986-87 (+5.2) and 1987-88 (+7.4), including +9.2 rORtg in the 64 games McHale played in '88. Squared2020's limited data is showing Kevin had a higher on-court ORtg than Larry in both seasons, especially 1987-88. And has him 3rd in league-wide RAPM that year, too.

- Charles Barkley

Archetypically most similar to Dantley; a less skilled (worse touch, shooting), but heavier and more athletic, above-the-rim variant. Has face-up skills out to the high post. Genuinely unbelievable combination of scoring volume and efficiency. Led a couple of high-performing offenses when his individual numbers peaked in PHI: 1988-89 (+5.2) and 1989-90 (+5.4). More great offenses in PHX: 1992-93 (+5.3), 1993-94 (+5.4), 1994-95 (+6.2).

- Shaquille O'Neal

Unparalleled combination of size and athleticism, plus a strong set of pivot fundamentals and passing. Doesn't have the range or touch of some of the names listed, and has the same weakness as Wilt: FT shooting. However, his off-ball positioning is really good, and, when combined with his physical gifts, dominates the deep post unlike anyone else.

He was blessed to play with great guards throughout his prime. Led incredible ORL offenses: +4.5 in 1993-94, +6.8 in 1994-95, and +5.3 in 1995-96. Three-year stretch of +5.53 rORtg. Penny was a big part of that; I've seen the raw +/- and adjusted numbers for those years. Then really good LA offenses: +6.9 in 1997-98, +5.4 in 1998-99, +3.2 in 1999-00, +5.4 in 2000-01, +4.9 in 2001-02, +3.6 in 2002-03, and +2.6 in 2003-04. And the post-season offenses were historic, IIRC. Then a +4.1 in 2004-05 and +2.5 in 2005-06 to finish off in MIA.

- Nikola Jokic

Easily the best combination of scoring and passing out of the post. Can make any pass, can hit any shot; has the ball skills to face-up like Barkley or Dantley. Hard to find a weakness, really. Maybe a lack of speed and power, which can limit his scoring against certain matchups. Not as relentless/aggressive a scorer as some of the other names listed.

Has led DEN to a +3.6 ORtg over nine years from 2016-17 to 2024-25. Includes a +5.4 (2024-25), +4.8 (2020-21), and +4.4 (2016-17).

Guys I was borderline on: Mikan, Hakeem, Duncan, Lanier, Embiid.

Mikan's from the '40s and '50s, so it's hard to extrapolate. I've always thought Hakeem's post-up game was overrated due to its flashiness. Duncan has better shot selection than Dream, but they rank similarly as post-up players to me. Lanier is more of an unknown to me; no notable team offenses in DET. Embiid has great individual post-up numbers per Synergy, but his team offenses haven't impressed.

FrodoBaggins wrote:- Wilt Chamberlain
- Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
- Bill Walton
- Adrian Dantley
- Kevin McHale
- Charles Barkley
- Shaquille O'Neal
- Nikola Jokic

So, I immediately wouldn't touch McHale or Dantley, because neither were sufficiently good passers, IMHO. Excellent individual play finishers, though.

Walton, if you ignore his heath issues, is an interesting one, as is Kareem.

Wilt is a tough one because he was so brutally useless at the line, and the same thing is true for Shaq, so there's a degree to which era matters to their candidacy.

Barkley's an interesting thought.

What about Jokic. He's the best passer. He's the best shooter. He's statistically superior to all of them. The question then becomes... what does he look like in an earlier era where the offense isn't as advanced and the spacing is worse?

I think my answer changes with era.

I think Jokic, Shaq, and Barkley are clearly ones you can build an elite offense around, since elite offenses have actually been built around them as the clear focal point. All three of them have led +5 rORTG teams (which I’ll use as a basic cutoff for elite offense). Shaq did it several times, with talented teams in Orlando and LA, but even once in 1998 when his team was good but not overwhelmingly so. Barkley did it twice with a pretty weak 76ers team and three times in a row when he joined a talented Suns team. Jokic has only done it once but with a much less talented team, and his on-court rORTG have been super high (for instance, this year his on-court rORTG was the 3rd highest on record).

Kareem is a tougher one to gauge. He had several 5+ rORTG teams on the Lakers, but never got even close to that prior to Magic Johnson showing up. He also did it once with the Bucks, but only that first year Oscar Robertson was still there. So it’s a bit hard to say if you can build a genuinely elite offense around Kareem, because he’s been part of genuinely elite offenses, but only when he had a teammate that is probably one of the top 7 best offensive players ever. When he didn’t have that, he didn’t actually get all that close to have a 5+ rORTG team. That said, I’m inclined to think elite offense could be built around Kareem, particularly since the Lakers had a 5+ rORTG in Magic’s rookie year when Kareem was still clearly the focal point. I do think that the above three guys are probably better in this regard though.

For Wilt, I think the answer is probably yes, but maybe not with his high-volume playstyle he had most of his career. He did lead an elite offense in 1967.

As for McHale and Dantley, I think it’s hard to know. Dantley was never the focal point of a good team, but his bad teams were bad enough offensively that I’m very skeptical. Meanwhile, McHale was mostly tethered to Bird, so it’s hard to know. The Celtics were only a +3 rORTG team the year Bird almost entirely missed, so that doesn’t really suggest the answer is yes, but it wasn’t a bad result and is only one year—if the Celtics had had someone less good than Bird but actually healthy that year, then maybe McHale could’ve been the focal point of an elite offense. I do have some skepticism though.

tsherkin wrote:...So, I immediately wouldn't touch McHale or Dantley, because neither were sufficiently good passers, IMHO. Excellent individual play finishers, though...Barkley's an interesting thought....

You don't like Dantley's passing but you find Barkley's interesting? In Dantley's 6 year prime in Utah, he was consistently in the 15-20 assist% range; Barkley in the 14-21 assist% in his prime in Philly. Dantley's TO% was 13 give or take half a point; Barkley started his prime with a TO% of 21.5 then brought his down to roughly 14 through the rest of his prime. And I think Dantley was just more aware of what was going on around him while Barkley had more tunnel vision, again, during their primes. Although they aren't fully dispositive, the stats give a slight edge to Dantley.

lessthanjake wrote:...Dantley was never the focal point of a good team, but his bad teams were bad enough offensively that I’m very skeptical....

Dang, those Frank Layden teams were indeed some bad offenses even with Dantley. Of course they stayed bad when Layden replaced Dantley as the focal point with Karl Malone and continued so even when Stockton got the starting PG position through the year Layden was fired and replaced by Jerry Sloan (that year stayed bad too). Then they at least improved to above average with one year in the top 5 until Hornacek came and they became a consistent top 5 offense.

We may be underestimated the effect of Barkley's great offensive rebounding too; something Stockton didn't offer and McHale was below average at for a post player of his era.

In the 80s, it was probably the smarter play (more efficient outcome) for guys like McHale and Dantley to go ahead and finish, as opposed to kicking it back out for a midrange attempt. An "And1" would be a more likely 3-point play than a behind the arc shot.

penbeast0 wrote:You don't like Dantley's passing but you find Barkley's interesting? In Dantley's 6 year prime in Utah, he was consistently in the 15-20 assist% range; Barkley in the 14-21 assist% in his prime in Philly. Dantley's TO% was 13 give or take half a point; Barkley started his prime with a TO% of 21.5 then brought his down to roughly 14 through the rest of his prime. And I think Dantley was just more aware of what was going on around him while Barkley had more tunnel vision, again, during their primes. Although they aren't fully dispositive, the stats give a slight edge to Dantley.

Oh, I'm with you, it's just the difference between the two of them is more centered around offensive rebounding than that I think Barkley was a better passer, or a significantly better scorer for that matter. Though I notice you did get to that in your reply to ltj.

Forgot about Dirk. His mid-post game circa 2008-2011 was something special. 1.15 ppp on 6.8 post-up poss/g in 2010-11. Incredible numbers considering the era and that he operated further from the basket than most post-up players.

FrodoBaggins wrote:Forgot about Dirk. His mid-post game circa 2008-2011 was something special. 1.15 ppp on 6.8 post-up poss/g in 2010-11. Incredible numbers considering the era and that he operated further from the basket than most post-up players.

"Hello, I'm 7 feet tall, have a high release and rainbow arc on my jumper. Would you like to attempt blocking my shot, or would you like to sit down and STFU right now?"

Dirk was nuts, man.

Ol Roy wrote:In the 80s, it was probably the smarter play (more efficient outcome) for guys like McHale and Dantley to go ahead and finish, as opposed to kicking it back out for a midrange attempt. An "And1" would be a more likely 3-point play than a behind the arc shot.

It worked to finish the play, but you did have to get the ball to them, and there is little about what they did which elevated others around them, which is why there was a ceiling to their offensive value. Strictly speaking about building an elite offense, they lag behind some of the other guys. Not that you'd do poorly with running the ball into them, it's just a little unipolar to be as broadly effective.