Latrell wrote:And also someone you wouldn't want to build your team around or have him start.
Depends on the particulars.
JellosJigglin wrote:It has everything to do with his perceived potential in today's NBA, which is what the OP was questioning. Our opinions differ. I agree with the rest of your post regarding DRob, Ewing and Olajuwon moving off-ball but they played in eras that highlighted their post players. It was an era when the focus was getting their post players the ball in advantageous spots. In today's NBA the focus is on getting perimeter guys open looks.
Right, but I think we might still be speaking past one another.
Those guys played more like big SFs or PFs than this idea of "post play" which centers around someone like Okafor. They played a game far more similar to Toronto-era Chris Bosh than Shaq, and that's a really significant difference in terms of the spots they most frequently used and how they got their points. They supplemented with backdowns, they didn't go to that as a primary MO, and when they did it, it usually wasn't a drawn-out isolation.
My point is this: Okafor's brand of backdown isolation isn't actually a focal element of what made earlier post players very strong, and we've learned a lot about post offense in the intervening years. It's very clear that perimeter-oriented offense was a better choice even BEFORE the 2005 rules changes, and even before the 5-second backdown rule was implemented, for that matter. Post isolation is slow, weakly correlated with shifting of the defense and aside from a handful of stellar legends in league history, not what actually made post players a worthy option.
They're mostly at their best as reactive players. They hit the offensive glass, they screen and roll, they dive cut when perimeter guys penetrate so they can get lobs and dump-offs. They cut off-ball for feeds leading to quick moves and they hustle in transition to get out ahead of the D or to come slicing in as trailers. They're almost never very good for offense in the role of INITIATOR or ISOLATOR. That's the point.
If Okafor's major contribution is going to only be isolation offense, in ANY era where he isn't Shaq/Wilt/Kareem, that's not going to be as worthwhile as a perimeter star. We've learned. Post play was misapplied in a number of different situations historically. Just because it WAS an emphasis doesn't mean that it was the best choice, and again, the style element is very different. The strength of post players aside from the precious few isn't isolation at all, it's the other stuff which they can offer an offense.
The trick for Okafor is going to be more about what else he can add. He needs to improve out of the PnR some, and he needs more time playing with a competent backcourt. Then we can see what he really is. All around the league right now, we're seeing a REVIVAL of the post, the exact opposite of what you're saying... but teams seem to have generally learned that volume isolation is a weak tool regardless of location. The Spurs even shifted away from it with Duncan, going to using him more as a decoy to develop a broader set because it was a more effective tool even with a guy nominally a strong post player. Better to use him in PnR and as a post/repost/swing kind of player unless there was a good mismatch, because shy of Shaq-type dominance, that's a more reliable and effective set.
The 90s were an era of focus for post players because we had the talent. 84-92, teams drafted Olajuwon, Ewing, Robinson, Shaq and Zo. Of course you're going to see an era of focus on the post when you have that much talent in the league at the position. We're starting to see some of that again with KP, Towns, Embiid, Okafor, Nicholson, Vucevic, another rise in wing post action, Dwight, Denver's folk, etc, etc, etc.
Gotta have the talent to have the focus. You wouldn't be making that comment had Oden and Bynum remained healthy. It's an issue of availability more than anything else, not of rules.
My RealGM account is old enough to drink. 
