LaMarcus Aldridge post fadeaway: Is it an all-time great move?

Does Aldridge’s post fadeaway remain as potent in the playoffs?

The post fadeaway has long been a staple in the NBA and history hasn’t necessarily been kind to big men who’ve used this as their bread-and-butter move.

To rattle off a few of the names of past superstars who utilized it to catapult their careers: Wilt Chamberlain (whom history crowns as the originator), Patrick Ewing (especially from the baseline), and previously mentioned forwards Kevin Garnett and Dirk Nowitzki.

Besides all of them being recognized as either Naismith Hall of Famers or bona fide locks for the future, they’ve all had to unfairly carry the distinction of what history has sometimes deemed the loser’s shot. As Bill Simmons once described it in The Book of Basketball in 2009:

"My theory on the fall-away: it’s a passive-aggressive shot that says more about a player than you think. (Continued) Well, five basketball stars in the past sixty years have been famous for either failing miserably in the clutch or lacking the ability to rise to the occasion: Wilt, Hayes, Malone, Ewing and Garnett. All five were famous for their fall-away/turnaround jumpers and took heat because their fall-aways pulled them out of rebounding position. If it missed, almost always it was a one-shot possession. On top of that, it never leads to free throws—either the shot falls or the other team gets it. Could you make the case that the fall-away, fundamentally, is a loser’s shot? For a big man, it’s the dumbest shot you can take—only one good thing can happen and that’s it—as well as a symbol of a larger problem, namely, that a team’s best big man would rather move away from the basket than toward it. So here’s my take: the fall-away says, “I’d rather stay out here.” It says, “I’m afraid to fail.” It says, “I want to win this game, but only on my terms.” (381, 382)."

The keyword there was “unfairly.” After struggling to re-position himself as the alpha dog after Kawhi Leonard’s injury in the 2017 postseason, Aldridge too, had to deal with media-driven narratives that he was a postseason underperformer.

This narrative completely ignored Aldridge’s own injuries, along with the ample double and triple teams he had to deal with from the Warriors defense. Here’s a personal favorite: a clip from Game 1 of the Warriors series two seasons ago.

Box score numbers would point to Aldridge being “passive.” It’s hard to be anything but passive with defenders coming in a man-to-man set, with help on the weak and strong side with traps immediately after the touch.

All it took was one uncharacteristic series or two for the media to forget that — taking away the 2017 postseason — Aldridge averages 21.9 points and 8.8 rebounds per game on 45.4 percent shooting in the Playoffs.

As for if Aldridge’s fadeaway jumper translates into postseason play, it does. It passes the litmus test, falling just a shade under his regular season work.

All told, he hit on 47.4 percent of his turnaround fadeaway jumpers in his postseason career (37-of-78 in total), including a blistering 18-of-37 over the last three postseasons.

In terms of the burning question of where Aldridge’s turnaround ranks in history?

Over the past few years, ESPN, Bleacher Report, and Uproxx have done featured stories on the most unstoppable go-to shots, and none of them have included Aldridge’s go-to move. As said, it’s certainly a tier below some of the more well-known ones.

Though, when you start to get into that second or third tier — with moves such as Tony Parker‘s floater and Rajon Rondo‘s no-look pass — there’s absolutely a case for why Aldridge’s fadeaway deserves to go down as give-or-take, a top-15 or top-20 go-to move in basketball history.

It passes the test of longevity (how does 14 years sound?), proven models of efficiency, and even portability into the postseason.

That being the case, it wouldn’t be a surprise to see the go-to shot end up much like Aldridge’s career has turned out: under-the-radar, painfully overlooked through time, and passed on as a secondary story to a more exciting play.

Yet, from a diehard fan’s perspective, one just has to hope that Aldridge’s turnaround fadeaway — doesn’t fade away.