And a lot of those other names are highly debatable- to say the least.
Really? Have you learned
nothing from recent discussions? I'll stick with the names of current players that you took issue with, be sure to pay attention, because I know it's going to be hard for you to wrap your brain around these concepts:
Let's assume that the players you took specific issue with (Billups, Anthony, Pierce, Ming and Carter) all have peripheral--with respect to scoring--statistics that wash out with those of Drexler. This may not be necessarily true in all cases (most of them actually are similar to Drexler per 36 minutes or excel in one category that would completely wipe out and exceed the differences in others, so this actually helps your position out), but I don't want to have to go through
every single one of these guys and explain every minute detail to your satisfaction, mainly because I know that the more and more that I explain, the more and more you will helplessly flail at straws to cling to your point, and thus the more pain in the ass it will be for me.
So anyway, they all wash out in the peripherals, and the only differences we are (as we should be) interested in are those in the scoring department (given in points per 36 minutes):
Drexler: 21.3
Yao Ming: 21.1
Chauncey Billups: 17.2
Paul Pierce: 21.8
Carmelo Anthony: 24.4
Vince Carter: 22.9
Now, I'll forget for the moment that a majority of these guys actually out-score Drexler straight-up, and just jump straight into adjusting those point totals for the context of the modern era (up-ticking them by 11%, the difference in league-average scoring per game between Drexler's era and the modern era), effectively turning those point totals for the modern players into what the equivalent point totals would be in Drexler's day:
Drexler: 21.3 (he gets no boost because he's not changing contexts)
Yao Ming: 23.4
Chauncey Billups: 19.1
Paul Pierce: 24.1
Carmelo Anthony: 27.1
Vince Carter: 25.4
So then, all but one of the players on my list significantly out-score Drexler when viewed through the context of his (Drexler's) own era, and since we have assumed that all else is equal, they are therefore better than Drexler was, and they therefore retain their spot on the list.
Now, I know you want so badly to nit-pick at the little assumption I made at the beginning of this little study, but remember this: the vast majority of the players looked at above out-performed Drexler in
the most important element of NBA basketball, so there would have to be some
huge differences in peripheral stats to even
consider removing them from their positions above Drexler (I checked, and there aren't).
What about Billups? Well, that's up to you: you can either admit that Drexler isn't "easily" in the top-50 of NBA players, or you can ask to have him removed completely, at which point I will just insert one of the other 5 or so players from the modern(ish) era that out-performed Drexler in an environment where it was harder to do the thing they out-performed him in. Your choice.
