DetroitEWarren
Veteran
I agree wit everything you said EXCEPT MARK PRICE. Would definitely be a great value/Meijer brand Steph Curry type nikka. Hed probably be a consistent 20/8/5 on 50/40/90 splitsClyde Drexler wouldn't be "average" but he would't be a superstar in this era. His jump shot was too broken and he could only go right on the dribble and looked at the ball. Plus his basketball IQ was never very high (MJ and Phil famously mocked him for it) and he used to eat a ton off the fast break which ain't that big now. Back in that day his size/athleticism was unusual for a guard, but now there are a lot more guys in his range and defenses would just shade him right and then what? Exactly what would Drexler do in this era that, say, Wiggins can't do?
Tom Chambers would be just another guy now that every big man has range out to at least 18 feet.
What would Vin Baker be now?
I don't think Mark Price would be able to get his shot off nearly as easily and he would be food on defense. He's too short and too slow - if today's defensive pgs got in his grill then what? Look at how Jimmer struggled to stay in the league and remember that Price was even smaller than him. He would still have a place in the NBA because his ballhandling and passing was much better, but he wouldn't be making no all-star teams and might not even start depending.
Imagine Gordon Hayward if he was 5 inches shorter. And you have Jeff Hornacek.
Rodman would be a bigger liability on offense because back then you had to have a man guarding him, now you could just ignore him completely. Look at the treatment Draymond got when his shot fell off - Rodman would get even less respect than that. On defense he wouldn't be quite as valuable because off-ball defense inside is a lot more important than on-ball defense, and a lot of those big men are dropping back and shooting over guys too. Not that he wouldn't still be an elite defender, it just wouldn't have the same value now that it did then.