I'm referring to your voluntary original explanation - "which is a huge compliment" - not to your subsequent response to me.
Meant as such perhaps, but not effectively expressed as such. Putting aside the other three definitions, in which the pejorative connotation ranges from mild to severe, let's expand your preferred one to include the usage examples:
"someone or something that is similar to a well-known person or thing but is not as good. He was only ever a mediocre singer - they used to call him 'the poor man's Frank Sinatra'. 'So what did you think of the film?' 'It was just a poor man's 'Pulp Fiction'."
Now the pejorative comes through there too, does it not?
Therein lies the problem, with which I tried (unsuccessfully it seems) to be of assistance. If I wince at an inappropriate choice of words, I'm confident others will too.
As they did in prior threads where they perceived your player comparisons as knocking the "lesser" player or even multiple players ("plays like a walk-on").
It's not a matter of ill intent, maybe just a tonal deaf spot. Perhaps you're doomed to be misunderstood in this regard.
But you do good work. Just excellent in many ways. So what's a little malaprop among friends?
