The original article compared Erdos to Euler. They are comparable only in sheer number of publications. Erdos was a nice and eccentric fellow and a competent mathematician who liked to solve specific problems with other colleagues . Erdos is not in the same universe of not only Euler but of any Fields medal winner. His made claim to fame is his "number", but so is Kevin Bacon's.
Who was comparing him to any Fields medal winner? You said his papers were of "very limited quality." That's what I'm saying is untrue. That isn't to say there aren't some stinkers in the mix. Anyone who publishes 1500+ papers is going to have some stinkers. But, "very limited quality" as a general assessment is way, way off the mark, IMO.
Yes, Erdos and Euler are not really comparable, but that's mostly the effect of 250 years and a lot of drugs, IMO. :P
