Canzano says . . .

[Da_O]

... In the first quarter last night, Stoudemire was able to take advantage of some mismatches against the smaller Warriors, but for the game he only shot 7-18 from the field because he was usually trying to score one-on-one. Once he entered the game, Ronny Turiaf was largely able to shut Stoudemire down in man-to-man situations, much like Brian Scalabrine and Matt Bonner in previous contests. Stoudemire is so-so as a self-created scorer and spotty as a passer, which means that he's not a strong fit as a centerpiece that the offense should run through (as opposed to him finishing plays). When Stoudemire averaged over 20 points per game without Nash in '03-'04 (and the Suns did feature some talented guards that year in Stephon Marbury and Anferenee Hardaway early on and Leandro Barbosa and Joe Johnson later), what was his field goal percentage and what was the team's record? Why are the Suns 6-12 (.333) over the last five seasons when Stoudemire has played and Nash hasn't?

Stoudemire is not the kind of LeBron James/Kobe Bryant/Dwyane Wade scorer that some of you apparently fancy him as, nor can he score in the post like Tim Duncan or a prime Shaquille O'Neal or, dare I say it, even Boris Diaw. If you watch him, Stoudemire struggles to routinely create space and separation with his one-on-one moves and because he doesn't dribble well, the ball lags behind his body movement, thus neutralizing some of his athleticism and allowing defenders to stay with him, even guys who are mediocre athletes by NBA standards such as Scalabrine and Bonner.

To be worthy of the $20M-plus per season that he will be seeking on his next contract, Stoudemire would need to become a really strong all-around power forward who defends, rebounds, and passes consistently, and to this point he has shown little consistency in any of those areas. Indeed, paying a specialist as if he were a franchise player would constitute a terrible mistake, more apt for a general manager like Isiah Thomas. Without the kind of substantial improvement that I've spoken to, Stoudemire would be no better than Zach Randolph in terms of leading a team anywhere. ...

 

[Da_O]

Yeah I stand by my statement, I'd rather have Z-bo that Amare.

 

[Da_O]

You lost any credibility.

Amare is a tier above LaMarcus.

Zach, despite his #'s, is a tier below both Amare and LaMarcus.

Amare > Aldridge > Randolph

Obviously you don't know anything.

 

[MickZagger]

Gotcha.

I don't think, though, that it's inconsistent to say that I am happy to have LA but I see Amare as a massive upgrade. Thinking Stoudemire is a lot better doesn't mean that I think Aldridge deserves to be traded.

I would trade any player on the team in order to upgrade. Roy and Oden are almost impossible to upgrade on... Aldridge is a very good player, but there are players at the power forward spot that may become available to improve the team, and Stoudemire is one of those guys.

Ed O.

A massive upgrade? C'mon lets get real. Both of them are a little below average defenders. They both have range, Stoudemire can explode to the rim better and pass out of double teams better, but he's also further along in his career and in his prime. Stoudemire is a little better, I'll give you that. But he's not a "massive" ugrade.