Amare Stoudemire and Paul Milsap

In 2007, I wrote that Paul Milsap was the exact type of player that Phoenix needed. Now that the Suns appear intent on trading Amare Stoudemire, I have to ask the question: who would you rather have?

Now, on its face, this is a spectacularly ridiculous question. Stoudemire is a perennial all-star who most people would list in or near the top ten talents in the NBA, while Milsap is only starting because Carlos Boozer is injured.

However, I ask because the Sacramento Kings fans, caught in a downward spiral not felt since the Kings moved to Sacramento, hang onto hope by dreaming of which player could be acquired for Brad Miller's contract or signed when Miller's deal expires. Milsap was a popular choice early in the season, but now Stoudemire seems to be coveted by fans.

While few would argue that Milsap is the better or even equal player, that is not always the question. Who would you want? Milsap, even when he gets his giant raise this summer, will likely command less than $10-million, while Stoudemire, when he hits free agency in 2010, will likely ask for $20-million. So, is Stoudemire twice as good as Milsap?

I believe in the superstar effect: a team really only has a chance to win the NBA championship if it has a superstar. Therefore, when it has a superstar, it has to spend whatever it costs to keep him, as superstars are rare. Which begs the question: Is Stoudemire a superstar? Will he lead a team to an NBA Championship? Or, is he a star, a Robin to someone else's Batman, or the number one player on team's destined not to win the championship?

With his well-chronicled aversion to defense, I would suggest that he is not a superstar - he is not the player on which to hitch a franchise's championship aspirations. And, if he is not the superstar to lead your team to a championship, is he worth $20-million?

I don't think Milsap is a superstar either. However, if I am building a franchise, I don't want to spend $20-million on my Robin, unless I have Batman in place or I have an endless bank account. So, for those teams other than Portland and New York ($$) and Cleveland, Boston, Los Angeles, Miami (Batmen), I would rather have Milsap and his more-friendly contract, hustle, rebounding and defense than the almost-superstar Stoudemire.

Stoudemire flourishes with Steve Nash. But, will he flourish when he gets his opportunity to be the man? Will he be a devastating back to the basket scorer or is he the type of post player who has to get the ball in motion to excel and score against bigger players and tougher defenders? Stoudemire is 26 and in the prime of his career, but $20-million is a lot of money for a team if you are not sure that he is your alpha-male. And, do you really want your alpha-male to be defense-averse?

It seems like Steve Kerr has decided that he wants his alpha-male to be someone else. However, someone will be lured into believing they can make Stoudemire into a defensive presence and the leader of a championship team. It's just a matter of who. This seems so strange because the combination of Robin Lopez and Stoudemire seemed so perfect as a post combination moving forward, as Lopez can run the floor and play defense and play with a selflessness that allows Stoudemire to get a high percentage of touches and shots to fuel his ego. I wonder what would have happened if the Suns did not have Shaq and the Lopez-Stoudemire combo was given time to marinate and develop.