Stoudemire will begin the season pretty much where Rodriguez finished his: on the bench, trying to ignore increasingly strident denunciations of him as a brittle and payroll-busting albatross. Stoudemire’s left knee, in which he recently suffered a ruptured cyst and will now need to be surgically cleaned out, will sideline him for up to two months. And the long-term prognosis — it’s always something — does match Rodriguez’s continuing affliction.

In terms of sheer magnitude and organizational magnanimity, it seems like a reach to compare Stoudemire’s five-year, $100 million contract to Rodriguez’s 10-year, $275 million haul that could reach $300 million depending on since-discredited home run benchmarks. But factoring in a few apples-and-oranges variables does raise an intriguing question: How can A-Rod’s deal be the absolute worst ever when, within the same city, Stoudemire appears to be having a more deleterious effect on the Knicks’ ability to so much as sniff championship contention.

Let me say that I am not in the habit of blaming any athlete for what he or she negotiates and shall not begin here. But frustrated fans generally do not absolve the highest-paid players for their perceived failure to live up to their contracts, for it’s the performers who are the ones on stage, within earshot. Furthermore, it’s not as if Hank Steinbrenner or James L. Dolan are about to work the phone bank for season-ticket renewals.

But let’s be abundantly clear: nobody forced either franchise to commit to these now-regrettable deals. Unlike the Yankees in the case of Rodriguez, the Knicks can at least defend the Stoudemire signing by insisting they had no other workable option: in the summer of 2010, they were spurned by free agents more prized than Stoudemire, and this after a two-year roster purge and grand promises made to the long-suffering New York fan base that better times were directly ahead.

Stoudemire would likely have remained in Phoenix had it come close to the Knicks’ maximum offer to a player the Suns drafted out of high school and developed into an All-Star. He did, however, “embrace the city and the Knicks” — as Donnie Walsh, their former president, reminded me recently — when others wanted no part of the daunting challenges of New York.

“You don’t realize how hard he works, how much he does, just to keep his knees going,” Walsh said. “I had no idea he was that good a guy and, in a way, that’s what the most refreshing thing was.”

That impression, unfortunately, was based on the first one Stoudemire made on New York, when he was healthy and the hub of a revived and appealing young team. It is also the one Walsh apparently took with him upon leaving town after Stoudemire’s first season with the Knicks, only months after the acquisition of Carmelo Anthony dramatically altered the core conditions under which Stoudemire arrived. (That’s another debate, not the one we are having here.)

We have since seen a different Stoudemire, ailing and ornery after the shotgun marriage to Anthony. Few people believe Anthony and Stoudemire, given their disparate styles as front-line scorers, can successfully coexist, and fewer expect that Stoudemire’s knees will allow him the privilege of again being an elite player.

With three years remaining on his deal, Stoudemire is probably as untradeable as Rodriguez, at least until he approaches the final year and becomes a potential asset as an expiring contract in another team’s attempt to clear salary-cap space. And unless he soon reverses a pattern of decline, the nearly $20 million that he will earn this season will certainly limit the Knicks’ competitive prospects within an N.B.A. financial system that is more restrictive than baseball’s.

After a decade of fielding teams that were not only terrible but distinctly unlikable, the Knicks believed they were opening a multiyear window to contend with Anthony, Stoudemire and Tyson Chandler in the prime of their careers. But with reinforcements long past their best days now added to a team that has won one playoff game in the last two seasons, the argument could be made that within two to three years the Knicks will be back to where they started in the summer of 2010.

Though the Yankees have expressed a strong desire to avoid paying steep revenue-sharing taxes in the future, they might just put that objective aside if the continued and costly presence of Rodriguez forces them to keep their payroll above $200 million. Even if they do bring the payroll down to the $189 million limit they covet, they will still outspend most competitors, even if you exclude the huge sum being paid to A-Rod.

And no matter how bitter Rodriguez’s contract tastes, and assuming he stays to the end, he will always have 2009, when he finally seized the postseason spotlight and the Yankees broke an eight-year World Series title drought.

The Knicks, in sharp, damning contrast, will note the 40th anniversary of their last N.B.A. title next spring. That, ultimately, makes their expensive mistakes more injurious to the greater cause than those of the Yankees. The malady known as “it’s always something” is exceedingly worse when there is never a full postseason of relief from the pain.

Amare is awesome and Donnie was a genius in paving the way.

I didn't want us to sign him and not particularly fond of the way he plays and has near zero leadership qualities, but he has shown a resiliency about himself which I can appreciate and he doesn't appear to be a bad person.

I'm more upset at the organization for putting this franchise in one of the most difficult set of circumstances known to man.

anrst wrote:where would we be without melo?

Thats a good question. Relying on gallo LOL

worst deal in all of HUMANITY is Dolan's deal with the devil...

Knicksfan wrote:This is a huge stretch here, especially since the Yankees aren't sure which A-Rod they are gonna get next season, for the humongous deal he has.

Its easy to pile on Amar'e now that he is out 'till November and the Doctor said he has grandpa's knees, but if he comes back and plays at least as he played last season (here is hope he plays like his first season, but still) then all is good in Knicks Land.

The Yankees? They benched A-Rod so many times in the playoffs with his inability to hit right-handers that they must wish his contract ended in 3 years.

Of course, but the phrase "the deal" is referring to the whole deal, not just the remaining years. The Yankees got a lot of excellent play out of A-Rod. We got half of a season from Amare.

gunsnewing wrote:

anrst wrote:where would we be without melo?

Thats a good question. Relying on gallo LOL

And really pissed off about the mcgrady trade.

tj23 wrote:Without Amare we never get Melo or Tyson and we win 40 or less games(at best) for who knows how long. We had to attract some big name here to earn some respect. Amare was the ticket out of hell, even if he put our cap back in it lol...

agreed... I think everyone agrees that Amar'e is damaged goods at this point. But he seems to have the ability for a bounce back season every now and again. Hopefully he's got one or two of those left.