Case can be made for Knicks trading Carmelo Anthony, but forget about it
Contrary to suggestions that the Knicks are closer to entertaining a trade for their franchise player, Carmelo Anthony isn't going anywhere.
By
Ken Berger
•
2 min read
The Phoenix Suns have a problem. Markieff Morris is angry that his brother, Marcus, was traded to the Detroit Pistons and has publicly demanded a trade, which resulted in a $10,000 fine from the NBA.
GM Ryan McDonough doesn't want to trade Morris for the pennies on the dollar he'll be offered due to the unrest surrounding his situation (including a felony assault charge against both Morris twins that remains unresolved). Coach Jeff Hornacek is hopeful for a reconciliation, but either way Suns owner Robert Sarver is said to be getting "antsy" with the team's rebuilding plan, according to a person well versed in Suns matters.
So what does Carmelo Anthony have to do with all this?
Well, recent speculation suggested that the Suns, amid all this Morris drama, would be wise to take a look at a deal for Anthony, and that the Knicks are "getting closer" to exploring trade options for their frachise player.
Is there any truth to this?
As of now, absolutely not.
For starters, before Anthony, an eight-time All-Star, could be traded, two things would have to happen: 1) Knicks president Phil Jackson and GM Steve Mills would have to have a conversation about it; and 2) with a no-trade clause, Anthony would have to agree to it -- and dictate the team and the terms.
On count one, the parties are not guilty; a person with direct knowledge of the Knicks' front-office discussions told CBS Sports Thursday that Jackson and Mills have not so much as had a discussion about trading Anthony -- no matter how much Peyote may or may not have been in the air.
After that, count two becomes a moot point, but either way Anthony's no-trade clause is merely one of many factors that would make trading the $124 million man problematic, to say the least.
The Suns' situation notwithstanding, a cogent argument could be made one way or the other about whether the Knicks should trade Anthony. On one hand, he's 31, he's one of the NBA's highest-paid players and he's on the downward slope of his career.
On the other, Anthony committed to the Knicks for five years last summer when he easily could've gone elsewhere, and the reality is that stars of Anthony's caliber are irreplaceable. As flawed as the Nuggets were with Anthony, they've never fully recovered since trading him. Neither have the Jazz since trading Deron Williams, despite his unfortunate physical demise during his time with the Nets. (I like the Jazz and don't particularly like Williams, but facts are facts. Utah has been to the playoffs once since trading him.)
The Raptors have managed two first-round playoff exits since losing Chris Bosh to the Heat. The Cavs didn't recover from losing LeBron James until they signed ... LeBron James.
Superstars in the NBA are irreplaceable. Sometimes, you experience bad luck and lose one in free agency (see the Trail Blazers and LaMarcus Aldridge). But why would you lose one by choice? With the salary cap skyrocketing over the next two years, stars have never been more affordable and valuable than they are right now.
More crucial to the discussion is that, whatever you think about whether the Knicks should trade Carmelo Anthony, the Knicks themselves aren't thinking it. And so the mess in Phoenix has nothing to do with the mess in New York.
And now, we move onto the next September NBA non-story. Don't worry; it's right around the corner.
