What If the Knicks Didn't Call Carmelo Anthony's Bluff?
Feb. 21, 2011.
To some Knicks fans, that lives on as one of the best and most important dates in franchise history. To others, it's viewed as one of the biggest blunders that a team notorious for blunders has ever made. To some others still, it's viewed as the start of an era that ultimately was fun, but didn't amount to anything.
Feb. 21, 2011 is, of course, the date that Carmelo Anthony was traded to the Knicks. After months of speculation, the Knicks sent a package comprised of Danilo Gallinari, Wilson Chandler, Raymond Felton, Timofey Mosgov, their 2014 first round pick and the right to swap first rounders in 2016 in return for Anthony, Chauncey Billups, Shelden Williams, Anthony Carter and Renaldo Balkman.
Essentially stuck with a handful of money they were itching to spend, not two days later, the then-New Jersey Nets — who had been competing with the Knicks for the right to trade for and extend Anthony to spearhead their move to Brooklyn — completed a trade for Deron Williams of the Utah Jazz, sending Derrick Favors, Devin Harris and two first round picks (their own 2011 pick and Golden State's 2012) to Utah in exchange for the perennial All-Star guard.
At the time, many thought that perhaps the Nets had come out looking better than the Knicks. Williams was largely considered one of the top two point guards in the league at the time (along with Chris Paul), while Carmelo was a fantastic scorer, but not nearly on the level of LeBron James, Dwyane Wade or Kobe Bryant in the realm of wing players.
As time went on, it became pretty clear that the Knicks wound up with the better player in the long run. Williams' career took a steep decline in Brooklyn, resulting in the Nets buying out the final year of his contract in 2015. Anthony would last two years longer than that with the Knicks, getting traded to the Oklahoma City Thunder prior to the 2017-18 season.
One thing that has always been a bug in my mind is: What would've happened if the tables were turned? What if the Knicks had acquired Williams after the Nets had won out in the bidding war for Anthony? Let's assume for the sake of argument that the Knicks kept Mosgov in the Williams trade (weirdly, Mosgov was almost the sticking point of the Melo deal) and the Nets gave up the same package for Anthony. Here are just a few of the thousands of threads that could be pulled in the quilt of this New York what-if:
How would the trades have affected how the Knicks and Nets built their rosters?
Acquiring Carmelo seemed like a pretty decent fit at the time for the Knicks, but time would tell that he, Amar'e Stoudemire, and the soon-to-be-acquired Tyson Chandler were actually a really poor fit together.
As basketball as a whole got increasingly smaller during Melo's time in New York, he insisted on playing the nominal small forward position, rather than staying at the power forward as he had during the 2012-13 season when Stoudemire was injured for much of the year.
Meanwhile, in New Jersey and Brooklyn, the Nets of course famously made the move prior to the 2013-14 season to acquire over-the-hill Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce from Boston while simultaneously giving up a treasure trove of draft picks that fueled the Celtics for over half a decade. That move came after a trade prior to the 2012-13 season that brought Joe Johnson to Brooklyn as well.
So what would've changed, had the Nets had a core of Carmelo Anthony and Brook Lopez to build around, and the Knicks had Deron Williams and Amar'e Stoudemire?
Honestly, the butterfly effect would have likely benefitted the Nets a lot more than the Knicks in this scenario. The Nets would have had Anthony entrenched at the small/power forward spot and Brook Lopez at center, perhaps making point guard more of a priority for them.
Rather than trading (deep breath) Houston's 2013 first rounder, their 2017 second rounder, their 2014, 2016 and 2018 first rounders and the right to swap their 2015 and 2017 firsts cumulatively to Atlanta and Boston in the Johnson and Pierce/Garnett deals, could the Nets have just pushed their chips in a year earlier to acquire Chris Paul in 2011 to pair with Anthony? It's definitely not out of the realm of possibility — the Knicks were linked to Paul basically until the moment he was traded to the Clippers (neé Lakers) in 2011, but just couldn't ever get a competitive offer together. Paul famously made a toast at Melo's wedding in the summer of 2011 saying maybe he, Melo and Amar'e could've teamed up in New York... could that have been about Paul, Melo and Brook Lopez instead? Could they have gotten Paul and then still gotten Joe Johnson in 2012 to form a big 3.5 (including Lopez)?
Meanwhile, with Deron Williams and Amar'e Stoudemire, the Knicks probably also would've gone out hunting for a third star as well. Ultimately, they probably would have settled in the same place that they did with Melo, signing Tyson Chandler in 2011 free agency. After a historically league-altering 2010 free agency period, 2011 was extremely underwhelming once Melo opted to guarantee a trade and extension the year prior. The headliner was Marc Gasol, who would've surely had any offer matched by Memphis as a restricted free agent, and Chandler was the next-best free agent overall that offseason.
If they stayed healthy, Williams, Stoudemire and Chandler could've made a great combo. Of course, nothing about this hypothetical would magically repair STAT's rapidly-degrading knees, Williams' ankles still would've been a huge problem, and Chandler's kids still would get him sick all the time. For whatever faults he had, Anthony was mostly healthy for his first few years in New York. Williams, like Stoudemire, started breaking down at a rapid rate once he hit the tri-state area.
One potential positive about the Knicks getting Williams instead of Anthony would be the potential for more cap flex and preserving their amnesty clause from the 2011 lockout. Williams was on the third year of a four-year, $70 million rookie extension when he came to the Nets, meaning he made about $17 million in 2011-12 compared to Carmelo's first year of his three-year, $62 million extension that he signed to come to the Knicks.
More importantly, the Knicks wouldn't have acquired Chauncey Billups, thus giving them enough room to sign Chandler outright and preserving their amnesty clause granted after the lockout. Presumably, that would have given the Knicks an out to relieve themselves of Stoudemire's or Williams' contract when their bodies began to break down down the line. Would the Knicks have been able to use that space to sign a difference-maker? Who knows, but they could have given themselves another shot at Melo in 2014, if nothing else!
How would it have affected the perception of Melo, D-Will and their respective organizations?
This is a big, big topic, particularly as it pertains to the players themselves.
Again, for all of his faults in New York, Carmelo Anthony was a model citizen and adored by media and fans for his level-headedness and aplomb when dealing with the media. He was a lightning rod if there ever was one, taking all of the most difficult questions during the Knicks' toughest stretches (and there were plenty) and having the ability to politely "no comment" the more prying questions away.
Regardless of whether he ended up in New York or New Jersey (and then Brooklyn), Anthony's perception by the media likely wouldn't have changed. Perhaps playing for the Nets would have actually even gotten him more good will, particularly if they had been able to get him someone like Chris Paul and they were able to achieve more postseason success than he had with the Knicks.
Williams, on the other hand, may not have even made it to the point of signing a new contract with the Knicks in 2012, as he wound up doing with the Nets. Williams said this of his time in Brooklyn in an interview with Yahoo! Sports in 2015, after his buyout with the Nets that summer that paved the way for him to sign with the Mavericks:
"It took a lot out of me, man, those three years. Some of the hardest in my life. Made me question if I even wanted to play basketball when I was done with that contract."
He would go on to say, "It’s cool. There’s a lot of people, I guess, who aren’t built for New York. New York is not for everybody."
If playing for the Nets in Brooklyn managed to do that to Williams' psyche and affect him that much, what would playing at Madison Square Garden have done to him? Yes, the Nets took some media heat for the Johnson/Garnett/Pierce debacle, but ultimately not nearly as much as the Knicks would have in the same situation. Plus, things would have been bumpy right away for the Williams/Stoudemire duo in New York — Williams missed 11 games in the 66-game lockout-shortened 2011-12 season, while Stoudemire missed 19 in what would be the first year of his rapid physical decline with the Knicks. Could that situation have broken Williams mentally even sooner?
As far as the perception of the Knicks and Nets, it probably also would have worked out way better for the Nets in this situation. The Knicks would've been dealing with the rapid health-related decline of both Williams and Stoudemire on max contracts, while the Nets would've, at bare minimum, had a mostly healthy Melo. Lopez was another story entirely, almost missing the entire 2011-12 and 2013-14 campaigns, but again, the Nets were clearly willing to move assets to attempt to contend and likely would have given Anthony at least one more co-star.
No more Linsanity!
Linsanity was a small handful of games, a blip in the basketball history of the Knicks where end-of-the-bench player Jeremy Lin caught fire and lit not just New York City, but the world, on fire for over a month.
With Deron Williams instead of Carmelo Anthony, it's likely that Linsanity never happens. Yes, Williams missed 11 games in the abbreviated 2011-12 season (the same as Anthony), which could potentially have opened the door for a miniature Linsanity at some point. But outside of a five-game stretch to end the season, Williams' longest missed game streak was four in March. Melo missed seven straight games in February, which was what paved the way for Lin to have his nuclear hot streak.
How would the teams have fared record-wise?
This is easily the most difficult to figure out. In Anthony's time with the Knicks, the team went 221-283 in about six-and-a-half seasons. In Williams' time with the Nets, they went 160-177 in four-plus seasons. That's a 43.8% win percentage for Anthony and 47.5% for Williams.
At his peak, Melo was an MVP candidate in 2012-13, leading the Knicks to the second overall seed in the East with a 54-28 record and taking the Pacers to six games in the Eastern Conference semifinals. Meanwhile, Williams' crowning achievement record-wise was a 49-33 mark in the 2012-13 season, and playoffs-wise was a second-round defeat to the Miami Heat in five games in 2013-14. Neither will really blow you away!
It could definitely be argued that Williams had more help on his roster, however, considering Joe Johnson managed to stay mostly healthy in his time in Brooklyn versus Stoudemire's constant state of injury. Brook Lopez wasn't much better, though, and the corpses of Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce clearly didn't do much either, while Anthony had JR Smith and Tyson Chandler healthy for most of his tenure in New York.
In the end, how both teams would have done probably has a lot to do with how they would have approached team-building. If the Knicks had ended up with Williams/Stoudemire/Chandler and kept the amnesty clause in their back pocket, could they have added another star at some point? If the Nets had a core of Anthony and Lopez, would they have made smarter moves, like trading for Chris Paul, and created a core that actually had a shot of being a contender?
Like everything examined in this piece, it's all completely up in the air and we'll never know for sure. Still, it's interesting to think about, and definitely one of the more intriguing what-ifs in Knicks history.
