Rasho Brezec wrote:This is the same scenario as with the Bargnani trade, trying to diminish the importance of everything to rationalize a bad move and it always turns out to be false.
"Those draft picks are meaningless, they had to be included to get rid of Novak"
"The no-trade clause is not important, players hate us because of this"
It is a completely distorted line of thinking and it always comes back to haunt us. There is a reason why only 4 players had a no-trade clause last season, Kobe, Duncan, Garnett and Nowitzki. They've proven themselves loyal to their teams, they've all won MVP's with them, they've all made them perennial playoff teams and they've all gotten at least to the conference finals with them. Carmelo doesn't meet a single criteria.
Bargnani doesn't have a no trade clause so why can't the Knicks trade him? Same with Amare Stoudemire? Exactly...because they are both broken with big contracts. It doesn't need a no trade clause. If Carmelo Anthony breaks, NO ONE is going to trade for him either regardless of whether he has a no-trade clause or not.
And if you are comparing Anthony to Bargnani please see my distorted thinking comment. The Knicks are not trading a thing for Anthony unlike Bargnani and Anthony (even for the most fervent haters...see TKF level) is far better than Bargnani.