Why the Knicks Should Have Traded Carmelo Anthony Before Mike D'Antoni Escaped

With Carmelo Anthony sidelined and Mike D'Antoni free to run the offense, the New York Knicks were a dominant 6-1. With Anthony back in the lineup and demanding the ball, the Knicks were a putrid 2-8.

As great as Anthony is, sometimes, a player just doesn't fit the system. Anthony should have been traded before D'Antoni resigned.

While an 18-24 record was rather underwhelming, so is Melo's 40 percent field-goal percentage and his 30.8 percent shooting from distance.

With that being said, no statistic or win-loss record could truly define what the problem is.

With the group of Raymond Felton, Wilson Chandler, Danilo Gallinari and Amare Stoudemire, D'Antoni led the Knicks to a 15-9 record. Why? Because the Knicks had players that matched the system they were running, not the talent that brings in the money.

Upon trading away those very players to acquire Anthony, the Knicks have gone a combined 45-59, including a 4-0 loss to the Celtics in the 2011 NBA playoffs. One of the driving forces behind this failure has been the change in strategy, as Anthony abruptly took over as the Knicks' primary ball-handler and facilitator.

With the offense suddenly revolving around one player, rather than a fully-functional unit, the Knicks began to falter.

So whose fault is it? Do you blame the head coach who had a functional system in place, leading the Knicks to their best start since Patrick Ewing? The same coach who created Linsanity, bringing the Knicks on a captivating winning streak that had the nation believing in the Knicks' title chances.

Or do you blame the one player who has consistently broken up any chance the Knicks have had at truly contending? The one constant in the Knicks' downward spirals.

It's rather self-explanatory, but clearly, the Knicks have yet to realize that no individual is more important than a franchise.