Danilo Gallinari’s claim that he’s the “biggest what-if guy in the history of the game” stirred up the usual debate, and plenty of names came up fast. Penny Hardaway, Grant Hill, Derrick Rose and Bill Walton all have stronger injury-riddled cases on paper. But from the Knicks’ side of the ledger, Gallinari’s name lands differently because his story is tied to one of the franchise’s most painful maybes.
New York took Gallinari with the No. 6 pick in the 2008 NBA Draft and kept him for most of three seasons before moving him in the 2010-11 deal that brought Carmelo Anthony to Madison Square Garden. That trade remains one of the most sensitive topics for Knicks fans who lived through that stretch, especially because many have long wondered whether the team could have simply waited and signed Anthony the following summer.
Anthony himself has said he told the Knicks in 2011 not to blow up the roster to get him.
Melo went through A LOT in his trade from Denver to New York 😂
"If they would've called his [James Dolan] bluff ... I woulda been stuck in Denver forever." pic.twitter.com/uINllmi1dD
- 7PM in Brooklyn (@7PMinBrooklyn) December 5, 2024
That is where the Knicks’ version of the Gallinari what-if starts to take on real weight. The question is not just what Gallinari might have become elsewhere. It is what New York might have been if it had not emptied the cupboard for Anthony.
The assumption in that alternate path is straightforward: Anthony arrives in 2011 as an unrestricted free agent. If that happens, the Knicks are looking at a roster with far more balance and far more depth than the one they actually ended up with.
At the top, there would still have been Anthony and Amar'e Stoudemire, who had the Knicks above .500 at the time of the trade and earned All-NBA Second Team honors in 2010-11. And if Anthony comes later instead of via trade, the Knicks may also keep a valuable piece they used in that deal: the amnesty clause.
New York applied it to Chauncey Billups, who came over in the Anthony trade. Without the trade, Billups would not have been on the roster, and the Knicks might have had the chance to use the amnesty clause on Stoudemire’s hefty contract once injuries started cutting into his value.
The deeper issue is the group New York gave up to make the deal happen. Wilson Chandler, Raymond Felton, Gallinari and Timofey Mozgov all would have remained in the fold.
Felton’s half-season with the Knicks produced 17.1 points, 9.0 assists and 1.8 steals per game, while Chandler and Gallinari later became key pieces for a Nuggets team that won 57 games in 2012-13. Mozgov, meanwhile, developed into a strong backup center.
If Tyson Chandler still ended up signing with New York, the roster picture gets even better. Felton and Chandler would have formed a steady backcourt.
Anthony and Gallinari would have given the Knicks two versatile scorers who could create on or off the ball. Chandler and Mozgov would have provided a solid interior pairing in the starting and backup spots.
There is also the age factor. The players New York traded away were all still on the rise: Gallinari was 22, Chandler 23, Mozgov 24 and Felton 26. That group had room to keep growing, and the Knicks could have used that kind of younger, selfless depth to survive Stoudemire’s injury problems and keep the window open longer.
Instead, the franchise bet everything on Anthony, then tried to patch the rest of the roster with older veterans. From that angle, Gallinari’s question is not just rhetorical. For the Knicks, it is the one that still hangs over the whole deal: what if?
In Other News...
Knicks Still Have One Clear Roster Need Before Camp Opens
The Knicks spent the summer reshaping the front of their roster, but one quiet need remains as camp approaches: a third center. With Karl-Anthony Towns and Andre Drummond set to anchor the rotation, New York is still thin behind them after Mitchell Robinson and Ariel Hukporti departed in free agency, leaving the club looking for another big man who can give the staff some peace of mind at the start of the season.
Leon Rose and the front office have been surveying the market for veterans who can fill that gap without changing the teams bigger plans. Tony Bradley has been on the radar, and Drew Eubanks is another name in the mix as the Knicks weigh whether to add depth now or keep flexibility for later in the season. Another move could always come before the trade deadline, but for the moment, center remains the clearest unfinished item on the board. [Read more 🡒]
Knicks Still Have A Ben Simmons Option They May Need Later
Ben Simmons has landed with the Sacramento Kings on a one-year deal that could pay him up to $3.5 million, and the arrangement gives him a real chance to re-establish himself after a long stretch of uncertainty. For the Knicks, it is another reminder that their search for help in the frontcourt never really ends, especially when a player with Simmons size and playmaking profile comes off the board and onto a roster in flux.
New York did have interest in bringing Simmons back this offseason, but the sides never got to an agreement, leaving the door cracked rather than shut. The Knicks still view him as a possible option later if circumstances change, which means his fit in New York could become a storyline again depending on how Sacramento handles the situation and whether Simmons is still available down the line. [Read more 🡒]
Knicks May Need To Speed Up Their Center Search Fast
The Knicks have been taking a patient approach to finding help at center, but the market may not stay patient with them. A new injury in Phoenix has changed the math around available big men, and it comes at a time when New York has already been weighing its options and trying to avoid a rushed move.
Phoenix suddenly has a more urgent need to add size and depth in the middle, which could tighten the pool of available centers for everyone else. For the Knicks, that means the wait-and-see strategy they have used up to this point may not last much longer if the same players they have been monitoring start drawing heavier interest elsewhere. [Read more 🡒]