New York Knicks: Pros and cons of trading Enes Kanter to Kings

Con: Does it actually move the needle?

A Kanter trade removes an unhappy player and returns someone from the New York Knicks’ past, but does this actually make a difference for the 2018-19 squad and beyond? Otherwise, does it fail to move the needle?

Trading the former lottery pick for a fellow expiring contract, especially a player without a future in New York, potentially provides no long-term gain for the Knicks.

Sure, it settles one long-running issue, but without gain, unless the deal expands to something grander that makes it worthwhile.

Taking just Randolph or even Kosta Koufos means just a short-term look at either player, barring there are no buyouts. The Knicks should not want a contract that extends into 2019-20 to preserve that precious cap space, but if they can’t land an asset, even a small one, this provides nothing for the team to look forward to.

Trading Kanter for Randolph means as much as buying out the former. Maybe he does not agree to that and forces the Knicks’ hand to trade his full $18.6 million salary, but few scenarios provide them a viable return to make this satisfactory.

The Knicks also take a hit on the court. Fans may not mind that, but it removes one of their two or three best players. Randolph, at age 37 and having not played in 2018-19, does not replace that.

It’s an interesting part of this trade scenario to contemplate. The Knicks solve one problem, although, potentially, without gain.