It’s no secret that the Knicks would love to rid themselves of the contract of Amar’e Stoudemire, and not just because he is due more than $23 million next season and his contract is uninsurable against any future injury.

That’s a huge chunk of salary that’s preventing New York from rebuilding quickly through signing star-level free agents, so anything the team could do to remove that contract from its books would almost certainly be open for discussion.

But offering Stoudemire to a team that hasn’t yet used its amnesty clause isn’t one of them, because that team wouldn’t be able to use it after acquiring Stoudemire under the rules of the latest collective bargaining agreement.

From Gary Washburn of the Boston Globe:

The Knicks have limited options to improve this summer but a move they are expected to make is offering the expiring contract of Amar’e Stoudemire to a team that has not already used its amnesty clause. That team in turn could trade the Knicks the long-term, unwanted contract of an impact player, such as the Pelicans’ Eric Gordon.

The Knicks would have no problem taking on Gordon’s deal, which is another that’s scheduled to pay out more than the expected level of production is worth. But the Pelicans (or any other team that trades for Stoudemire) wouldn’t be incentivized to make this trade by having the ability to then amnesty Stoudemire.

From Larry Coon’s CBA FAQ (Q. 68):

“For a player to be eligible for the Amnesty provision he must be on his team’s roster continuously from July 1, 2011 to the date he is amnestied, without any new contract, extension, renegotiation or other amendment to his contract in the meantime. Players who were waived prior to July 1, 2011 and are still receiving guaranteed salary are also eligible. Teams cannot amnesty players they sign, receive in trade, extend, renegotiate, or otherwise amend after July 1, 2011.”