Iverson is not the answer

June 30, 2006|Jackie MacMullan, Globe Columnist

(Page 3 of 3)

The Celtics already dangled Wally Szczerbiak, but league sources confirmed Philly has no interest in him, which means he would only be of value in a three-way transaction. If the Celtics want Iverson, it will cost them Jefferson (don't buy that untouchable nonsense -- who do you think has more cache at the concession stands, A.I. or Big Al?), and a combination of players such as Gerald Green (the Sixers like him), Ryan Gomes (King is a fan) or even possibly Delonte West now that Telfair is in town.

In other words, if Iverson is coming, that means some of the key building blocks to the future are going. So I ask again: does Iverson get you to the Finals, or does he win you 50 games? Are both scenarios worth it?

In theory, Boston could package Jefferson, Green, and the recently acquired Ratliff for Iverson, as long as they wait until Aug. 28 per order of the collective bargaining agreement. Those salary numbers work.

Now, if we were talking about bringing Indiana big man Jermaine O'Neal aboard for that package, sign me up. But Larry Bird told me yesterday O'Neal isn't going anywhere.

``I don't know where this stuff keeps coming from," Bird said. ``I am not trading Jermaine O'Neal."

Another old friend, Minnesota boss Kevin McHale, has said he's not trading Kevin Garnett, either -- at least for one more season.

Too bad. If O'Neal or Garnett were available, I'd say bring them on. But in Iverson you have a very expensive guy under 6 feet who has a window of three years to get it done for you -- maybe less if he falters physically.

If Iverson were 26, that would be one thing. But soon enough A.I. is going to stand for Already Injured. On practice days, he already stands for Always Inert.

Let me suggest one more moniker for the Celtics: Ain't Interested.

Jackie MacMullan is a Globe columnist. Her e-mail address is macmullan@globe.com.