Roundtable: Iverson's future, more

PRINT EMAIL FACEBOOK DIGG TWITTER RSS SHARE

Allen Iverson's refusal to play off the bench has short-circuited his tenure in Memphis and may usher an early end to his career. Rocky Widner/NBAE via Getty Images

Four SI.com writers analyze the latest news and address hot topics from around the NBA each week. (All stats and records are through Nov. 9.)

1. With Allen Iverson's future in limbo, what is the best possible outcome for him? What do you think will happen?

Ian Thomsen: By bringing Iverson off the bench, coach Lionel Hollins is obviously trying to act in the best interests of the Grizzlies' franchise (as opposed to what is best for Iverson). It will be interesting to see if Hollins' sense of virtue is rewarded -- or condemned -- by management. I don't understand why Iverson would want to play for the Grizzlies. They're a losing team with no hope of reaching the playoffs, and his $3.1 million salary is 15 percent of what he was making last year. Iverson believes he deserves a level of respect and commitment that the league is unwilling to give him. If he isn't willing to play with a second unit and no team in the league is willing to start him, then he should retire. (And under no circumstances should he try to play in Europe. He would not be happy there at all.)

Jack McCallum: The best possible future for him is that he climbs into a time machine and sets the dial for 2001 when he lifted an otherwise junior varsity team called the Philadelphia 76ers to the NBA Finals, and even led the Sixers to a Game 1 win in Los Angeles. Except that's not exactly a future. (Unless it involves Michael J. Fox.) Iverson's actual future? That's a tough one. If there's a team out there able to persuade him he should come off the bench, he's worth signing. The coolest scenario would be for him to join Larry Brown in Charlotte, but I don't think that's going to happen. I do believe that Iverson and the Grizzlies will part ways, but the man does not really want to retire and will not do so until every option is explored.

Chris Mannix: If this really is it for Iverson in Memphis, then this really is it for Iverson. Let's remember, the line for Iverson's services in the offseason began on Beale Street and ended at the FedEx Forum. Memphis wasn't his best option; it was his only option. And if Iverson walks away after just three games, there won't be a team in the league willing to touch him. That includes the Knicks, who, despite an anemic offense and no real point guard to speak of, won't add the Iverson Show to an already circus-like season.

Arash Markazi: The best possible scenario for Iverson would be to stay out of Memphis, because that situation isn't going to change anytime soon. Just being around that team for two days in Los Angeles last week, I could tell that Iverson wouldn't last with the Grizzlies. I figured something would happen before the All-Star break, but I couldn't have imagined he would bolt before the end of their road trip. Iverson and Hollins will never see eye-to-eye -- that is if they ever took the time to actually have a heart-to-heart talk about Iverson's role. I still think he can play and contribute, but if you're a contending team, would you really take a chance on him after you saw what happened to the Nuggets and Pistons after Denver traded him to Detroit, not to mention his most recent stint in Memphis? We may have seen the last of Iverson in the NBA.

***

2. The Spurs, Cavs, Jazz and Trail Blazers are all off to somewhat lethargic starts. Though it's early, which team should be most concerned?

Thomsen: It has to be the Spurs. Though it is indeed early, they've nonetheless been a big disappointment at the defensive end while enabling opponents to shoot 48.6 percent. Only five teams rate worse than San Antonio in that crucial indicator, and the Spurs will have no hope of overtaking the Lakers unless they ratchet up their defense to the championship level of previous seasons.

McCallum: Clearly it's the Cavs, with the Trail Blazers a distant second. The Spurs know how to jump-start themselves after midseason, and hopes weren't that high for the Jazz (who won a big game in New York on Monday night if there is such a thing as a big game in New York) even at the beginning of the season. They are just trying to be a playoff team. The best guess right now is that Cavs coach Mike Brown is losing sleep over how to best blend the talent of LeBron James and the experience of Shaquille O'Neal, especially with the Celtics playing like world-beaters.

Mannix: If I'm working in the Cleveland front office, I'm squirming a little in my seat. Shaq has been a disaster (a career-low 11.1 points and a regular seat on the bench in the fourth quarter) and it may get worse. I spoke to an executive from one of O'Neal's former teams last week and he warned that if things stay status quo in Cleveland, Shaq will start to divide the locker room. "It happened to us," the executive said. "It will happen to them." In the most important season in franchise history, the Cavs can't afford that.

Markazi: The Jazz have the most cause for concern mainly because they were a question mark to begin with. Carlos Boozer may not be a distraction anymore, but his presence limits the opportunities for Paul Millsap, who is averaging only 8.3 points and 5.6 rebounds off the bench after signing a four-year, $32-million contract last summer. The biggest cause for concern, however, is that the Jazz are struggling defensively.