YOU CAN CERTAINLY make a case for the Warriors not being serious bidders in the Allen Iverson sweepstakes. The seven-time All-Star, after all, has Chris Webber (and many other things) written all over him.

But much of what I've read and heard is flat-out nonsense.

-The Warriors need to be patient. They what? Twelve consecutive years without playoffs and now I'm being told to let Monta Ellis, Mickael Pietrus, Ike Diogu and Andris Biedrins develop?

I bought into that excuse three years ago when the names were Jason Richardson, Mike Dunleavy, Troy Murphy and Adonal Foyle. I'm sorry, being patient went out the window when Baron Davis and Don Nelson were imported.

At the very least, the Warriors need to compete for a playoff spot this season, then find a way in next year. An 11-11 start against an Auburn-type schedule is not at all encouraging.

-Iverson has two more good years in him. The guy put up a career-best 33 points a game last season, shooting 44.7 percent. He's currently averaging 31.2 under terrible conditions.

Imagine Iverson actually getting three or four easy hoops running a Nelson break. So instead of shooting 8-for-22, he goes 12-for-26. Even at age 31, he could average 38 as a Warrior.

He doesn't have two more good years in him. He has two more great years. Maybe three.

-Monta Ellis is untouchable. The young man is good, no doubt about it. But let's not underestimate the Nelson factor here.

Matt Barnes spent four seasons bouncing around between the Developmental League, the ABA and the end of NBA benches. You think he learned to be a 32-point scorer there?

One of the great things about an uptempo system is as a player's scoring goes up, so does his value. And as a player's value inflates, it's often a good idea to sell.

Ellis plays the same position as the team's star (Davis) and is staring at a huge deal a couple of years down the road on a club that has rented out its cap space for the foreseeable future.

He'll never be as good as Iverson will be the next two seasons. So why wouldn't you make that swap?

-Iverson and Baron Davis can't coexist. Sure they can. If Davis and Ellis, two point guards, can coexist, why can't a natural point guard/shooting guard tandem?

No point guard dominated the ball more than Tim Hardaway. Yet somehow, he found a way to keep Mitch Richmond and Chris Mullin happy. That's what happens in the Nelson offense.

Actually, Iverson complements Davis well. While a one-on-one whiz works his magic in the halfcourt set, Davis would be spotting up on the perimeter.

You double off the point guard, as Iverson has experienced his entire career, and arguably the Warriors' best perimeter shooter burns you from outside. You leave Iverson's defender on an island and ... well, no coach would be dumb enough to do that.

DATELINE: Headed west. We're not getting the Warriors' name mentioned in conjunction with Iverson as much as it was earlier in the week, but I've got to believe the 76ers haven't heard the last from Mullin. Wisely, he's just playing the market, letting the price come down a bit.

In the end, it might take just Richardson and Foyle. Or perhaps Davis and Biedrins. Or even Ellis, Murphy and Foyle.

They're all cheap prices for a ticket to the playoffs the next two seasons.

Or you keep what you got, but remember this: You're so close to the luxury-tax line, you'll be lucky to pay your first-round draft picks in years to come. Forget about ever adding as much as a mid-level free agent.

You probably lose Pietrus to free agency after this season and then likely have to sell off an asset (or two) to keep Ellis and Biedrins two years from now.

The future isn't bright, people. It's bleak.

You only get one shot at a guy like Iverson. Don't believe what you've read and heard: The positives far outweigh the negatives.

Would you trade Monta Ellis, Troy Murphy and Adonal Foyle for Allen Iverson? E-mail your thoughts (with full name and city) to

dave@angnewspapers.com.