This franchise is a loser franchise and has been for fifteen years, largely because they trade the wrong players at the wrong time. Some people are proposing we act rashly, looking only for instant gratification, revenge or making up dream world trades that would never happen. If you want to stop being a loser, start emulating the best.
See those nice clothes? We paid for those. via img.sports.tom.com
What would the Spurs do with Jackson? While we can't be exactly sure, they're a well run business that demands respect and no single player will make fools of them. I think that may be what Jackson would like to do to the F.O. Of course, the F.O. is probably tired of being made to look like fools, so they ought to take some time to seriously think about this.
I say we play the waiting game. When you go to the doctor's office, there's a waiting room. It's called a waiting room, because you're supposed to wait. Why do doctors do that, when other businesses do not? The idea is they are in charge, and the patient sits and waits as proof of that. It's a psychological game that makes the doctor's job easier. We wait and trade him on our own terms, letting Jack and the rest of the league know who is in charge.
That means, we sit on him, until a good opportunity comes along. Besides, how dumb would that be to trade him immediately? So far, he hasn't played well, so no one wants him to play for them, and his behavior is bad so no team would want to deal with his drama. Every team in the league feels that we're anxious to trade him to try to avoid more drama and appease disgruntled fans; today, we have no power over the situation.That means, if we try to trade him today, we're dealing from a position of extreme weakness.
So what do we do with him in the meantime? Do we sit him? The question is, does that help the team? In the short run, I think it does. Nellie and the F.O. show Jackson that he doesn't run the show here. We tell would be Jackson-suitors that Jack is staying put for now. We do with him, essentially what we did with Randolph. If he keeps yapping and acting up, we simply will not play him and keep him on the bench. We don't even have to bring him on the road with us. Why waste a plane ticket?
My point is, the Dubs need to be patient right now, regardless of how disgruntled the fans and Jackson get. It's irrelevant how bad our team has been or how Jackson or the fans feel, when it comes to making good long-term decisions. If we can just wait out Jackson's tantrum and get him playing decent basketball again, we can possibly get a decent offer for him. We have a lot of trading chips and a lot of time. We're not going to win a championship this year anyway, as we all know.
What would the Spurs do? I'm sure they would feel like they are in control of the situation, because they always are. In turn, they would behave in a way that reflects that confidence. Why should we let Jackson dictate the terms of his departure? He signed a contract with us; we're paying him far more than what he deserves. The least he can do is show some courtesy and not hurt the team. I say, sit his behind down and leave him there as long as it takes for this drama to pass. He has lost a lot of influence on the team at this point, because much of his influence came from playing well. He hasn't done that so far and has frankly acted like a jack-ass. Our other more mature players will fill the leadership vacuum, like Ronnie Turiaf and maybe even Monta Ellis.
On the bright side of all of this, we're a good enough team that sitting Jackson on the bench will not cost us much. We have solid 3's in Maggette and Azubuike. We have no reason to behave rashly or rush to make a trade. Our team is still pretty decent, Nellie is still in charge (which is good for a young, rebuilding team) and we know exactly what Jackson wants, since he announced it publicly. We can hold that over his head for 4 more years, if we so choose.