DeAndre Jordan to Dallas: The Los Angeles Clippers are literally mad men

By Matt Zemek

Straight from the "Mad Men" era, in 1960, singer Brenda Lee said the words DeAndre Jordan carried inside himself these past few weeks.

What is free agency, in any sport, other than a very public revelation of a basic emotional reality? Like politicians, athletes also carry the Brenda Lee verse as their personal anthem: “I want to be wanted.”

The Dallas Mavericks understood this. The Los Angeles Clippers didn’t understand it as much. Jordan is now a Maverick, and the Clippers’ shot at a title — or even just a Western Conference final for the first time in franchise history — will have to wait until the 2016-2017 season. The Clippers, at this point, can’t carry any realistic hopes of doing anything substantial next year. They will need to wait for the 2016 free-agent bonanza and acquire championship pieces then.

Why are the Clippers in such a bad spot? Yes, the relationship between Jordan and Chris Paul wasn’t as strong as it needed to be. Yes, Dirk Nowitzki and Chandler Parsons were excellent recruiters for Dallas. However, any supremely important moment rooted in a recruiting process — whether for individuals or organizations — has to be met with total commitment to that person.

Dallas showed total commitment to Jordan. The Clippers didn’t.

Brad Turner of the Los Angeles Times had this to offer.

What Nowitzki did was impressive, and it certainly seems to have helped Jordan make up his mind. Plenty of people could say that Jordan had made his mind up long ago. That’s possible. However, here’s what the Clippers have to live with, as their organization encounters yet another dark and humiliating moment in a history filled with nothing but dark and humiliating moments: They didn’t do their very best to keep DAJ.

They didn’t. The point is incontestable.

Sure, the other Clipper players knew Jordan. They played with him, practiced with him, ate meals with him, took plane flights with him. One could say that everything that needed to be done had already been done. Why should any of the Clippers have shown up to the final meeting with Jordan?

Here’s the relevant distinction.

Everything had been said that needed to be said, but that’s not the same thing as doing everything that needed to be done. Words convey support in one form and context, but commitment is expressed in more than words. The simple act of showing up at a meeting isn’t an example of vocalized speech, but it says something powerful just the same. It is an affirmation of a teammate. It is a visible sign of support. It is — on its own level — a statement and a gesture.

Coach and general manager Doc Rivers — who led the Clippers so well during the Donald Sterling mess — should have made sure a player was at that last meeting. Blame begins and ends with him. Chris Paul doesn’t deserve as much blame as Doc, given Doc’s pair of very important and central roles within the organization, but as an iconic player and the team’s floor leader, CP3’s absence from that meeting is profoundly puzzling.

Chris Paul is on a short list of NBA players whose skill level and overall personal excellence as a player are wildly disproportionate to his level of postseason achievements. If any NBA player really, REALLY needed to leave nothing untried, nothing on the table, in terms of convincing a teammate to stay in this 2015 period of free agency, it was Chris Paul in relationship to DeAndre Jordan.

Yet, CP3 could not be bothered to show up for a meeting.

The Clippers ignored advice from the "Mad Men" era. They didn’t fully appreciate that DeAndre Jordan wanted to be wanted.

Now, the Clippers are merely mad men, furious that their grand postseason ambitions have been frustrated even before the 2015-2016 season has begun.

It’s their own fault, too.

More from Crossover Chronicles: