Here's what makes it so strange:

	Van Exel has skills and is clutch, but does your team want him?

No one is denying the possibility, hiding the desire or doing the duck-and-weave behind a no comment/weak attempt at a denial.

The Denver Nuggets are working to trade Nick Van Exel, who might only finish in the top 10 in scoring and assists and will finish in the top five of guys you would want on your side in a pressure situation.

The Golden State Warriors are working to trade Marc Jackson, who only happens to be a promising big man at a time when most every team is anxious to find a promising big men.

Two intriguing players who want to be dealt before Thursday evening -- hell, before Wednesday evening -- and whose teams see the benefits in cutting what could have been long ties. And both may end up sitting still. In that event, it'll be everyone else on the move, diving under desks to avoid the ensuing fallout. These guys can bring down the mood of a room with temporary setbacks, so imagine the vibes if both have to spend ... another ... two ... months in the same place.

Colorado will have skiing into August with all the frost Van Exel will bring down. The Warriors and the Bay Area will get such a death stare from Jackson that Lombard Street will be scared straight. Thank goodness Chris Webber is talking again, just in time, and will be able to send a message of advice in anger management.

Two people have a great deal of control over how this plays out, of course.

Van Exel.

Jackson.

If the trade deadline comes and goes and they don't, the blame and frustration going around had better come complete with a mirror.

That's the common denominator for cases that are so different. Van Exel is a veteran, of many things, and in his fourth season with the Nuggets in particular, long enough for the frustration over constant losing and instability to runneth over, not that he had anything to do with that instability. It can't be about shots and minutes; he wants to go somewhere to win. Jackson, meanwhile, is in his second NBA season, sort of. He barely played early in 2000-01, capitalized on a series of injuries to Warriors big men to become one of the league's success stories and push for Rookie of the Year, and this season has played even less than barely. Maybe even less than "Who?" He wants to go somewhere where his picture will be in the team's media guide, not a milk carton.

Both, though, have a voice on how this turns out. So if it goes bad, look within, too.

Should you blame them for holding firm?

	Jackson

No. Van Exel should not be criticized for keeping $26.5 million as the final two years of his contract, instead of donating it to the wind in hopes it would make it easier to find taker, as he once suggested. I wouldn't do it either and I only make half as much in the next two years of my contract. Likewise, Jackson should not be dinged for wanting to have a say in his future by giving the Warriors a list of teams for destination. The rules give him veto power for one year, so he should exercise that, just as the rules allowed Golden State to match Houston's offer sheet. Nothing underhanded is going on here.

It's just that both will have to accept blame if nothing happens. They have hurt their own cause.

That notion is much more prominent in Oakland. Jackson caught lightning in a bottle last season, just in time to become a free agent. In a classic case of mismanagement, the Warriors let other teams establish his value, instead of taking the aggressive approach and deciding on his worth on their own. Houston signed him for six years and $24.4 million and Golden State matched, with the intent to trade Jackson and get a return on the original investment. Jackson, in turn, provided a list of teams he would accept a trade to, as rules allowed. The Warriors couldn't get anything done, so he expanded the list a bit.

In between, Jackson went off in a locker room tirade, just after talks broke down with the Suns, one of the original hoped-for destinations: "This is a stupid-ass organization," he said, before getting real intimate. This wasn't so feel-good anymore. He was suspended, at least saving Golden State a few bucks since they weren't playing him anyway. The only thing worse than all this buildup to a trade will be if no trade happens and they are stuck with each other for the rest of what remains of the Warriors' so-called season. More months of waiting for a trade.

Golden State should not be criticized, however, for holding out for what it thinks is the right deal. Whether they have over-reached on the trade demands is another point of discussion, but in this one, the only thing the matters is that they don't owe Jackson any favors to get him out of Oakland. Make the trade when it's right and not before. The upcoming draft is noticeably lacking big men, so people will remain interested. And if nothing happens then either, come next season, Jackson won't be able to veto a trade and the Warriors will have greater flexibility, either to get something in return from a team he won't now agree to or just to get even with the guy in the process and let him know what a bad situation really is. So when does David Stern plan to have that European league up and running?

Van Exel, meanwhile, is now saying giving up the last two years of his deal to make a trade financially more attractive for suitors isn't an automatic. Along the way, there have been talks with many teams, some with Van Exel as the headliner and some involving Raef LaFrentz, with the added intangible that all this comes just as Denver's best player, 2001 All-Star Antonio McDyess, is ready to return from his knee injury. He just happens to be close friends with Van Exel.

"You just want it to be over with," Nuggets coach Mike Evans told the Denver Post. "Everyone wants the trade deadline to be over. Either Nick is here or he is not, and then everyone can move on."

Or not move on. As the case may be.

Scott Howard-Cooper covers the NBA for the Sacramento Bee and is a regular contributor to ESPN.com.