I have generally been on the bandwagon that feels we need an upgrade to Steve Blake as our point guard. This could either be through acquiring another player (e.g. Hinrich, Conley, Miller, Kidd) or by allowing Bayless or Sergio to develop and eventually take over. However, after watching the last Laker-Orlando game I have started to question my position. After getting over the anguish of the certainty of another Lakers title, I have to admire and acknowledge the greatness of Derek Fisher. And further, I have to ask the question: do we have another Derek Fisher in Steve Blake?
I live in LA so I have been forced to watch, read and absorb more Lakers-ism than I really care to. But with that, I have also learned a few things about what makes them tick. And one of the unsung and underrated reasons for their success the past decade is Derek Fisher. It's no coincidence that when Fisher returned from a few seasons away (Golden State, Utah), the Lakers have been in the finals the past 2 years and are now poised to win their 4th title this decade. Phil Jackson has always valued his veteran players, and he seems to get the most out of solid but unspectacular guards like Ron Harper, Brian Shaw and now Derek Fisher, especially when paired with a superstars like Jordan or Kobe. He has faith and sticks with his veterans even when they go through a rough period of play. During these playoffs, Fisher has been in horrible shooting slump, and on defense he was lit up big time by Aaron Brooks. However, on Thursday night Jackson's faith and perseverance with Fisher paid off big time.
So maybe we have the same kind of solid, unspectacular player in Steve Blake that we should stick with. He doesn't light up the stat sheet, and he has limitations on both offense and defense. However, I think our situation is very similar to the Lakers in terms of personnel, just a few years younger and less experienced. We have a budding superstar at SG (Roy v. Kobe) that needs to be the dominant force in the backcourt. We also have a potential all-star PF (Aldridge v. Gasol) and a young, potential beast at center (Oden v. Bynum). We also have a lot of good, solid role players, as do the Lakers....which includes our point guards (Blake v. Fisher).
Maybe the best course for us to take is to stay with Blake, because each year his value grows in terms of experience, consistency, continuity and leadership. We know what he brings skill-wise and he will continue to bring it for at least the next 3-5 years. Yes, he didn't perform as well as we needed during the playoffs. But is that sufficient reason to pull the plug on him? The team has grown and improved tremendously in the last 2 years with Blake starting at the point. Trying to upgrade the PG position brings about some uncertainty, and maybe a new player at PG will not perform as or fit in as well, and thereby set us back.
The big questions in this argument are two fold: 1) Is our contingent of players (Roy, LMA, Oden, etc) equal to the Lakers cast, and 2) Is Blake the equal of Fisher??
What are others thoughts...?