Is Steve Blake our Derek Fisher?

by socalblazer on Jun 13, 2009 12:32 PM PDT

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...?

Tweet Comment 23 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

There's something Fisher, Shaw, Harper, Paxson, Kerr all did that Blake doesn't do

Play defense. Even if they weren’t great man defenders, then they knew how to play dirty or flop for the calls.

That Steve Nash is exactly the same as Kirk Hinrich, but worse.
by NBA Observer on Apr 8, 2009 12:23 PM CDT

by Ozzie Montana on Jun 13, 2009 1:06 PM PDT reply actions

thats hog wash and you know it.

Blake Play’s D!! he’s just not fast enough to keep up. but he plays D with the heart of a Champion.

Bad form.

The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out, burns out farms, and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.

by faith on Jun 13, 2009 6:15 PM PDT up reply actions

I was actually just thinking that. Similar game actually

Cept he doesnt play defense.

Officer:Why did you kill your husband ?
Crazy Woman: Because I love too much!

by YikesItsCameron on Jun 13, 2009 1:07 PM PDT reply actions

Even thought he's a vet

he plays very poorly under pressure unlike Fisher.

by as11osu on Jun 13, 2009 1:19 PM PDT reply actions

fisher hit more clutch shots in game 4 going 2-7 from 3 than blake has hit in his entire career.

Blazers Edge.com

by Ben Golliver on Jun 13, 2009 1:52 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Shocking...

I can’t believe you had something negative to say about Blake… (sarcasm) I think we get it. You don’t like him.

by Ilikeemall on Jun 13, 2009 2:47 PM PDT up reply actions

In all honesty.

Fisher has been pretty incredibly clutch in the playoffs in his career. This year alone Blake has had some pretty epic screw ups/chokes in the clutch and not a very big list of good clutch plays.

by Bskey on Jun 13, 2009 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions

And he's been blown past by the same bunch of PG's...

if he was on the Blazers the same people would be crying for his head no matter his past “clutch performances” or his veteran leadership. Some would even be under the same dillusion that Bayless should start in front of him… So I guess he IS our Steve Blake…right?

Fishers clutch shots have happened because he’s had the opportunity. Steve hasn’t, until now, played for teams in that position. Based on the here and now I’d rather have Blake than Fisher… even with the fact that he got yet another chance to hit a big shot because of a complete defensive melt down by Nelson…and Kobe’s elbow.

I personally get a little sick of arm chair GM’s bagging on Blake while he goes out and gives his all everytime he’s on the court.

But that’s just me… I’m loyal to quality teammates that are an excellent value and do exactly what the coach asks them to do… call me crazy.

by Ilikeemall on Jun 13, 2009 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions

It's funny...

because it’s true.

Roy is the best player in the world with the exception of Incarcerated Mike from Queensbridge .

by Nick Van Excellent on Jun 13, 2009 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions

Bayless is very similar to Derrick Fisher

In they both have strong frames. Statistically comparing them, Bayless is ahead of where Fisher was at(still in college) at Bayless’s current age. Both are not true PG’s, I think Bayless has more potential finishing at the rim(maybe not as great 3pt shooter). I would like to have a Fisher/Bayless PG duo.

Offseason:
PG Options: Mike Conley(T)/Rodrigue Beaubois(D)
SG Options: Mickaël Piétrus(T)
PF Options: Ronnie Turiaf(T) - Damion James(D), Taj Gibson(D), Kevin Seraphin(D)
C Options: Alexis Ajinca(T)

The French Invasion !

by TheGreatDane17 on Jun 13, 2009 2:03 PM PDT reply actions

This is exactly correct...

Here’s a very Lakersy piece on the relationship of Kobe and Fisher. It’s all about the work ethic…

It’s a fairly long piece and worth reading in its entirety, even if you don’t like the color purple…

Fisher — Sidekick To The Greatest Grocery Guy Who Ever Lived

* * *
The Kobe Bryant I got to know was this pretty miserable person. He told me he was determined to be the greatest. He knew he was going to be, but he just didn’t know how it was going to happen.

They laughed at him behind his back, derided him and despised him. As veteran teammate Rick Fox explained to me, the older players saw Kobe as the punk kid in the school cafeteria who was trying to jump ahead of them in the lunch line. They spent their time thinking of ways to teach him a lesson.

If nothing else, the rest of the team bonded together in their dislike for this arrogant young guy.

All of them except for one.

Derek Fisher was a rookie with Kobe Bryant, but Fisher was already 22, having put in four years of hard work at the University of Arkansas-Little Rock.

When I first met Fish, he was young, open-faced, and honest, with a maturity that extended far beyond his years.

"Really," Fish told me, "we should all be the way Kobe is. We should all be working as hard as possible to be the best we can be, to make this team the best it can be."

Still, he didn’t know quite what to make of Bryant. And Bryant, who had quickly learned not to trust anyone, was wary of him too.

Bryant, though, had a pretty simple way of looking at the world. He gauged those around him based on how hard they were willing to work.

It didn’t take Bryant long to notice that Derek Fisher, while not the most talented guy in the world, worked really, really, really hard. And that became the basis for their trust, and eventually, their friendship.

Fisher’s main talent was his ability to work really, really, really hard. * * *

"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal

by timbo on Jun 13, 2009 9:47 PM PDT up reply actions

I say yes to both...

Next year our guys will be the equal of the L@kers and our depth, as it stands now, or even minus Outlaw and Sergio will be superior and in 2009 and beyond Blake is not only the equal but superior to Fisher…

by Ilikeemall on Jun 13, 2009 3:51 PM PDT reply actions

Can't agree with that

No matter how much LMA improes this offseason he can’t match gasol’s all-around game. in addition to haing eery offensie moe in the book, he is one of the best high-post passers in the game. People often forget he was the best player on a 50-win Memphis team a few years back. Ariza is a lot like batum but a few years ahead, and nobody on or roster, let alone our bench, can match odom’s ersatility. So while the blazers hae an extremely deep and much younger core, the l@kers hae 2 perennial all-stars and a slew of long, athletic, ACCOMPLISHED role players. Watching Houston play Portland and LA in back-to-back series showed just how far behind the L@kers we are.
Im sorry if i sound oerly pessimistic, im just as excited about our future as anyone. But the L@kers hae been in the finals 2 years in a row and we haent won a playoff series since 2000.

by momomoses7 on Jun 13, 2009 4:46 PM PDT up reply actions

gasol = over rated

I’d take LMA over gasol any day. Maybe at this point Gasol’s passing is significantly better, but I’d bet next season LMA shows more balling ability then gasol.

by lurtsman on Jun 13, 2009 9:36 PM PDT up reply actions

Gasol is one of the 15 best players in the NBA

I dream LMA is one day as good an overall player as Pau is.

by as11osu on Jun 13, 2009 10:15 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

If we stand pat

we will not be as deep or versatile as the Lakers 4’s & 5’s.

The French Invasion !

by TheGreatDane17 on Jun 13, 2009 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions

Good post, I think he could be

I would even prefer Blake over Fisher mostly because Fisher is going to be 35 when the next season starts. That said, I would still prefer Hinrich to be our Fisher.

And one thing that might sound weird: Fisher is not really doing many typical point guard things. In this regard he is more like Blake as an off-guard to a dominant Kobe. But the Lakers triangle offense helps him to be that player (though they play it less now, Bill Simmons calls it rectangle offense – four guys standing around watching Kobe at the top of the key).

Off tangent: The Lakers in recent years never had that dominant point guard to replace Fisher except for his rookie year and 2003-04. You can even notice a pattern: Often the Lakers played without a real PG. Fisher and his backups didn’t get enough minutes to always have one on the floor. When he came in the league in 96 they had Nick Van Exel taking most minutes (3000 to 900). Next year they already about split time. Then he had an injury season seeing a drop in minutes, but also Nick gone and replaced with the unimposing Tyronn Lue. Next year the same lineup, then in 2000-01 another injury-plagued season. Then a season where he split time with Lindsey Hunter. 2002-03 a lot of minutes backed up by Jannero Pargo. Then backing up Gary Payton in the 2003-04 season that ended in failure, probably not making Jackson a big fan of aging formerly great point guards.

Then Fisher left, and the Lakers tried to make do with a potpourri of point guards. Names like Chucky Atkins, Tierre Brown, combo guard Smush Parker, vet Shammond Williams, and the newly drafted Jordan Farmar (who has pretty much come down to earth since being hailed as the next good point guard in LA). When Fisher returned, Farmar was they player left and it was pretty clear that Fisher would still be the man in front.

As for what the future holds, I would argue the Lakers also don’t have their point guard of the future in place. Maybe it’s Farmar, but I doubt he will ever be considered elite. Vujacic can play it in stretches, but not defend the position. And Sun Yue is a marketing gag. Would the Lakers be interested to move up in the draft in 2009 or 2010 to draft their future point guard? Could be.

by Norsktroll on Jun 13, 2009 6:02 PM PDT reply actions

Fisher is clearly near the end of his career...

I believe that the Lakers’ success more or less proves that you can win an NBA championship with a less-than-stellar PG.

Blake shoots 3s MUCH better than Fisher.

Blake defends about as well as Fisher, if not better.

Blake passes about as well as Fisher.

Neither Blake nor Fisher can finish at the rim worth a crap.

Blake carries the ball upcourt better than Fisher.

Blake is a vet, as is Fisher.

Blake is pretty tough, not quite Fisher’s equal but in the same general area code…

Fisher draws charges better than Blake.

Chris Paul who???

"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal

by timbo on Jun 13, 2009 9:56 PM PDT up reply actions

Fisher's backups, by the way, are Jordan Farmar (less athletic than Rex, finishes worse that Rex, equally troubled shooting jumpers than Rex)...

……………….. and Shannon Brown, who is essentially a combo guard with several Fisherian qualities (and shortcomings).

"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal

by timbo on Jun 13, 2009 9:59 PM PDT up reply actions

Agreed with Norskie that Lakers do NOT have their PG of the future. But with the triangle offense, they are not obsessed about things like that...

"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal

by timbo on Jun 13, 2009 10:00 PM PDT up reply actions

couple counterpoints

Blake is a vet, as is Fisher.

One guy has played in 175 playoff games, the other has played in 15, never outside the first round. Not quite equal levels of “vet”.

Blake is pretty tough, not quite Fisher’s equal but in the same general area code…

Let’s be honest here, could Blake even trip Scola, much less level him?

by Royster on Jun 13, 2009 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions

Fisher's main value is due to three things

none of which Blake has/can give.

1. A championship pedigree. Obviously he wasn’t the reason for those titles, but he’s been through the playoff wars and has the rings. That carries weight with players. Being able to say he’s been there and done that makes him a valuable, calming lock room presence. It’s not that Blake is a bad guy or anything, but based on reports, it doesn’t sound like he’s an especially large presence in the locker room, like we constantly hear about Fisher. Besides, given similar players, guys are going to listen to the guy with 3 NBA rings instead of the guy with an NCAA championship.

2. He’s clutch. 0.4 seconds shot over the Spurs in 2004, game 4 this year, some HUGE shots earlier in these playoffs. We can argue over whether Steve has had those kind of opportunities all we want, but based on the small data set, it’s pretty ugly. There’s the obvious playoff examples, but his FT% dropping 20 points during “clutch” situations according to 82games.com is the more worrying stat to me.

3. He’s the one guy on the Lakers willing to make the “right” play, rather than the “kobe” play when he’s on the court. Obviously this is less of an issue with us because we don’t have Kobe, but it’s still a major reason for Fisher’s value. Henry had a good interview with Brian Shaw about this exact issue. Regardless, this makes Fisher a lot less valuable to other teams than he is to the Lakers.

by Royster on Jun 13, 2009 7:18 PM PDT reply actions