RealGM

Is Steve Blake the best point guard we have had on this team since Nick Van Exel?

May be but I'd probably take 2003-04 GP over Blake albeit not in the confines of the triangle.

j-far wrote:May be but I'd probably take 2003-04 GP over Blake albeit not in the confines of the triangle.

Good call. I forgot about GP because it was only one year. Blake will probably be statsically better than GP this year becasue he will be playing off Kobe and 2 seven footers.

I remember GP struggling to play within the offense and bickering about it to the media all the time but when he was on the fastbreak with Kobe, he was a totally different player.

j-far wrote:I remember GP struggling to play within the offense and bickering about it to the media all the time but when he was on the fastbreak with Kobe, he was a totally different player.

Yeah I remember him saying that he didnt need to learn the triangle because they were going to be running up and down the floor.

iamworthy wrote:Is Steve Blake the best point guard we have had on this team since Nick Van Exel?

No way.

I'd put Shaw, Harper, and Fisher above him. Yea... we haven't had any good PGs.

Fisher and Harper are better players for sure but or versionof shaw wasn't better than Blake. I think worthy is pointing out as a pure pg, Blake is ahead of those guys, he did average closet to 7 asts a game on a ball dominant team in Denver. None of the other guys managed that with us.

Fk typing on iPhone again!

His stats will be down since the tri is run and Kobe will have the ball in his hands a lot of the time. I still go with Fisher. He is the master of the big shot. PG is just another option on the team. Winning is the main goal. LO will be handing out assist just as much on the second team.

Patterns wrote:

iamworthy wrote:Is Steve Blake the best point guard we have had on this team since Nick Van Exel?

No way.

I'd put Shaw, Harper, and Fisher above him. Yea... we haven't had any good PGs.

I dont really consider Harper, Fish and Shaw pure PG's.

iamworthy wrote:I dont really consider Harper, Fish and Shaw pure PG's.

If we're considering pure PGs, then Nick the Quick was the last one.

I think he maybe the best we've had since Nick.

Side note-But did we do the right thing by jumping on Blake so soon when we could have gone after Felton instead, or is Blake the better the choice? Don't get me wrong I love what Steve can bring to our team, but we could have used the youth

felton was signed for 7mil and 7.5mil a yr, lakers couldn't match that. i like blake better than him anyway.

Blake isn't the best but he is the most serviceable since Nick. He is a true lead guard, and his game is suited for the triangle.

Dalakerbox wrote:Side note-But did we do the right thing by jumping on Blake so soon when we could have gone after Felton instead, or is Blake the better the choice? Don't get me wrong I love what Steve can bring to our team, but we could have used the youth

No, we're not in the position to gamble like up-and-coming teams are with nothing to lose. We needed a serviceable point guard who didn't have an ego A.S.A.P, and Steve Blake was just a call away. What if we continued to wait and Blake signed elsewhere, only to find out Felton wasn't willing to take the full MLE?

Harp > Blake... Better defender 7 rebounder... Blake will be solid though...

i dont think i would take payton over blake....hes much better fitted for the triangle....

sheesh imagine nick the quick in the tri....he'd be great


if blake plays on par, he will be sorta like ron harper

magic was our best pg lol

Payton is NOT a triangle PG, as demonstrated in 2004. He's a pure PG, something the triangle really doesn't need, as playmaking really is made through ball movement and crisp passing.

That's pretty awesome you guys know how good Blake will be before he ever plays a regular season game with the Lakers...!

I love Steve Black

(inside joke, anyone here get it?)