We do not really know if Miller can guard Brooks... While I think that Miller is a better PG than Blake - he is not exactly mister stay in-front of the really quick guards. He sure is a much better 3rd scoring option than Blake. One more thing to remember - Blake was playing hurt last year (shoulder) - and you did not hear a pip out of him about it. While I agree that Miller is a better PG - Blake is fantastic and we should be feeling lucky we have them both.
I think describing Blake as fantastic is way over the top. He is a very good backup in this league, and a passable starter.
Why? Fantastic is based on role. If his role was to be our leading scorer, premier rebounder or post defender - he would not be. As a PG that will probably see 20 mpg next to another PG who is better than him and a couple of small-guards that can handle the ball, create plays and assist - he is fantastic. He is tough, he shoots great from outside, he does not make a lot of mistakes and he works great. For this role - this sounds fantastic to me.
I do not think it matters if he starts or comes of the bench. I think that a distribution of 28/20 or 30/18 between Miller/Blake is probably where we are going to end - and that seems to be a fantastic position to be in. We went from being sub-par in the PG spot to being above average. Biggest position weakness we had - is now solved. That's fantastic.
Sorry, I toook fantastic as a stand alone comment, not in regards to his role as a bench player, or a 18-20 minute per night player.
Steve Blake is the second worst starting point guard in the entire NBA and Andre isn't the worst. So no, Blake is not better then Miller. It's actually insulting to Miller to even compare the two players.
