You need to think of LACP as a "verification mechanism" of link aggregation.
You will not achieve any better performance whether you use a static LAG or whether you use an LACP LAG. What you will get is faster failover, and some intelligence that is checking to make sure that the links are functional before introducing them into the LAG.
Now... depending on your TRAFFIC.... would directly answer your question on which is better. Each participant in the link can use the different methods (IP src/dest, MAC src/dest) to choose how to EGRESS the traffic. Ideally both ends of the link will do it the same, but they don't have to.
NetApp has a WONDERFUL document on this, covering multiple different scenarios but let me get straight to the chase:
1) You're going to want to have a separate LACP bond to each VIF, one to each NetApp head.
2) You should configure static LAGs on the ESXi side if you're running 5.0 or earlier, and LACP enabled LAGs if you're running 5.1 or later.
Once you hit the limitations of 1GbE on that NetApp, you either need to step to 10GbE cards, or get a more powerful filer.
EDIT: Here's the link to the documentation, there may be a revision out now that 5.1 http://media.netapp.com/documents/tr-3749.pdf