Why the Bulls might be Good and suggestions for 2010.

The Good?

1. Kirk Hinrich will succeed in his new role.

There are obvious reasons to question Hinrich's ability to live up to his substantial contract and also reason to fear an increased role after he laid a giant egg the season before last.  But I think there is sufficient evidence to suggest that he might excel in his new role.  

(1) He can convert the three point shots that Ben Gordon once took.  He shot 41% from three last year, 38% for his career and has generally done well when given more opportunities. (2)  The more minutes he plays, the better he does. I say this after looking at his game logs the last season, where he did considerably better when playing 30 minutes or more; he also played markedly better 2 seasons ago when he averaged 36 minutes a game. (3) He and Rose play well together, which improves the defense and the ball movement.  The Rose-Hinrich lineups without Gordon have a +13, +20, and -13 +/- respectively.  Truehoop had an anecdotal description of them playing together early last season which describes the potential of the combination quite well. (4) The more minutes he plays, the larger the net defensive gain for the Bulls.  Lineups including Hinrich held opposing teams to a considerably lower estimated field goal% and the Rose-Hinrich-Deng-Thomas-Noah lineup had the best defensive rating of any Bulls lineup. (5) Not to mention he performed considerably better after the all-star break when he shot 45% from the field and 45% from beyond the arc.

2. Joakim Noah and Tyrus Thomas were on the rise at the end of the season and will continue that trend.

Over the last three months of the season (34 games) Tyrus averaged 13.5ppg on 47% shooting in about 32mpg; he also averaged 2.1bpg/1.3stls/7.6rbs. Over the same period of time Noah averaged 8.8ppg on 58% shooting in 30mpg and 1.2bpg/.7stls/9.2rbs.  Noah also improved his free throw shooting percentage, also--and started getting to the line for that matter.  

I got all of these numbers from their splits pages on b-r, so you can double check to see if I did my math correctly. Either way I find these numbers encouraging and they make me think the Bulls were right to not get rid of Hinrich and Thomas for an injury prone rental.

3. Rose-Gordon-Salmons and Rose-Gordon-Deng just didn't work that well last year, whereas lineups with Hinrich did.

The five worst 5 man units for the Bulls last season, according to +/-, were: (1) Rose-Gordon-Deng-Noah-Thomas [-49], (2) Rose-Gordon-Deng-Gooden-Gray [-47], (3) Rose-Gordon-Sefolosha-Thomas-Gray [-33], (4) Rose-Gordon-Salmons-Thomas-Noah [-31], and (5) Rose-Gordon-Salmons-Thomas-Miller (-18).

I don't believe this is representative of anything about the players--except for Gray, whose presence is anything but inconspicuous.  What it does seem to suggest though, that the Bulls were less successful with three players who required isolations, which makes the possibility of starting Rose and Hinrich somewhat enticing.  

It is also worth note that (1) and (4) on that list were the two most used lineups last year.

4. Rose is going to be really really good.

The Bad?

I recognize that the Bulls have some noticeable holes in their armor.  If Deng continues to have injury problems, they will feel the loss of Gordon in full; I am sure that a healthy Deng is one of the better small forwards in the league, though I cannot be sure we will ever see that player.  There are also legitimate questions about Salmons continuing last year's anomalous performance; though my personal opinion is that there wasn't anything particularly out of the ordinary last year for Fish, aside from taking 2.3 more threes per game than the year prior.  I see no reason why he will not have the opportunities this year, which would likely keep his percentage up. 

The most glaring danger is the bench.  Miller, Hinrich, and Pargo are solid bench players and Johnson could be one a couple years, but the Bulls cannot rely on Gray and Gibson to back up our three big men or continue to rely on Miller for 27 minutes a game--though I suspect Noah and Thomas will take some of those minutes; any expectation that they will supports the growing "treading-water" sentiment around these parts.

2010

The creeping reality is that signing a max player with the cap-size shrinking will be a tall order.  Assuming both that the first tier max players will resign with their teams (Lebron, Wade, Bosh, Amare and Joe Johnson), that the restricted first tier player will resign (Roy) and also that the the cap will lower to 55 million; that leaves the Bulls with about 17 million to spend next year.  

I believe that the Bulls should make three moves, (1) offer Tyrus Thomas 28-35 million for 4-5 years; (2) offer David Lee 45m million over 5 years; (3) offer John Salmons for Ronnie Brewer in a sign and trade at 26 million over 4 years.  Obviously this assumes that Lee is unable to find a deal this year and that Tyrus will sign for 7 million; but seeing as Portland locked up their money with the Miller deal and that New York seems intent on having Lee accept the QO, the first assumption doesn't seem completely farfetched.  The Tyrus deal is right around what Villanueva got which is the strata I'd put Tyrus on.  The third move is the biggest stretch, but the Jazz already have 52 million in contracts not including Brewer's QO as well as also having C.J. Miles.  I have a feeling they will be completely disinterested in letting their 23 year old stud go, but a move of that sort is far more attainable than Dwyane Wade or Joe Johnson.  These moves would also leave us with a core of Rose, Noah, Deng, Lee, Thomas, Brewer, Hinrich and Johnson with the oldest of the bunch being 29.  

I don't expect all of this to happen but I hope it promotes thinking about the positive potential for the Bulls.  What moves outside of Bosh or Wade do you think the Bulls should attempt?