I know there are skeptics regarding the Wages of Wins analysis.  Nevertheless, I find the analysis interesting, and Prof. Berri did accurately predict the triumph of the Celtics last year.  He also accurately predicted that Philadelphia did better trading Allen Iverson than most people thought.

Here is his preseason analysis of the Bulls.  I take away two points: no one player can be blamed for last year's collapse because all of our best players underperformed, and, in light of such an unusual teamwide collapse, perhaps we can hope that the team will return to form this year.  Or not!  It could be worse; at least I have some reason to hope.  But which Bulls team will show up this year is very hard to predict.

Short version for the Bulls: draft Beasley, and look for some sleepers in the second round. 

The Wages of Wins statistic is controversial, but interesting.  It tends to de-emphasize scoring and highly value other statistics -- notably rebounding, shooting efficiency, assists, low turnover rate, etc.  The verdict on Rose is neutral because he came on strong in the second half of the season, but did not play well in the first half of the season.  Also, Beasley is rated better than Oden or Durant.  So is Kevin Love!  Anyway, it's a good conversation starter.

I know Ben Wallace continued to decline, but I judge that we had replacements for Wallace, whereas we did not have replacements for Hinrich.  I'm sure other players had problems as well, but I think Wallace and Hinrich declined the most from last year. 

I'm far less concerned about the hunt for a new coach than I am about whether Hinrich can return to form, or whether Paxson can, through the draft or elsewhere, find a replacement.  Can someone who followed the last, say, 30 games of the season comment about whether Hinrich looked okay during those games?  I'm afraid I lost interest.