I don't know about Brown with the Warriors. Brown with AI--a lot of conflicts. Brown with Baron--a lot of conflicts. Big-ego, my-way-or-the-highway coaches like Brown often work poorly with big-ego players. Brown is an encyclopedia of basketball game knowledge, from situations and matchups to little details of skills (such as, according to Avery Johnson, how to spread the fingers of your shooting hand); but he's not exactly a subtle psychologist or motivator. It could backfire.

On the other hand, I don't have any other bright ideas about coaches. I do, however, have increased wishfulness for either Bobby Simmons--your rec, Atma--shoots 41% from three--that's right, forty-one percent, higher than Baron's field goal percentage, higher than Biedrin's free-throw percentage--or Shane Battier, on second thought, as he's one of the best perimeter defenders out there and I'd rather have defense than offense (yes, he actually offers less scoring threat than Dunleavy, averaging about 11 per game. Both Simmons and Battier shoot around 80% from the line, which will help in the close games we seem to have so much trouble winning. I don't see why anyone would trade either guy straight across, even with minor packaging, for Dunleavy, but Murphy and/or Pietrus plus salary-levelling packaging could work.  And I'd still be perfectly happy with Theo Ratliff!

I've got mixed feelings about the idea of bringing Larry Brown to the Warriors.

The pros:

1. Larry Brown has been a great coach for 30 years.
   
2. If Brown is hired, he'll have the juice to run anybody off the roster.  This gives the franchise some cover for potentially trading Baron in the off season, which is something I support as long as the package in return is reasonable.
   
3. Instant credibility for the franchise
   
4. We are capped out as it stands, which makes coaching pretty much THE place to improve the team this offseason.
   
5. It increases the likelihood that we'll trade this year's pick for a veteran, which is probably smart considering the number of recent draftees already in need of minutes.
   
6. I've watched enough of this year's playoffs to realize that Montgomery would be the worst coach in the Final 16 with the possible exception of the guy coaching Cleveland.

The cons:

1. Larry Brown just turned in one of the worst coaching years in basketball history.  The coach from Teen Wolf would have schooled him last year.
   
2. How long is he going to stay?  He spent two years with DET and now a single year at his "dream job"?
   
3. Will it get us any closer to the playoffs next year?  I worry that Brown will get a considerable honeymoon period from the locals, which will make next year's 32 win season OK for most people, but not me.
   
4. Brown will have the juice to run anybody off the roster.  Anybody else worried about Brown orchestrating a Biedrins & Monta for Eric Snow trade?  (Yes, I realize this was also a pro.)
   
5. I'm also worried that Brown will fall in love with high effort, low talent guys like Foyle, and give them twice as many minutes than they deserve under the guise of "playing the right way".
   
6. Montgomery becomes the scapegoat for problems that extend beyond his own incompetence.  Mullin has built a roster of overpriced, low percentage, wanna-be jump shooters, J-Rich, and a couple of intriguing young guys - he needs to be accountable as do the clowns.  Hiring Brown just postpones that conversation.

With a gun to my head, I'd hire him for the probable short term jolt that he'll give the team, but Brown won't solve everything; nor will he solve our biggest problems (bad roster, clowns).