---

SACRAMENTO -- If a few years from now the Kings are playing their home games in, oh, Boise or Anchorage or Albuquerque (the NBA has made it clear that Las Vegas is out of the picture), the fans will look back at May 19, 2004, when the Kings fell 83-80 to Minnesota in the Western Conference semifinals.

It marked the third straight season the Kings were knocked out of the playoffs with a Game 7 loss. Remember Robert Horry's 3-pointer that lifted the Lakers two years ago and Chris Webber's knee injury against Dallas last year? Well, the result of this series was every bit as painful because the Kings had good opportunities to win the series' first three games (they won one) and despite playing shorthanded (Bobby Jackson injured, Anthony Peeler suspended, Peja Stojakovich comatose), almost pulled out the series finale.

A third straight disappointment for a team that feels it "woulda, coulda, shoulda" won a couple of championships by now might herald some significant changes. But moving to Boise?

This much is certain: the Kings' continuing inability to reach the NBA Finals won't help the drive to build a new arena in Sacramento, which is where Boise comes in (just kidding). Arco Arena is one of the league's oldest, and the Maloofs are backing a plan to build -- mainly on the public dime -- a new arena in an area of downtown that would displace a Macy's and the Hard Rock Café.

The low public sentiment for the project might have shot up had the Kings made the Finals; now it has as much chance to get off the ground as Vlade Divac.

It might be better for the Kings to get their house in order before trying to build a new palace.

Even if they come back exactly as they are today, the Kings are capable of winning 50-plus games next season. The team's ownership and management claims to want more than that, though, and the people they're asking to foot the bill for a new arena most definitely wants and expects more.

It's convenient to cite the abdominal injury that kept Jackson, last season's Sixth Man of the Year, out the last couple of months as the primary culprit in the Kings' demise. But the truth is that they weren't nearly as deep this season as in the past -- not nearly as ready to compensate for the major injuries that seem inevitable with this franchise -- and that's the Maloofs' doing.

It would be interesting to know what the Maloof family would have said prior to Game 7 against the Wolves if the devil had offered this deal: You can have Jim Jackson the rest of the playoffs for $5 million, the amount in salary and cap penalty the owners saved by letting Jackson sign as a free agent with Houston. I'm guessing -- acknowledging that hindsight is easy and spending someone else's money is easier -- the answer would have been "yes."

Coach Rick Adelman has come under fire for using, almost exclusively, only seven players throughout the playoffs: starters Chris Webber, Stojakovic, Divac, Mike Bibby and Doug Christie and reserves Brad Miller and Anthony Peeler. However, the bottom line is that Adelman was forced to use a short bench ... because of the bottom line. Management's pennywise-but-pound-foolish ways, coupled with Bobby Jackson's injury (which the Kings' brass deluded itself into thinking wasn't serious enough to necessitate replacing him on the roster) spelled trouble.

Last summer, the Maloofs gave general manager Geoff Petrie orders to cut costs. Jim Jackson, who had been very productive as a backup at small forward and shooting guard, wanted a multiyear contract, so he became the primary casualty. Jackson signed a three-year deal with Houston that paid him $2.25 million this season. All he did for Houston in the playoffs was average nearly 15 points and more than 10 rebounds in five games against the Lakers.

Peeler -- a standstill 3-point shooter who does little else -- was never an adequate replacement for Jackson, and Stojakovic's miserable performance in the playoffs can be explained, in least partially, by the fact his legs were gone from carrying the load all year.

So now the Kings have reached a fork in the road. If they go one way, they'll keep the team largely intact, add a couple of pieces, and try again. If they go the other way, they'll make a blockbuster deal and change the look of the team. Either way, for the Kings to be championship contenders next season, it's likely that the Maloofs will have to open their wallets a bit wider.

The first scenario -- adding to what's already in place -- seems the more prudent course, given the Kings' talent base and the state of their main competition: the Lakers are great but fragile, the Timberwolves have age issues, and the Spurs and Mavericks are in the same boat as Sacramento, needing ... something.

Decision No. 1 for Sacramento will be Divac's status. He is indisputably the heart, soul and conscience of the team, and he's still the best passing big man in the league. Unfortunately, he looks older than his 36 years as often as not on the court, plus he's an unrestricted free agent. If Divac is willing to take a significant cut from $12 million salary and is content to become a 15-minute-a-game player to help the Kings finish the job, he will probably finish his career in Sactown.

Even if Divac stays, however, the Kings need to get more depth up front, preferably a younger, more athletic type who could back up Webber and Miller. Memphis jumping jack Stromile Swift, a restricted free agent, would be a good fit. Failing that, the Kings might want to take a look at free agents such as Mark Blount, Adonal Foyle, Brian Skinner and Greg Ostertag, all of whom could help improve their wimpy interior defense. (Side note: Wouldn't it be ironic -- even though it doesn't address the issue of aging the Kings are facing -- if Sacramento ended up with Karl Malone or Robert Horry?)

The other major hole in the Kings' roster is the aforementioned space formerly occupied by Jim Jackson. The best (swing)man for the job -- if the price is right -- is another Jackson, Atlanta unrestricted free agent Stephen. And if he is to be judged by the way he played at the end of the season, Jackson's teammate, Bobby Sura, is worth a look. Both should be reasonably priced free agents.

Webber may never be the same as he was pre-knee injury, but he'll undoubtedly be healthier by next season and is still capable of being a force. Assuming the rest of the core group is back on board (Peeler is the Kings' only unrestricted free agent of note), adding a backup big man and a legitimate swingman may be enough to prop the Kings' window of opportunity open a bit longer.

Although logically, if not emotionally, the Kings are far from needing a complete makeover, a major trade is a possibility, however slight.

The Kings would have to explore their options if a young superstar like Tracy McGrady or Paul Pierce goes on the market, even if it meant breaking up their nucleus (Bibby and Stojakovich for McGrady and Drew Gooden, anyone?).

And Webber, a very emotional player, has made noise about being under-appreciated in Sacramento and wanting a trade. The question is, who's going to take on the four years and $80 million left on his deal, and what would the Kings get for him? Certainly he could help put an Eastern Conference team, in particular, over the top. But would, say, Kurt Thomas, Shandon Anderson and Mike Sweetney do the same for the Kings? Probably not.

It will be an interesting summer in Sacramento. The Kings still have an opportunity to win a championship in the Webber era, but they have to make the right moves, right now.