A "King" sized debate

When looking at the Sacramento Kings dilemma, one would have to wonder what the true facts about the situation are. When it comes down to it, it depends on which city you live in.  This plays a huge role in the choice of outlet you go to read because of the proximity of the outlet.  If you live in Sacramento, you will read about how the city still has a fighting chance to keep the team, where as if you live in Seattle, it's all about how it's a locked deal and that Sacramento has no chance.

This is all based on the public of each outlet.  The Sacramento Bee is addressing the public of Sacramento, while the Seattle Times will address the public of Seattle. I have read many articles from both sides, but for the most part both have taken different opinions on a subject that really has no answer until the league votes on it.

I feel that both outlets have relayed the same information, in totally different ways.  Seattle will say that Ron Burkle and the rest of the investors have no chance at matching the offer on the table, where as Sacramento reports that there is no way it can be refused if they can find a way to match the $340 million offer. I for one think that both sides are wrong.  Yes, it does depend a lot on whether or not Sacramento investors can find enough money to put up a contending bid for the team, but when it's all said and done the deciding factor will come from the NBA Board of Governors meeting in April.

Public's and proximity have played a huge role throughout this entire debacle, and when the decision is final neither will play a role in the final verdict.  It will be interesting to see where each of the outlets go from here in their reporting, but like I said it probably won't play much of a role in the end anyways.

Photos courtesy of www.cowbellkingdom.com

Seattle Times Article
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2020185484_kings22xml.html?prmid=4939

Sacramento Bee Article
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/01/21/5128586/seattle-deal-for-kings-reported.html