The Instigator
xxGINGER-THE-DEBATERxx
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Zaradi
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points

Jeremy Lin is the best rookie ever in the NBA

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Zaradi
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/18/2012 Category: Sports
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,742 times Debate No: 21243
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (3)

 

xxGINGER-THE-DEBATERxx

Pro

Jeremy Lin has so far broken many record, shut down the top people and teams in the country, and taken the Knicks to an unbelievable winning streak. He has astonished fans, coaches and other players and doesn't look like he will dull out any time soon, Jeremy Lin is a fantastic basketball player and the best rookie there has ever been in the U.S.
Zaradi

Con

I'd like to thank my opponent for posting this debate. I'll be negating the resolution based off the fact that, while Jeremy Lin is certainly a good basketball player, there were people who had much better rookie years.

But first, I'd like to clear up a little bit on this vague resolutional wording.
Ever in the resolution implies that we must also consider past NBA legends when considering how Jeremy Lin compares.

I'd first like to propose three other candidates for best rookie years ever, then possibly show some insight into why Jeremy Lin has had the success that he has, and one potentially fatal flaw that he possesses that makes him lesser than the three I will mention.

1. Larry Bird.
Anyone who knows about basketball knows about Larry Bird. One of the greatest basketball players in NBA history. His stats are comparable, if not better, to Jeremy Lin's stats.[1] Rookie of the year in his rookie year.[1]

2. Michael Jordan.
Again, another legend in basketball history. If you've even heard about basketball, you've heard of Michael Jordan. His stats are comparable, if better, than Lin's. [2] He was also rookie of the year in his rookie year and made the All-NBA Second Team in his rookie year.[2]

3. LeBron James.
LeBron is an outstanding player on the court with stats that are definetely better than Lin's.[3] He was also rookie of the year in his rookie year, was rookie of the month seven months out of twelve in his rookie year, and made the NBA All-Rookie 1st team in his rookie year [3].

Now to explain some of Lin's successes. Lin's success, obviously, has partially to do with talent, but also his so-far easy schedule against rather unthreatening teams[4] that allows him to show off a little. He has yet to face a really challenging team.

One major problem that Lin has is ball control. Lin has tied for the most given away balls in the NBA at nine in one game[4]. Ball control is a major problem because if you don't have the ball, your productivity as a player is cut dramatically. Playing defense counts for something, but a) you need points to win, and you can't score if you keep coughing the ball up, and b) even if defense matters more, it doesn't make things any better if he steals it then coughs it back up again.

Thus, while Jeremy Lin is an undenyably good player, he is not the best rookie EVER in the NBA.

I await my opponents response.
Debate Round No. 1
xxGINGER-THE-DEBATERxx

Pro

Yes, those three people are fantastic basketball players and may have gotten rookie of the year, but who is to say that Jeremy Lin won't get rookie of the year. Then with this rookie of the year title, and all of the records he has already set, how can any of these people that you have mentioned compare to Jeremy Lin?
Zaradi

Con

It's not all just about having rookie of the year. While it is a major factor, all three of these players accomplished feats in their rookie year as well which makes them just as good, if not better, than Jeremy Lin. Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, and LeBron James all set records in their rookie year, so they compare in just the same way.

Also, I offer a good reason as to why a rookie has had the success that he has, which was the lack of actual challenge in his schedule. Analysts stated that the schedule that Lin and his team have had so far was not the most challenging of them all, and have yet to hit a really good team. When they do, Lin's capabilities might be dumbed down a little. You failed to refute this in your last speech.

Also, I offered a fatal flaw to Jeremy Lin that makes him lesser than the three people I offered as alternative candidates, which was his ball control. Since he's currently tied in the NBA for most give aways in a single game, at nine, that's potentially disastrous. I also gave reasons as to why this off-sets his talents because when you don't have the ball, you can't score and even if he's good at defense, it doesn't make things any better if he steals the ball and gives it right back. This also goes unrefuted in your last speech.

So far, you've done absolutely nothing to prove your case, and haven't even refuted my case.
Debate Round No. 2
xxGINGER-THE-DEBATERxx

Pro

Are you saying that that the Lakers are a bad team? And that shutting Kobe Bryant down to 1/10 in the first half is not a big accomplishment?

And with the nine steals, you can't help the guy, it was his first time playing after being cut from multiple teams, its obvious that he was nervous. Sure he made mistakes in his first game but wouldn't you be nervous? And, he has corrected his mistakes and been the best rookie ever.

Also, the three people that you state in your case may have set records in their rookie year, but then obviously to set these records and beat their records than obviously he would have to beat their record making him a better rookie because he beat their records so obviously he is better. Which makes him the best rookie that has ever been in the NBA.

Thank you.
Zaradi

Con

Are you saying that the Lakers are a bad team?

No. I myself am not saying that the Lakers specifically are a bad team. The source I quoted stated that the schedule that they had faced so far was not all-together challenging. This you have not attacked.

And with the nine steals, you can't help the guy,

That's true. What we CAN DO is say that giving up the ball is a flaw of Lin's and that this is what makes him lesser than the greats of basketball (i.e Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, LeBron James).

it was his first time playing after being cut from multiple teams,

Can we not reasonably conclude that a player of this magnificent talent that you claim Lin to be wouldn't get cut from a team in the first place? If so, then I can use this evidence against you as offense for me.

Sure he made mistakes in his first game but wouldn't you be nervous?

All this is is an appeal to popularity by my opponent, which is fallacious in the extreme. My opponent's point is this:

A lot of people would be nervous in a big game,
therefore, it's okay if Jeremy Lin is nervous in a big game.

But if this kind of argument is true, then it would also justify the argument given below:

Getting massively drunk and beating up your girlfriend is popular.
Therefore, it's okay if you get massively drunk and beat up your girlfriend.

Hence, his appeal is fallacious.

but then obviously to set these records and beat their records than obviously he would have to beat their record making him a better rookie

....
Excuse my momentary lapse in proffesionalism, but what does this even mean? I appologize if this sounds insulting, but I can't understand what this is saying for the life of me. I will try to adress this argument to the best of my ability, but I would like to ask my opponent to clarify on this statement as to what it means.

Lin would have to beat their records in order to have some claim as to why Lin is better, but you haven't proved that. If you were to prove that, then you might have something to work with. But since you haven't, I don't know what else to tell you.

So far, my opponent has only made claims that he has yet to back up with actual cited evidence and has yet to even fully refute my case. The main warrants in my case still stand, and thus you can vote con.
Debate Round No. 3
xxGINGER-THE-DEBATERxx

Pro

xxGINGER-THE-DEBATERxx forfeited this round.
Zaradi

Con

My opponent has forfeited the last round. You can extend all of my arguments.
Debate Round No. 4
xxGINGER-THE-DEBATERxx

Pro

I apologize for not being able to post my argument, but even though that happened, my opponent only said to extend his arguments, but you can not extend your arguments until you refute the arguments that your opponent has said against your arguments, so you can extend my answers to his arguments, so they are not a voting issue in our debate. Because i said that he has broken the record of these people, proving that he is a better rookie, proves that I win this debate, also because it was unrefuted that Jeremy Lin was able to actually beat these peoples records, wins me this debate.

Thank you.
Zaradi

Con

As blunt as this is going to sound (deduct a conduct point if you must), my opponent obviously has failed to read through my rebuttals I made in the third round. If Jeremy Lin HAS broken as many records as the pro is saying, he has yet to even provide any proof as for what records have been broken. Since he failed to do that, there's no real way for the judges to evaluate the argument except as an unwarranted assertion.

And since the rest of my arguments were not responded to, they can be cleanly extended through the round. This round will break down in a few ways:

1. My opponent just isn't responding to all the arguments I'm making. He's been undercovering the arguments I've been making the entire round, while I've clearly refuted the arguments he has made. So just on argumentation, this is the first place to vote con.

2. My opponent hasn't backed up any of his arguments with any scrap evidence. I'm the only person providing any sort of link to statistical or analytical evidence via the links in comments. So thus, his claims are, at best, subject to question. At worst, groundless assertions. So from an evidence stand point, this is the second place to vote con.

3. My opponent forfeited round four. From a conduct stand point, this is the third place to vote con.

So there really isn't a reason not to vote con.

I'd like to thank my opponent for providing me with an interesting debate.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Zaradi 5 years ago
Zaradi
I WANT THIS. NOBODY TAKE THIS.
That means you.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by johnnyboy54 5 years ago
johnnyboy54
xxGINGER-THE-DEBATERxxZaradiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: No question here. Con could have also talked at length about Lin great supporting cast, while players like Jordan, James and Bird elevated their respective teams.
Vote Placed by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
xxGINGER-THE-DEBATERxxZaradiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: con showed how many other people were the best rookies ever and the pro even admitted that Lin has his flaws. FF gives conduct to the Con as well ,and sources by the con were actually provided in the comments, so sources go to him too
Vote Placed by RougeFox 5 years ago
RougeFox
xxGINGER-THE-DEBATERxxZaradiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Args- No sources on pro's "broken record argument", con extends clean offense b/c pro makes no coherent responses Conduct- Pro forfeited Sources- Con provided the best sports sources compared to pro's none.