The New york knicks are beter than the miami heat.
Debate Rounds (4)
I accept. Please state your argument.
The knicks have had a great season. Even though the heat have won the championship last year there defense has been horrible. they are 15th in the league in steals compared to the knicks who are 3rd. Also rebounding wise the heat have been horrible and even though the knicks aren't much better the heat are a bigger team. The knicks have a free throw percentage than the heat which is crucial in winning games.
Pro has the burden of proof to demonstrate that the New York* Knicks* are better* than the Miami* Heat*. So far, all we have heard from Pro is assertions about the athletic quality of the New York Knicks, describing aspects of the team that might have a slight edge over the Miami Heat. There are no sources to substantiate these claims and no examples as to how New York may be superior.
I'll mention the most important aspect of winning basketball games: points. The team with the greatest number of points wins the basketball game. In points per game, the Miami Heat outperform the New York Knicks on average by 1 point in a 103.6 to 102.6 PPG. [1, 2]
Pro has made statistical claims that are unsourced, and should thus be dismissed until proof of authenticity is provided.
Pro said that the Heat lost to the Wizards, which is partially true, yet irrelevant in the grand scheme of the NBA, because the most recent game the Miami Heat bested the Washington Wizards 102 - 72. That is a 30-point margin. Had there been a sense of urgency on the night the Heat lost to the Wizards 105-101, the outcome would have been wholly different. 
My opponent also told a blatant falsehood by referring to the Washington Wizards as "by far the worst team in the nba." The Toronto Raptors have had a worse season than the Wizards by a two-game margin. 
My opponent claims that defense is what wins games. I don't fully agree to this analysis, but suppose we were to assume that it were true for the sake of argument. Positing that defense wins games, the Miami Heat are still the superior team. According to the statistics, Miami is ranked 16th best defense, which contrasts with New York's ranking: 20th. 
In a power ranking of the NBA's best one-on-one defenders, two of the Heat's players demonstrated strong performances: Shane Battier at 9th place and LeBron James at 2nd. The only Knicks player on the list was Iman Shumpert at 10th.  The Bleacher Report's Dan Favale had this to say about Heat small forward LeBron James' defensive prowess: "The small forward is both explosive and versatile enough to defend every position on the floor and excel while doing so. And while he lights up the defensive stat lines by snagging 1.7 steals and swatting away nearly one block per contest, it's his impervious demeanor that truly makes him a great man-to-man defender. Despite being one of the most powerful athletes in the game, James sacrifices nothing in swiftness. He can navigate the floor while defending with his back to the basket extremely well, and he has the hands and timing necessary to make an opponent pay if they do manage to pass him. It simply doesn't get much better than James here. But then again, it never does." 
So, to recap:
According to the statistics, the Heat score more points than Knicks, have a better team defense than the Knicks, have better one-on-one defensive players than the Knicks, and have better fans than the Knicks.
I urge that you vote for con :)
Wallstreetatheist forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by carpediem 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||1||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Wallstreetatheist forfeited the last round, so the conduct rightly goes to Pro, since they were both cordial to one another. Pro had weak argumentation for rounds 2 and 3. He could have substantiated to a greater degree during this time. He essentially waited until the last round to make his case with sources; however, in debate new arguments introduced in the last round are disregarded by the judge, because the opposing team either has negligible space/time to respond to new arguments or physically cannot respond to the new arguments for having want of another round. Con used sources to substantiate his arguments in rounds in which introductory arguments were allowed. I think both debaters could have contributed more to the debate in the main case and analysis rounds.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.