The Instigator
phans86
Pro (for)
Winning
46 Points
The Contender
Rousseau
Con (against)
Losing
42 Points

Why the Boston Celtics will not win the NBA title

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/3/2008 Category: Sports
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,783 times Debate No: 1330
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (28)

 

phans86

Pro

Look, I love the Celtics. KG, Pierce, and Ray Allen are all exciting players to watch. Their personalities and determination have yielded them a lot of love and the best record in the league. BUT, we've seen before that the regular season does not guarantee anything. The consensus of basketball fans I've surveyed, all say that Boston is going to win the title come June. I would love to see this, however I have to be critical and consider the many factors...Factors supporting my opinion why Boston will not win the NBA title!!!
Rousseau

Con

Well, first off... I'd like to go into the merits of a debate. As the Pro, you must prove that, without a doubt, your case is impossible to deny. This is called the Burden Of Proof. You several times referenced several factors about why the Celtics would not win, yet never listed the factors. As such, I have nothing that is technically on case with your arguments (because you haven't really made any). My one on-case attack so far would have to be just to disagree with your topic statement. Follow my logic: The NBA Regular Season is to weed out the bad teams from the good teams. We then move onto the playoffs, with the teams that performed best being rewarded the most, with higher seeds. Logically, the best teams perform the best.
Now, what exactly does a win-loss record indicate? Well, it indicates the wins versus the losses. To carry further, a team with a bad record, isn't likely to be good. Now sure... there is a slim chance of something terrible affecting the team EVERY night for every loss, but how likely is that? The inverse is just as true. A good record reflects a good team. So, lets just assume that barring a terrible mishap, the Celtics will at least get into the playoffs. From there, they will face the cream of the crop. The only other noteworthy team from the Eastern Conference would be the Pistons.

Comparing the Pistons with the Celtics:
Positions:

Celtics:
PG: Rajon Rondo
SG: Ray Allen
SF: Paul Pierce
PF: Kevin Garnett
C: Kendrick Perkins

Pistons:
PG - Chauncey Billups
SG - Richard Hamilton
SF - Tayshaun Prince
PF - Rasheed Wallace
C - Antonio McDyess

So, let's go thru. Billups will beat Rondo any day. Pistons 1, Celtics 0. Allen over Hamilton, because of assists and perimeter shooting. Pistons 1, Celtics 1. Pierce over Prince any day. Pistons 1, Celtics 2. Garnett over Wallace, that's inarguable. Celtics 3, Pistons 1. Center position has to go to Pistons, but it is still 3-2, Celtics winning. Bench is arguable, but for the argument, I'll go ahead and assume Detroit wins. All tied up. Where else can we look at? Well, record? Celtics are 27-3, while the Pistons are 25-7. Celtics win.

So that leaves the Celtics on top of the Eastern Conference. If you want to argue a team from the West, go ahead and name the team. There are a few that are good, and I don't want to waste space pre-emptively responding. I'll just mention that the Celtics are the best team in the league (record-wise. The ENTIRE league.

My Arguments So Far:
1. No team is better
2. Celtics record (the best way to justify how good a team is) is best in the league
3. No reasons why they would lose (burden of proof)

One more argument: http://www.betus.com...

Now, if you look at that link, it basically says that the Celtics have a 1 in 450 chance of winning the championship (Spurs - 1 in 350). However, the articles criticism and reasoning for the Celtics being placed lower wasn't for lack of talent, but rather lack of chemistry. So let's refute that. If there were to be a chemistry problem, wouldn't it have been most prevalent at the beginning of the year? That would be most logical. However, the Celtics have only lost 3 times. Seem like a chemistry problem? Not to me.

My arguments (Final):
1. No team is better
2. Celtics record (the best way to justify how good a team is) is best in the league
3. No reasons why they would lose (burden of proof)
4. The bets on who will win are in favor of the Celtics

Thank you for your time.
Debate Round No. 1
phans86

Pro

Enemy

Thanks for the advice, but I didn't come up with this debate in the hopes that someone will educate me the basic of arguing. Also, I'm well aware that I didn't include any factors, so lets stop stating the obvious, bro. Oh and I think I have a keen understanding of what a teams regular season record means, wins and loses, yada yada yaa, but thanks for clearly that up for me.

"Pierce over Prince any day". What is this, where are your facts and stats. If you are expecting people to side with your debate because of that statement, then I'd hate to get your hopes up, dawg.
The Pistons aren't the only team in the east that poses some threat. The Orlando Magic is a equally powerful team. But lets forget the east, the topic of this debate is weather they'll win the title, not the Eastern Conference. (Please pay a little more attention) Also, even though a regular season record might foreshadow results in the playoffs, it's not enough evidence to bank on. Look at last year for example, the Dallas Mavericks; lost in the first round to the Golden State Warriors. Not only did the Mavs have the best record in the league, but the highest PPG, % from the line, among many other stats, and by far the deepest and best bench in the league. Lost 4-2.

1. 23-3 is impressive, but the Celtics haven't played the cream of the crop yet. The Mavs, Spurs, and Suns. These are the nights that matter, not the games between the garbage NY Knicks and other Eastern Conference chumps. The Eastern Conference is, to be blunt, a joke compared to the west. The west is well over .500 against the east so far this season. Two league powerhouses, Dallas and Phoenix, both average more against opponents at home and on the road, then the Celtics do.

2. The Celtics have one of the weakest benches in the league. The elite 4 players of their bench, average a depressing 6 ppg, 1.25 apg, and 3.5 rpg. The elite 4 of the mavericks bench average 10 ppg, 3 apg, and 5 rpg. Teams cannot win a championship without a good bench. Look at the defending champs, the Spurs, they have multiple championships due it part to their dependable and consistent bench.

3. Celtics:
PG: Rajon Rondo
SG: Ray Allen
SF: Paul Pierce
PF: Kevin Garnett
C: Kendrick Perkins
Pistons:
PG- Chauncey Billups
SG - Richard Hamilton
SF - Tayshaun Prince
PF - Rasheed Wallace
C - Antonio McDyess

Both teams average about the same numbers. The Pistons lead by a fraction in most fields. However, this shouldn't be overlooked. Whatever the difference is, even if it's a decimal point, it matters. I.E. The Pistons 2 point win over the Celtics earlier this season.

4. Another thing the Celtics lack, is experience. As a unit, they don't have any. The Pistons won that close game in December because of their experience. They've been in many similar situations, and know how to react. After the game Chauncey Billups told reporters, "We been there done that." The Celtics have not "been there done that". A big attribute, that is missing in Bean town. The Mavs, Suns, and Spurs, the three best teams in the league, are in a similar scenarios as the Pistons. This gives them a huge advantages over their opponents.

My arguments (Final):

1. Boston is not the best team.
2. A regulars season record is not enough evidence to declare the best team in the league.
3. Plenty of reasons why they would lose (week conference/division, easy scheduale/ still early in the season, and they haven‘t played the three best teams in the league yet)
4. F your bets pal

-hold on dees buster
Rousseau

Con

Your first paragraph was kind of commenting on my merits of debate point. Well, I wasn't really trying to educate you, more of I was trying to tell the voters the reasons I expect them to vote. As for the win-loss record, I believe it is the best predictor of who will win the championship. If there is anything else we can look at to predict who will win, then please show me.

Pierce over Prince point - You argued I should show statistics to prove my point, well that's necessary only when the point may be wrong. I believe the point is right, and undisputable, and you haven't given any reason for it to be wrong. The only career areas Prince beats Pierce in are his turnover ratio and rebounds. Added, Pierce only lost by a little bit on those two. Pierce soars over Prince in most other areas such as PPG (23.5 compare to 12.3). Pierce is much better. If you disagreed with any of my assumptions, you should say why you disagree. You haven't leading me to believe you just wanted clash.
Sources: http://www.nba.com...
http://sports.yahoo.com...

"But lets forget the east" - If you insist...

"The topic of this debate is weather they'll win the title, not the Eastern Conference." - I realize, but to get to the championship, they must be the best team in the Eastern Conference; I was simply proving that they are.

Regular Season record not enough to "bank on" - It may not be enough to bank on, but it makes them the most likely team to win. The idea of the debate is that the Celtics Will Not win the Title, and I am arguing that they are the most likely team to win, because of record. Give any other predictor of who will win the Championship, and I will show that the Celtics are favored by it.

Haven't played the best teams yet - Unless you prove that they are likely to lose to these teams, then this point has no real merit. I believe they will win against any team (assuming fair conditions). Provide a team that they would lose against. I won't go thru and say how they can beat every team in the league, because I don't have the space. Provide one team from the West and say how they can beat the Celtics. NOTE: The record of the Celtics isn't 23-3, but rather 27-3.

Celtics Bench Is Bad - Kind of ironic that you gave the Spurs example. Here is something that trashes your point: http://mvn.com...
You contended that the Spurs won Championships with a good bench, well the article compares efficiency, and the Spurs have a worse bench. Interesting..

Pistons and Celtics Comparison - You said that the Pistons are slightly better in every category. That's ridiculous, and your point lacks evidence. Here, look at the real comparison: http://sports.espn.go.com...
There is another game tonight, and then we can argue who is better. That being said, the Pistons and Celtics are (relying on stats and records) the two best team sin the NBA, and the Celtics average out to be better. Interesting.

Experience - Well, I'd say that they are working together pretty well, having only lost 3 times. As for experience, plenty of teams have won the NBA Title without boatloads of experience. The Houston Rockets in the 90's, the Bulls in the late 80's, etc etc. Experience is important, but not necessary.

Reasons I win:
I have negated all of the Pro's Contentions and extended my own. Also, Pro has yet to answer my point on Odds. Thusly, I deserve the ballot.
Debate Round No. 2
phans86

Pro

phans86 forfeited this round.
Rousseau

Con

Well, I'd like to firmly believe that my opponent dropped his arguments due to lack of time. However, due to this being he last round, we'll never really see. So, I'll just go over why under the arguments presented in this round, the Celtics are the most likely to win a championship.

1. Best Record
- I asked my opponent to provide something that measures who will win a championship more accurately, and he did not provide any system of measurement. Thus, he concedes that the best way to determine who will win the championship is to look at record. The Celtics have the best record in the league, and therefore are the most likely to win. To clear up the "most likely" phrase: We are debating who will win the NBA Championship. Now obviously, neither of us are psychics, nor have any inside information. That means that we cannot be SURE. However, the resolution is clear that the Topic is that the Celtics will not win the Championship. I simply must prove that they are the most likely to win out of all the teams, and their record says it all. The gold standard for regular-season success is the 72-10 Chicago Bulls of 1995-96. They, too, were 29-3 after 32 games. The 69-win Los Angeles Lakers of 1971-72, the team that set the NBA record for consecutive wins with 33, was in the middle of that streak after 32 games and also was 29-3. Again, the Bulls show up: The 1996-97 Bulls also went 69-13. They were 28-4 after 32 games. And the 1966-67 Sixers, who went 68-13, also were 29-3 after 32 games and didn't lose their fourth game until they had amassed 37 victories.

Those four teams all have one thing in common: They won the NBA championship. Point Made.

2. Best Team
The next best team (statistically) is the Detroit Pistons. I gave evidence showing that the Celtics are slightly better in all major categories, and gave analysis on the players. The Celtics have a slightly different team. As for the games they recently played, the Celtics are 1-1. The first one they lost off of a silly foul made by a rookie (which I can guarantee won't happen again) and the latest one, they won handedly, 92-85. The one argument my opponent made was that the Pistons have more experience. But how is experience made? By getting out there and doing it, something the Celtics can do.

3. The Bets
My opponent dropped this, so I really don't think I need to prove the validity of it. However I can prove the significance. The bets are designed to circumvent the litany of unknowns and strike at the heart of this matter: Who will win. While the Celtics weren't at the top of the bets, those bets were earlier season versions (i.e. before the Celtics became 29-3). I think it would be fair to say that the Celtics have a place above, as the bets main concern with the Celtics (chemistry) has been addressed adequately (29-3 is such a good number...).

My Opponents Arguments (All Refuted before):
Record doesn't matter - No Evidence on this claim. I proved that record is the only thing we can look at to predict a winner.
Weak Bench - The Article I gave (http://mvn.com...) refutes this point quite well. My opponent (who I concede, may have just lost track of time) didn't answer to this, thus agreeing with my side. I think that adequately answers the point.
Lack Of Experience - I had two arguments here, both of which stand still.
1. Experience doesn't matter all that much (Look at the 90's Rockets)
2. The only way to gain that is to get out there and play, which the Celtics have been doing.

Alright, I don't want to bring up another argument that my opponent has no chance to refute, but I want to make a little note to phans86: Had I felt I had no other arguments, I could have attacked the topic. The topic simply states 'Why The Celtics Will Not Win The NBA Title'. I could have simply said that it is ridiculous to claim a team that is historically as good as the Celtics will never win a championship ever again, and this argument would have held weight. You need to specify what EXACTLY you are debating. I myself would never run an attack like this (unless I had no others), but some debaters might. I ask that this argument (and only this argument) hold no relevance in the voter's decision.

All in all, I believe I have won this debate as I have fulfilled my two main duties in proving the Pro wrong: Refuted my opponent's arguments AND defended my own points. In the end, he may have agreed with may (or just lost track of the time). I won't comment on which one it is just yet, but he may leave a comment shading some light on the situation. Thank you for your time, and please vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Rousseau 9 years ago
Rousseau
Yeah, I enjoy the topic alot.
As for my last comment, I was laughing with you. I strongly advocate the level of casualness that is in this debate. It's pretty nice :D.
Posted by phans86 9 years ago
phans86
im just kidding rousseau, this is fun tho, right?
Posted by Rousseau 9 years ago
Rousseau
Well... How can I argue with that?
Posted by phans86 9 years ago
phans86
yes i can you fool! I CAN PREDICT ANYTHING
Posted by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
phans , you can not in anyway predict that the Celtics won't win the title. They very well could.
Posted by Rousseau 9 years ago
Rousseau
I'll post tommorow. I just wanted to snatch this up. heh
28 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by pcmbrown 7 years ago
pcmbrown
phans86RousseauTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:70 
Vote Placed by smith76 9 years ago
smith76
phans86RousseauTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Conservative 9 years ago
Conservative
phans86RousseauTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by SexyLatina 9 years ago
SexyLatina
phans86RousseauTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Randomknowledge 9 years ago
Randomknowledge
phans86RousseauTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by colsen110 9 years ago
colsen110
phans86RousseauTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by colsen111 9 years ago
colsen111
phans86RousseauTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by colsen112 9 years ago
colsen112
phans86RousseauTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Kierkegaard 9 years ago
Kierkegaard
phans86RousseauTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by mikelwallace 9 years ago
mikelwallace
phans86RousseauTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30