Sean's goal to "make my point of view a little clearer to a group of people who don’t already agree with me" is certainly achievable. Whether it is a good one to strive for (by whatever metric of goodness) is less clear.

While it's about Nye-Ham rather than Carroll-Craig, anti-creationist activist Zack Copplin thinks the Nye-Ham debate is worth it for this. David McMillan, who was raised in fundamentalism and later learned science, considers that "In a debate like this one, demonstrating even the most elementary facts about evolution and the age of the universe would be a great success" in order to put cracks in the hermetic world view of the faithful.

Edit: As Jayson notes below, this comparison isn't quite fair - though an ardent apologist, Craig is not in fact a creationist.