Is defense an overrated argument?

This trend is pretty frustrating. I suppose if we're talking about individual offense (ISO scoring) vs individual defense (man-to-man either in the post or on the outside), then perhaps there's a case that one is more valuable than the other. Team offensive and defensive play are by nature equally important though, as when you're on offense, your opponent is defending (and vice versa). Playmakers and defensive anchors are extremely valuable (as are willing passers/screen setters/guys playing off the ball and help defenders in general), and equally so. I don't think there's much value in discussing flat 35ppg scorers, or their hypothetical defensive counterparts since neither is being viewed in a team context

Yes, effort is key in playing good defense but to trivialize that side of the ball saying anybody can be a standout? That's going too far, and disrespectful to the great defenders we've seen in league history. Defensive talent is very real. Comparing Nash to Wallace or Deke to Barkley is up to you guys, but I do think there a couple of possibilities:

1) you're relying on popular perception too much; nobody is forcing you to take one over the other

2) they're not necessarily of equal quality in the pairings (they may or may not be, but this isn't set in stone); even if Nash/Big Ben are the Xth best offensive/defensive players and Barkley/Mutombo are the Yth best respectively, they might not be of equal quality (that is to say, the 1st best player on offense/defense all-time might not be equal to each other, and so on)

Your evaluation is entirely up to you obviously, but it's a good idea to keep some of this in mind.

No , there's no limit on both ends . Court is Open-end way for players .

Good defense can lead to good offense

Yes, Individual offense >>> Individual defense... otherwise Payton would be > Magic.

[QUOTE=hateraid]I agree fully. But it seems that excellence in offense is always negated by the other player is a better defender
Take the thread Barkley vs. Garnett. The main argument for taking Garnett is he's a better defender. To me this belittles Barkley's offensive dominace[/QUOTE]
Or it recogizes that Kg was a pretty good offensive player in his own right and an elite rebounder. The argument would be that Kg's defensive advantage is bigger and more relevant than Barkley's offensive advantage. You're comparing a top 10 defender to an average one. That's a big deal.

Depends on the player you stan.

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater]Yes, Individual offense >>> Individual defense... otherwise Payton would be > Magic.[/QUOTE]

How ? :facepalm

[QUOTE=feyki]How ? :facepalm[/QUOTE]

Educate yourself :cheers:

[QUOTE=ArbitraryWater]Educate yourself :cheers:[/QUOTE]

:whatever: