Why are Steph and even Luka in consideration for being some of the best basketball players ever when they don’t play defense? In my eyes the top 10 should be the best players on both sides of the ball, not just one. Can Steph really be considered a top 5 player all time without ever being an above average defender?
Because you can’t defend the ball each defense, but you can shoot it every offense
I wouldn’t even say that. Antawn Jamison was a better offensive player than Dennis Rodman, but much less valuable. It’s not just a simple question of whether offense or defense is worth more. It’s a matter of degrees. Someone like Curry isn’t just a good offensive player. He is a total anomaly, who shoots at unprecedented volume and accuracy.
Defensive players can impact the game in a similar way. Wemby has the potential to be anti-gravity in that sense. His mere presence on the court can influence the spacing and shot selection, so in that regard he is “defending the ball each defense.” Tyson Chandler and Marcus Camby didn’t do that, even though they had similar defensive qualities. Wemby is that archetype taken to an unseen level.
Any core skill done at an outlier level is going to be very valuable. That’s why you take a Rodman over a Jamison or a Curry over a Bam. Being very good at something is not the same as being a 1/1 at something.