The NBA is often littered with players who have styles that are completely opposite of each other. Some players in the league are perfect within organized coaching structures and can dominate when put around a tactical foundation. Other players in the league are capable of pulling out magical moments. Even if they aren't as dependable as the players that play within an organized structure, they have immense value in the NBA.
In a world of accolades and championships, many players get defined by what they won or what they lost in their careers. Manu Ginobili won 4 NBA Championships with the San Antonio Spurs and was a tremendous sixth man for one of the greatest dynasties in NBA history. Recently retired Jamal Crawford was a journeyman but one of the best off-the-bench players of all time due to his microwave scoring ability.
Gilbert Arenas made an argument that Crawford was actually a better player than Ginobili because of his individual skill. Arenas went as far as to say Ginobili isn't even a top-5 sixth man all-time.
"It's hard to convince me that Ginobili is individually better than Jamal Crawford. We'll look at their resumes and be like 'Ginobili's got 5 rings'. Who are you taking 1-on-1? 'I'm gonna take Jamal'. So he's the better player, right? That's how I evaluate it. Manu was amazing in that structure, but when we talk about individual play, he's not top-5 best sixth men of all time."
Ginobili has proven his ability on multiple occasions. He sacrificed to stay a part of the Spurs system and executed his role perfectly. Crawford is arguably more skilled when it comes to 1-on-1, but Crawford can't be the floor general of the backup unit like how Ginobili could.
The careers of both Ginobili and Crawford are incredible. It is unfair to try and minimize the achievements of one for the other, as both served a purpose in the NBA and were two of the greatest sixth men the league has ever seen.