Of course they don't have to be mutually exclusive - but they absolutely can be, which is why it's bad to solely focus on it.
Auburn last year was 194th in PPG allowed, giving up 73.2 PPG, 10th in the SEC. They were 37th in adjusted defense and 26th on offense per KenPom. A top 40 team in both categories is a good team. They finished 26-8 (13-5) and shared the SEC conference title. Auburn played the 18th fastest tempo, averaging 72.7 possessions per game.
Is it better to be Auburn, at 73.2 PPG, or Notre Dame, who finished at 68.6 PPG, 6th in the ACC, with a good offense (32nd) and an okay defense (68th). They played the 312th slowest pace, averaging only 65 possessions per game. Is it better to be Notre Dame who missed the tournament altogether with a 21-15 record? Was Notre Dame playing better or worse defense than Auburn? Was Bruce Pearl not demanding his team play defense and Mike Brey was?
I'll wait for your answer. I bet I won't get one.