Your whole point here is not logical. (I assume you are referring to Sergei Fedorov, above.)
First of all (as the "strange voting" thread proves), the Selke is a wonky award at best. No one in hockey knows what the Selke even is. It's essentially a media-narrative award with no value.
Second, by what measure did Jagr "play less than zero defence"? I think some people don't understand that when high-skilled forwards have the puck and are creating scoring chances, they are more effective defensively than stay-at-home defensive defencemen. That's because if you have the puck, the opponent doesn't. And if you score more than the opponent, you win.
In 1998-99, Jagr was on the ice for 159 goals by the Pens and 94 goals against. In the 1993-94 season you allude to, Fedorov was on the ice for 170 goals by Detroit and 99 against. That means in a higher scoring season, on an offensively stacked team that put in 356 goals, Fedorov was an overall (including special teams and even strength) +71. Five years later, Jagr was an overall +65 in a much lower-scoring season, on a team where the two next-best scorers were Martin Straka and German Titov, and on a Pens' squad that scored 120 fewer goals than the '94 Wings.
Then, let's not forget that on these offensively imbalanced teams (Fedorov's being far more skilled and explosive than Jagr's), Fedorov lost the scoring title by 10 points (and was fourth in PPG), while Jagr won the scoring title by 20 points and was #1 in PPG.
In conclusion, Jagr's greatest season was more impressive than Fedorov's.