I understand that argument, but I'm arguing pure technical musicianship, to which Ted Nugent is about 99 levels ahead of Bob Dylan. Nirvana made a bigger impact in the music industry too, but it doesn't mean Kurt Cobain didn't suck as a guitarist, who wrapped lyrics around basic bitch chords.
It's easy to make fun of Nugent because he's such a wacky psycho, but the dude is a legitimate legend in the guitar world.
I think a better argument would to say that Bob Dylan is the better overall artist than Ted Nugent, who's work clearly had a bigger cultural impact. Pure musicianship though(comparing how they played their respective instruments), it's really not a contest. If I was to say Freddy Mercury is a better singer than Bob Dylan, it shouldn't be controversial.
Although, I will say that I'm not a big fan of judging artistry on popularity or cultural impact, because it opens the door to popularity being the deciding factor to what makes an artist good, which I think most would agree is a faulty measuring stick when it comes to artists.