Speculation: What top 4D could Anders Lee return?

[SI90]

He is good, even very good the last two years.
And he has quite some value.
But the Isles' fans still manage to overrate his value.
That's how Lee is overrated.

What is his value?


I realize he only has 1 year left on his contract and that has to be taken into account.

He’s a legit goal scoring power forward. Also, contrary to what some believe he is NOT a product of Tavares. The guy earns his goals and has proved he can score without Tavares. So that’s not really an argument.

Lee isn’t a play maker and won’t get many assists so that affects his overall point/production totals do that brings his value down a tick below say a 35-40 goal scorer who is also a PPG.

 

[CREW99AW]

Cody Ceci+

You seriously think Ceci could be the main piece in landing a 40 goal scorer?

Wow. I would not be pleased to give up Nelson 20 goal scorer, for Ceci.

 

[CREW99AW]

He's an avs fan he's just pissed because we said no on Barzal and Sorokin and don't want Varlamov

sell your garbage elsewhere. Sakic has had a ***** for Sorokin for over a year and talk is the league has informed the Avs informally that any further contact will lead to tampering charges. He's a fishing buddy of Varlamov and have both camped on the Colorado river and according to NHL sources there was some form of recruitment going on so the NHL basically said cut it out. It was on Twitter last year and Corey Pronman mentioned it while speaking about the lack of a transfer Agreement. But for awhile there avs fans thought they could poach him.

Pronman eventually reported that the NHL decided that any player drafted by an NHL Team in the NHL remains on the Drafting teams exclusive list until they sign a standard player contract they aren't even eligible for free agency until they sign a standard players contract

I recall how pissy several Avs fans were, over nyi fans having little interest in moving Sorokin.

 

[One Winged Angel]

He's great in front of the net, but he's not a player that can create his own offense. I'd be very wary in giving up pieces for him.

 

[CREW99AW]

He's great in front of the net, but he's not a player that can create his own offense. I'd be very wary in giving up pieces for him.

I think a team needing a net front presence and grit would benefit from Lee's game.
Especially in the playoffs.

 

[EastonBlues22]

The last two years he's scored an absurd number of goals for the number of shots he's taken.

Since Lee doesn't put up a lot of assists, his offensive production is largely tied to that shooting percentage, and he's not exactly a high-volume shooter...at least relative to most guys who are putting up 30+ goals. Consider that shooting 18.5% over 195 shots nets you 36 goals, while shooting 12% over 195 shots leaves you with only 23 goals. There's a pretty vast difference in value between a 36 goal/58 point forward and a 23 goal/45 point forward.

Before you say that 12% is unfairly low, it's still a good bit above what the average forward shoots (~10.8% since 2005). Lee's career shooting percentage before the last two years was 11.1% over 180 games. The reason why I picked 12% as a reference point is below the break, for those that are curious.

Anyway, at some point Lee's shooting percentage is almost certainly going to come down from its lofty heights the last two years. Heck, Stamkos just shot 12.7% this year at age 27, and he shot in the 16-20% range from age 19 through 25. Fluctuations happen, and shooting percentages tend to decline (on average) into your 30s, anyway. IMO, the teams interested in signing him to his next deal would be wise to temper their expectations.

<break>

For those who want some context for those shooting percentage numbers, here it is:

The number of players who can sustain an 18.5% shooting percentage, or what Lee has averaged the last two years, is absurdly small. Only 29 players since the 1967 expansion have done it (minimum 70 goals and 160 games played), and 23 of them never played a game after 1995. None are currently playing.

There are six active players with at least 70 career goals (min 160 games played) who have a career shooting percentage above 15%: Byron (18.0%), Stamkos (16.7%), Marchand (15.8%), Henrique (15.5%), Stone (15.5%), and Hudler (15.0%). Lee ranks 11th on that list at 14.6% for his career.

If you sort younger, active players (age 33 or less) by career goals scored, there are 94 forwards meeting the criteria with 175+ career goals...a number Lee should almost certainly reach by that age. Stamkos and Marchand are the only two on the list with a career shooting percentage above 14.8% which means 98% of the group is below that number...with 96% being below 14.6%, and 89% being below 13.8%. The median value for this group of younger prolific goal scorers is 12.0%, which is why I used that number above. Approximately 78% of the group is above the average forward shooting percentage of 10.8%.

The moral of the story is that prolific goal scorers (even elite ones) have a very hard time sustaining 14.6%+ shooting percentages over the long haul in the modern NHL, with most coming in decidedly lower than that. Maybe Lee is one of the select few that bucks the trend, but I hope my team isn't banking on it.

 

[PWJunior]

Look at a heat map of where he scores his goals, 5 foot radius from the net. His shooting percentage is high because all of his chances are rebounds, deflections, and that sick backhand in tight. He's no frills, nothing fancy. He parks his ass in front of the net and creates havoc. Old school. Tim Kerr clone.

 

[One Winged Angel]

I think a team needing a net front presence and grit would benefit from Lee's game.
Especially in the playoffs.

I'm not saying they wouldn't, I would just be vary wary of giving up top end pieces for a guy like Lee, who I don't think would put up the same numbers without someone like Tavares centering him.

Not saying he still can't be a 20+ goal guy, but I'm fairly certain he wouldn't be scoring 35-40 without Tavares and I don't think I'm being unreasonable in saying so. His game reminds me a lot of Moulson's in the sense that he doesn't create his offense and a lot of his goals are scored in close, although I think Lee is a better physical presence and is much better along the boards and down low in loose puck battles.

I'm not saying he won't get a nice return, but I would be careful in giving up assets for him.

 

[Riseonfire]

A high shooting percentage is easier to maintain when you are selective about the shots you take.

Lee doesn't shoot from the circles, he scores all his goals <5 feet from the net. His shots (few though they may be) are all high-danger shots, hence the high shooting %. If Lee were a traditional volume shooter with a crazy high %, I would be worried, but he's not.

 

[PWJunior]

A high shooting percentage is easier to maintain when you are selective about the shots you take.

Lee doesn't shoot from the circles, he scores all his goals <5 feet from the net. His shots (few though they may be) are all high-danger shots, hence the high shooting %. If Lee were a traditional volume shooter with a crazy high %, I would be worried, but he's not.

Yup. It's not like he's the next coming of Mike Bossy, who I think has a career 21% shooting percentage. That's insane.

 

[leeroggy]

The last two years he's scored an absurd number of goals for the number of shots he's taken.

Since Lee doesn't put up a lot of assists, his offensive production is largely tied to that shooting percentage, and he's not exactly a high-volume shooter...at least relative to most guys who are putting up 30+ goals. Consider that shooting 18.5% over 195 shots nets you 36 goals, while shooting 12% over 195 shots leaves you with only 23 goals. There's a pretty vast difference in value between a 36 goal/58 point forward and a 23 goal/45 point forward.

Before you say that 12% is unfairly low, it's still a good bit above what the average forward shoots (~10.8% since 2005). Lee's career shooting percentage before the last two years was 11.1% over 180 games. The reason why I picked 12% as a reference point is below the break, for those that are curious.

Anyway, at some point Lee's shooting percentage is almost certainly going to come down from its lofty heights the last two years. Heck, Stamkos just shot 12.7% this year at age 27, and he shot in the 16-20% range from age 19 through 25. Fluctuations happen, and shooting percentages tend to decline (on average) into your 30s, anyway. IMO, the teams interested in signing him to his next deal would be wise to temper their expectations.

<break>

For those who want some context for those shooting percentage numbers, here it is:

The number of players who can sustain an 18.5% shooting percentage, or what Lee has averaged the last two years, is absurdly small. Only 29 players since the 1967 expansion have done it (minimum 70 goals and 160 games played), and 23 of them never played a game after 1995. None are currently playing.

There are six active players with at least 70 career goals (min 160 games played) who have a career shooting percentage above 15%: Byron (18.0%), Stamkos (16.7%), Marchand (15.8%), Henrique (15.5%), Stone (15.5%), and Hudler (15.0%). Lee ranks 11th on that list at 14.6% for his career.

If you sort younger, active players (age 33 or less) by career goals scored, there are 94 forwards meeting the criteria with 175+ career goals...a number Lee should almost certainly reach by that age. Stamkos and Marchand are the only two on the list with a career shooting percentage above 14.8% which means 98% of the group is below that number...with 96% being below 14.6%, and 89% being below 13.8%. The median value for this group of younger prolific goal scorers is 12.0%, which is why I used that number above. Approximately 78% of the group is above the average forward shooting percentage of 10.8%.

The moral of the story is that prolific goal scorers (even elite ones) have a very hard time sustaining 14.6%+ shooting percentages over the long haul in the modern NHL, with most coming in decidedly lower than that. Maybe Lee is one of the select few that bucks the trend, but I hope my team isn't banking on it.

Have you ACTUALLY WATCHED ONE Isles game from start to finish? If so, you'd know instantly how ridiculous this post is.

He is Tim Kerr 2.0, who shot 18.6% for his ENTIRE NHL career.

They play the SAME EXACT GAME.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

A high shooting percentage is easier to maintain when you are selective about the shots you take.

Lee doesn't shoot from the circles, he scores all his goals <5 feet from the net. His shots (few though they may be) are all high-danger shots, hence the high shooting %. If Lee were a traditional volume shooter with a crazy high %, I would be worried, but he's not.

Yes his Sh% isn't unsustainable if given his quality in a vacuum but it misses the bigger point.

The problem is how repeatable are those high quality chances he's getting. If you take him away from Tavares, Bailey and Barzal and ask him to be more of 'the guy' on a team those will probably drop signifcantly as he doesn't generate much offense, mainly just cleans up the garbage in front.

He's very buyer beware to me. He wouldn't work a on a young team that would try and make him a go to guy for offense, he'd need to go to a team that has offense and play drivers but needs a finisher and net front guy on the PP.

 

[Brock Radunske]

Of all the things the Leafs don't need, offensive wingers needing lucrative contracts most certainly tops the list.
Want to know what's 2nd on the list?
Trading top-4 dman for said wingers.

 

[ndgolden]

Yes his Sh% isn't unsustainable if given his quality in a vacuum but it misses the bigger point.

The problem is how repeatable are those high quality chances he's getting. If you take him away from Tavares, Bailey and Barzal and ask him to be more of 'the guy' on a team those will probably drop signifcantly as he doesn't generate much offense, mainly just cleans up the garbage in front.

He's very buyer beware to me. He wouldn't work a on a young team that would try and make him a go to guy for offense, he'd need to go to a team that has offense and play drivers but needs a finisher and net front guy on the PP.

Few will ever believe his game is sustainable despite always being a finisher.

Led the USHL in scoring out of HS tied with Jaden Schwartz with 35 goals.
Led Notre Dame in Scoring as a Freshman to the frozen four and led in goals all three years at ND.
Led the AHL Sound Tigers in Goals.
Has averaged 30+ goals per year /82 game season since coming into the NHL with lowest min/60
Led the NHL this year with highest percentage of points being primary for those over 50 pts.
Has more primary assists over the last two years to Tavares goals than Tavares to Lee...........
Led Team USA in Goals last year at Worlds on Olympic Ice.

If you think Lee is just parked in front of the net looking for tap-ins, you really don't have a clue about his game.

Lee also generates offense by the amount of d-men who have to follow and account for his presence in front of the net, this opens up the Barzals, Tavares and Bailey along with the amount of screens used in both 5v5 and PP. If picking up a loose puck in front of the net and scoring is not generating offense than what is it?

 

[boredmale]

The last two years he's scored an absurd number of goals for the number of shots he's taken.

Since Lee doesn't put up a lot of assists, his offensive production is largely tied to that shooting percentage, and he's not exactly a high-volume shooter...at least relative to most guys who are putting up 30+ goals.

I would argue his offensive production is a result of how many pucks you can get to him infront of the net. He has an uncanny ability to redirecting pucks and also picking corners with a backhand. Simple fact though is if you don't get him the puck he can't redirect it

 

[EastonBlues22]

Have you ACTUALLY WATCHED ONE Isles game from start to finish? If so, you'd know instantly how ridiculous this post is.

He is Tim Kerr 2.0, who shot 18.6% for his ENTIRE NHL career.

They play the SAME EXACT GAME.

I've seen him play a number of games, actually, over the last four years. He's rarely hurt, so pretty much every time I catch the Islanders he's on the ice. I've also had the opportunity to watch other players over the years, too, believe it or not.

Tkachuk comes to mind...another big, beastly, net front presence who was a hell of a lot better player than either Lee or Kerr. Tkachuk had a 5 year run in his early 20s where he shot 19.5%. He never came close to sniffing that again over the next 12 years, in spite of topping 30 goals 5 more times and 20 goals an additional 5.

Did you miss two years ago when Lee shot 8.2% over a full season and he put up 15 goals on 180+ shots in the middle of his prime?

Yup, totally ridiculous to think he might come back to earth a bit in the future.

 

[CodeE]

Yes his Sh% isn't unsustainable if given his quality in a vacuum but it misses the bigger point.

The problem is how repeatable are those high quality chances he's getting. If you take him away from Tavares, Bailey and Barzal and ask him to be more of 'the guy' on a team those will probably drop signifcantly as he doesn't generate much offense, mainly just cleans up the garbage in front.

He's very buyer beware to me. He wouldn't work a on a young team that would try and make him a go to guy for offense, he'd need to go to a team that has offense and play drivers but needs a finisher and net front guy on the PP.

First of all, he's never (or at least very very rarely) played with Barzal so I don't know where that is coming from.

Second, his game translates to help any decent center in the NHL. If a team wants to buy him and put him with two scrubs who can't set him up, then yeah his game will suffer. But for any team happy with their #1 center and the offensive production they bring to the ice (which I'd say is a majority of teams), he can play his game and finish opportunities.

 

[seafoam]

Lee probably gets ~10 goals on tip-ins a year. I assume attempts at tip-ins don’t count as shots on goal unless they go in so that’s likely a reason his shooting percentage is a bit higher.

 

[Bruce Granville]

What is his value?


I realize he only has 1 year left on his contract and that has to be taken into account.

He’s a legit goal scoring power forward. Also, contrary to what some believe he is NOT a product of Tavares. The guy earns his goals and has proved he can score without Tavares. So that’s not really an argument.

Lee isn’t a play maker and won’t get many assists so that affects his overall point/production totals do that brings his value down a tick below say a 35-40 goal scorer who is also a PPG.

He is from Minnesota, so let's play the one of us game.
Straight up, only one D, whom would you NOT take?
Suter, Spurgeon, Brodin, Dumba?

 

[Hunter368]

Of all the things the Leafs don't need, offensive wingers needing lucrative contracts most certainly tops the list.
Want to know what's 2nd on the list?
Trading top-4 dman for said wingers.

Agreed


Jets are in the same boat. Lee is a good player, but neither the Leafs or Jets need him.

 

[CodeE]

Yup, totally ridiculous to think he might come back to earth a bit in the future.

We're simply not ever allowed to actually have good players.

Barzal scoring 85 points in his rookie season? LOL you delusional Islander fans he'll be bad soon just you wait. (Emoticon)

Bailey scoring 71 points in a breakout season? LOL you delusional Islander fans he'll be bad soon just you wait. (Emoticon)

Lee scores 40 goals joining Ovechkin, McDavid, Laine, Malkin in the 40+ club? LOL you delusional Islander fans he'll be bad soon just you wait. (Emoticon)

I don't know why HFboards is always so insistent on telling us none of our players are ever really good, just temporarily good.

 

[PensandCaps]

Do you want Olli Maatta?

 

[seafoam]

Do you want Olli Maatta?

Not for Anders Lee.

 

[57special]

it would have to be way better than scandella because Lee is infinitely better than Ennis and Foligno who you traded Scandella and pominville for

and Gardiner isnt even as good as Scandella

Lee is much better than those 4 have ever been

horrible advice

The Scandella /Pominville trade for Ennis/Foligno had little to do with player value, and everything to do with cap. Ignoring that fact is misinformed on your part, or willful ignorance.

You are also underestimating the value of a top 4 D(as I'm sure you know, D age better than wingers, all things being equal) in his prime. I don't know why....it must be crystal clear to NYI fans what the lack of defense will do to a team's ability to compete, no matter how much they can score.

I don't think that Gardiner is a good match for your team because he is all about scoring(52 points as a dman), which you have plenty of. Ignoring the points he has put up, however, while touting Lee's ability to score(62 points as a winger) as an example of his value as a hockey player seems pretty hypocritical.

 

[57special]

Why wouldn't Toronto just re-sign JVR for free?

edit: oops, was mentioned already

....but apparently, we can't bring logic into this.