Speculation: What top 4D could Anders Lee return?

[EastonBlues22]

How do you explain his SH% if it's so high and unsustainable? How did it happen? You called it random.... did he just have two full seasons where random actions fell in his favor? Wouldn't that be the same as calling him lucky?

Two full seasons, which equate to more than half the games he's played.

No, it's not the same, because the answer is much more nuanced than that. Variance plays a role, and that's what I assumed you were getting at earlier when you were talking about pixie dust or whatever. Usage plays a role. Health plays a role. Who he plays with and how they're playing factors in, as does who he plays against and how they're playing. A whole lot of things undoubtedly matter, and nobody can precisely determine which of them affects the outcome by how much. The mix is different every year, and each ingredient likely affects him a different amount every year.

A large number of those things are beyond his control,...the variance, how the coach uses him, who he's playing with and how well they are playing, his health, etc. It's just as incorrect to imply that his improvement the last two years is all because of him, and thus perfectly sustainable, as it is to imply that it is not sustainable because it's completely due to "luck."

Why is it unlikely to be sustainable then? The short answer is that because it's really, really hard to sustain a shooting percentage that high. Nobody else is doing it right now, and it's been difficult to do historically. If nobody else is doing it, either playing his style or not, and it has been difficult to do historically, then it's unlikely that Lee will sustain it. Not impossible. Just unlikely.

I've presented much more nuanced and complete versions of that argument previously in here, but that's the simplified gist. Much of the rest of the discussion taking place is tangential.

As I've said before, maybe he's the one that does it when no one else (currently) can. I'm not saying that sarcastically. I really mean that.

 

[loyaltotheend]

.
Brock you missed the point. Easton whole argument of statistical variance is flawed and deliberately so. He used statistical measures for all players. Which while they may be true for the aggregate, or the whole are wholly inaccurate for a subset.

That's why I told him off. He knew his argument was deliberately misleading. He designed it to be so, by ignoring all evidence that others have about style of play. If he had used that subset in his analysis, his conclusions would have been entirely different but he chose to be overly broad for a reason. To Mislead.

Yet you refuse to post anything besides your opinion to refute his.

 

[loyaltotheend]

Not trading a 40 goal scorer in a depth trade. No interest in older, middle 6 forwards or unproven blueliners for Lee.
Isles have Toews who outplayed the other young blueliners in this yr's training camp,but because he still had waiver options and they didn't, he got screwed out of an nhl spot. Isles are high on him and if the big blueline return is Schmartz, I think the nyi would simply go with Toews.

Isn't Lee coming up on UFA? Entering his final year of contract? I haven't processed these offers, as it doesn't matter to me, so not saying you should take them. Just curious what you think the value of this 40G scorer is?

 

[loyaltotheend]

Tip Tap dancing around the fact that you're insinuating he's been lucky for two seasons now.

He already spelled this out for you. Why are you still pushing this?

 

[72hockey guy]

Yet you refuse to post anything besides your opinion to refute his.

bull spit i showed graphic evidence and statistical proof

 

[CodeE]

I'm passionate about math, which most of this discussion has ultimately been about, not Lee.

I'm not trashing Lee, regardless of how many times you insist that I am.

"I'm not trashing Lee, I'm just obsessively responding to every Islander fan that dare defend him from my predictions of regression". Stop playing the victim.

It's clear you don't watch enough Anders Lee hockey to truly understand why his numbers are so high. You've flat out ignored every single point made by Islander fans in regard to why your "math" is incorrect. We've told you time and time and time and time again why you're only presenting a half-baked argument, and time and time and time and time again you retreat back to the same position:

Nah, Lee's 18.5% is unsustainable because other players don't have a shooting percentage that high.

But what about...

Nah, Lee's 18.5% is unsustainable because other players don't have a shooting percentage that high.

But his game is different than other...

Nah, Lee's 18.5% is unsustainable because other players don't have a shooting percentage that high.

But he's been putting up these numbers for over half his career now...

Nah, Lee's 18.5% is unsustainable because other players don't have a shooting percentage that high.

So, you can either listen to people who've watched Anders Lee blossom from bottom-6er to top line power forward, or you can stubbornly insist you've always had it right from the very beginning and absolutely nobody knows more about Anders Lee than you do. Because other players don't have a shooting percentage that high.

 

[72hockey guy]

"I'm not trashing Lee, I'm just obsessively responding to every Islander fan that dare defend him from my predictions of regression". Stop playing the victim.

It's clear you don't watch enough Anders Lee hockey to truly understand why his numbers are so high. You've flat out ignored every single point made by Islander fans in regard to why your "math" is incorrect. We've told you time and time and time and time again why you're only presenting a half-baked argument, and time and time and time and time again you retreat back to the same position:

Nah, Lee's 18.5% is unsustainable because other players don't have a shooting percentage that high.

But what about...

Nah, Lee's 18.5% is unsustainable because other players don't have a shooting percentage that high.

But his game is different than other...

Nah, Lee's 18.5% is unsustainable because other players don't have a shooting percentage that high.

But he's been putting up these numbers for over half his career now...

Nah, Lee's 18.5% is unsustainable because other players don't have a shooting percentage that high.

So, you can either listen to people who've watched Anders Lee blossom from bottom-6er to top line power forward, or you can stubbornly insist you've always had it right from the very beginning and absolutely nobody knows more about Anders Lee than you do. Because other players don't have a shooting percentage that high.

love this codee, I should just let you Write my posts for me because frankly you say it better and get right to the point

After all the research, examples, hot zone points, and graphics showing the contrary, he still sticks to that one basic point and no matter how many times he's been shown to be wrong, he sticks with it

to be honest, I dont even think he looked at any of my examples of play style comparables who routinely shot in the mid 20s, again, and again, and again, because if he did, its rather obvious there is a correllation.

its not even about how good Lee is, Its about how butt hurt he is that His beloved Tarasenko is at 10% as opposed to Lee's 18% ( he just cant stand or fathom that Lee's shot percentage is that much better than Tarasenko's)

no matter how many times he denies it , its the only logical conclusion. otherwise:

wouldnt it just be easier to accept that they are two different types of players, and as a result of their different Styles, Lee is going to have a better shooting percentage, It doesnt mean Lee is better, just that different play styles lend themselves to certain statistical variances.

thats my entire point, you get it, I get it, and im sure that 95% of the board gets it, once they stop and look at it logically, but he will never admit he was wrong, his pride gets in the way. Its a shame because before this I thought he was one of the smartest posters on this site.

but how hard is it to accept the premise " that the closer you are to the goal when you shoot, the more likely you are to get it to go in"

thats all that the hot zone chart says and he even disputes that

but I really appreciate how you always clean up my long overly detailed post so succinctly. Thanks

 

[CREW99AW]

19 pages of Blues fans, trying to dismiss Lee's 74 goals over the last 2 seasons .
Isles will not trade Lee cheaply and that is the only way Blues fans want him .

Good thing this is not a 2 team league.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Mike Green
Toby Enström
Jack Johnson
John Carlson
Calvin De Haan

It's actually a pretty decent year for Defense UFAs

Carlson is the only one I would take over CDH.

That's not a lot especially if your talking about good defenders imho.

 

[CREW99AW]

That's not a lot especially if your talking about good defenders imho.

The frustrating part is CDH has publicly lobbied for an extension.Isles D missed him when he went down.

I do not want to go into next season with the rookie Toews as the big addition

 

[Riseonfire]

People here straight up about to get their PhD in shooting percentage.

 

[CodeE]

19 pages of Blues fans, trying to dismiss Lee's 74 goals over the last 2 seasons .
Isles will not trade Lee cheaply and that is the only way Blues fans want him .

Good thing this is not a 2 team league.

They're not even trying to trade for him (except for the one Blues fan saying 35-year-old Bouwmeester as fair value for Lee).

They just are very insistent we know that Anders Lee is a worse hockey player than his unsustainable numbers indicate. Lee has fooled us all into thinking he actually scored 40 goals and has a 18.5 shooting percentage.

Us silly Islander fans can never possess the knowledge or insight that St. Louis Blues fans have about the New York Islanders, so instead of wasting everybody's time with heat maps and statistics, let's all just shut up. If we don't, the omnipresent Blues fan might just compare Josh Bailey's 71 point season to his career average, and I don't think we'll be too pleased with his conclusions!

 

[Dan Kelly]

Man I would love to see Anders Lee on the Oilers !!!! LD Klefbom seems to be the odd man out here if the Oilers take on another big contact and of course the likely #9 pick. Aren't the Isles about to lose both Hickey and deHaan? And will need replacements?

 

[CREW99AW]

Man I would love to see Anders Lee on the Oilers !!!! LD Klefbom seems to be the odd man out here if the Oilers take on another big contact and of course the likely #9 pick. Aren't the Isles about to lose both Hickey and deHaan? And will need replacements?

I would have interest in Klefbom , but isn't Chia saying he wants to add speed?

 

[CodeE]

Man I would love to see Anders Lee on the Oilers !!!! LD Klefbom seems to be the odd man out here if the Oilers take on another big contact and of course the likely #9 pick. Aren't the Isles about to lose both Hickey and deHaan? And will need replacements?

Isles seem to be jettisoning off injury-prone D, first with Hamonic and now with CDH likely walking. For that reason alone I think guys like Klefbom, Tanev, Maatta aren't options for Snow, who blames our failures this season on CDH's season ending injury.

 

[CREW99AW]

They're not even trying to trade for him (except for the one Blues fan saying 35-year-old Bouwmeester as fair value for Lee).

They just are very insistent we know that Anders Lee is a worse hockey player than his unsustainable numbers indicate. Lee has fooled us all into thinking he actually scored 40 goals and has a 18.5 shooting percentage.

Us silly Islander fans can never possess the knowledge or insight that St. Louis Blues fans have about the New York Islanders, so instead of wasting everybody's time with heat maps and statistics, let's all just shut up. If we don't, the omnipresent Blues fan might just compare Josh Bailey's 71 point season to his career average, and I don't think we'll be too pleased with his conclusions!

Lee has had only 4 full nhl seasons. Three out of the four were good : 25 goals ,34 goals and 40 goals.

 

[CodeE]

Lee has had only 4 full nhl seasons. Three out of the four were good : 25 goals ,34 goals and 40 goals.

But when you add in that one bad season, his career numbers take a hit.

Which then proves he's overachieving from his "average".

Which then proves he's certain to regress back to his "average".

 

[Jester9881]

I've presented much more nuanced and complete versions of that argument previously in here, but that's the simplified gist. Much of the rest of the discussion taking place is tangential.

As I've said before, maybe he's the one that does it when no one else (currently) can. I'm not saying that sarcastically. I really mean that.

You've presented various different versions of writing it off to luck without actually having to call it as such. Historically, players that play the same style HAVE maintained similarly high shooting percentages such as Mark Parrish, Dino Ciccerelli, Tim Kerr, Gary Roberts, Paul Maclean, Luc Robitaille, Cam Neely, Joe Nieuwendyk and on and on. These guys all retired with SH% at or above 17, some as high as 21+.

 

[Jester9881]

He already spelled this out for you. Why are you still pushing this?

Oh yeah, he sure spelled it out for us..... by finding 100 different ways to pawn it off to luck without having to actually say it.

 

[LordNeverLose]

As did Tkachuk, career 15.1% with a couple of early seasons over 18.5%, and a number of others.

I'd happily talk about the percentage of Lee's shots that are in close vs the ones that are far away, but we don't have that numerical data. We know that his average shot distance is much further away than 5' from the net (> 20'), so we can talk about the implications of that, but we don't know if that's because he took 100 shots from 5' and 100 shots from 35', or because he took 150 shots from 5' anmd 50 shots from 65', etc. Ultimately we have to fall back to impressions.

Sustained shooting percentages above 15% are very rare among active players. It would not surprise me if Lee was able to hover in the 15-17% range for a few more years before dropping back a bit. That's high, but it's not inconceivably so. A good chunk of players fall in that range any given year.

As high as 18.5% though? For me, that's a tough sell. It's just so much higher than what anyone else is consistently doing, and only a handful of people manage it any given year (with repeats being nonexistent in the last 5 years).

Ok yeah I can agree that I wouldn't expect him to end up at 18.5% for the next five years. Of course it's more likely he settles into the 16-17% range, but that would still mean he's scoring like 35 goals a year. Don't really get why that's worth noting. You made it seem like you thought the last two seasons were flukish and he'd be back to being a 15-20 goal scorer next season.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Ok yeah I can agree that I wouldn't expect him to end up at 18.5% for the next five years. Of course it's more likely he settles into the 16-17% range, but that would still mean he's scoring like 35 goals a year. Don't really get why that's worth noting. You made it seem like you thought the last two seasons were flukish and he'd be back to being a 15-20 goal scorer next season.

Devil's Advocate: He could, depending on usage by the acquiring team.

Not taking anything away from Lee, but a big part of his production also is the fact he was stapled to the top line, and on the top PP unit. If he were traded to a team that already has a top line LWer and they acquired him more as a depth guy for their 2nd/3rd line, does he have enough individual skill to still score 30+ goals in a lesser role?

 

[ThreeLeftSkates]

As an Isles fan, I hope we keep him. Despite not being an offense driver, I wish someone would publish his stats from the times when JT has been out. Lee is a winner everywhere he goes, and I do not want him going anywhere else.

 

[72hockey guy]

he scored 8 points in 6 games two years ago at the end of the season when Taveras was injured, his style of play is not dependent on Tavaras, while that IS a small sample, it indicates that if he was relied upon to be the go to guy he Could do it.

as I said before Easton Blues entire reason for trying to down play Lee's shooting Percentage was because His Guy Tarasenko looks worse by comparison. No offense to Sid because I know he wasnt playing devils advocate flippantly, but rather Just pointing out a valid concern which we should consider. but as 2 years ago did give us a glimpse of, when Tavares has been out, Lee HAS stepped up

Sids point is fair about Top line and power play opportunities. but that is true about Every player. Im sure that if Lee were traded basically any team would use him the same way, because he's great at what he does

 

[loyaltotheend]

I've read all your other posts, and you absolutely did not respond with any data. A heat map (lol) doesn't prove anything.
I don't recall Easton saying at any point that Lee is not a net front player. So you showed that we all agree.

Ok, gotta go read some other replies. Keep up the good work!

 

[ndgolden]

But when you add in that one bad season, his career numbers take a hit.

Which then proves he's overachieving from his "average".

Which then proves he's certain to regress back to his "average".

Actually no, Lee has played a total of 343 career games with 124 goals at an average or 29.74 goals per 82 games played. * career low year in goals, he was capped off at 12 min TOI per game. No pun intended.....