Rabid Ranger
2 is better than one
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.
Good lord. This isn't basketball. Everyone needs help to produce.
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.
Lee and what?Not a chance. Like Lee....but love OEL. Elite Dman > Elite Wingers
"Everyone" = you and two Blues fans.
Opinion-based "evidence" is not real "evidence" because people can change their stances depending on what is being addressed.
When Matthews was having a dominant rookie season, no Toronto fan was talking about small sample sizes. Instead the narrative was that Matthews hit the ground running, would contend with McDavid for the league's best player, etc etc. When a Toronto rookie succeeds, questioning whether they'll regress is ridiculous.
Very next year, Barzal puts up better numbers than Matthews. Now Toronto fans are falling over themselves to declare Barzal's season a fluke, a product of a zero-defense "run and gun" system (wrong), and insisting when Tavares leaves Barzal will "come back down to Earth", similar to this thread where despite putting up fantastic numbers for two full seasons now, Anders Lee isn't allowed to retain his pace.
If the variables were applied fairly towards my players and your players, I wouldn't have a problem.
If I was running into Matthews & Tarasenko threads simply to post how they're gonna get worse because CodeE says so, I wouldn't have a problem.
Instead, ya'll are invading a Lee thread to post negative opinions about Islander players that you'd never apply to your own team's players. Which is annoying. Is it possible Lee regresses? Absolutely, but it's also possible Matthews, Tarasenko, or any other NHL player regresses on the numbers they're currently putting up.
1. There is a big difference when you're talking about a 19 year old consistently producing from his 1st game and a 27 year old who only started producing.
2. I've said nothing bad of Barzal. I wanted to trade back from him in his draft and I think he's going to be a superstar for a long time.
3. You're really taking all this personally. Lee may be what he seems currently and that would be great, but I wouldn't put money on it because of all the guys who came before him and dropped hard when the clock struck midnight.
At 19 yrs old Lee was in college .1. There is a big difference when you're talking about a 19 year old consistently producing from his 1st game and a 27 year old who only started producing.
2. I've said nothing bad of Barzal. I wanted to trade back from him in his draft and I think he's going to be a superstar for a long time.
3. You're really taking all this personally. Lee may be what he seems currently and that would be great, but I wouldn't put money on it because of all the guys who came before him and dropped hard when the clock struck midnight.
You're changing the subject, I'm trying to explain to you the difference between stats and opinions.
Stat = Anders Lee (74G in 163 games) has scored more goals than Tarasenko (72G in 162 games) over the previous 2 seasons.
Opinion = Mint Chocolate Chip is the best flavor of Ice Cream.
The "stat" can easily be researched and can't be proven wrong because it is factual information. The "opinion" can be countered by anyone who feels Rocky Road or Phish Food is the best flavor of ice cream.
"Anders Lee's numbers are unsustainable and he's gonna suck in the future because I say so" is not a factual statement backed up by statistics.
Nor is "uhhh remember Brad Boyes?" because Anders Lee and Brad Boyes are different human beings, much like Mint Chocolate Chip and Phish Food are different flavors of ice cream.
The whole "you lost this argument a long time ago" is a tactic generally reserved for people who don't have the stats to support their case, so instead they just declare themselves the winner. If you need to specifically declare yourself the winner of an internet argument, you've already lost it.
I hope this lesson has explained that you've provided nothing statistical or factual to back up your opinion that Anders Lee is actually a bad hockey player.
Just thought i would put lees first 4 full years of nhl play against tarasenko since you think he is elit like tank.
Funny thing is exact same number of games and one seems to be consistent and the other is not. Also tarasenko is younger and did all his numbers with either Lehtera or Statsny which we will all agree dont hold a candle to JT
tarasenko 4years
g149 p288 in gp319 .90ppg%
Anders Lee
gp114 p191 gp 319 .60 ppg%
A Brodie for Lee swap would be great for both teams, Id like to see Lee and Johhny together
how are stats(facts) opinions. You are huffing some poo if you think lee is on the same level as Tarasenko or that lee is elite cause he is not. Facts Facts factsThere's an internet comic that essentially sums up what you guys are doing:
Just replace "Help! Misogyny!" with something about Tarasenko and the parallel works.
You're more than happy to fling that pile of brown smellyness over the wall but the second it gets flung back at you, you're simply aghast anyone would have the nerve to point out Tarasenko has scored less than Lee over a 2-season sample stretch.
Last I checked, this is not a thread about what top 4D Tarasenko could return. So either get out, stop flinging brown smellyness, or deal with the fact that Lee's hard-nosed, offensive rebound style of play has netted more goals than the smoother, flashier play of Tarasenko.
There's an internet comic that essentially sums up what you guys are doing:
Just replace "Help! Misogyny!" with something about Tarasenko and the parallel works.
You're more than happy to fling that pile of brown smellyness over the wall but the second it gets flung back at you, you're simply aghast anyone would have the nerve to point out Tarasenko has scored less than Lee over a 2-season sample stretch.
Last I checked, this is not a thread about what top 4D Tarasenko could return. So either get out, stop flinging brown smellyness, or deal with the fact that Lee's hard-nosed, offensive rebound style of play has netted more goals than the smoother, flashier play of Tarasenko.
how are stats(facts) opinions. You are huffing some poo if you think lee is on the same level as Tarasenko or that lee is elite cause he is not. Facts Facts facts
*Complain about people not using stats
*Receive stats that go against what you're arguing
*Shorten time frame to fit your narrative
*Calls other stats brown smelliness
The victim complex you have is really the brown smelliness in this thread. Literally no one has said Lee isn't a good player. One person, who did a ton more fact gathering than you (Easton) presents FACTS and STATS (the things you're claiming people aren't using) to demonstrate that Lee's production MIGHT not be sustainable long term and he'd be leery of signing him to an extension. Said argument turns into "ErrMerGurd you hate my player, Islanders players always get dumped on just because they're Islanders! Your stats are stupid, Lee's a different player than ANY player that's ever played the game of hockey and he'll buck this 50 year trend cause he plays a style that NO ONE has ever played before!"
Lee is a solid first line winger that is good for 30+ goals when put into the right situation with the right linemates. If signed long term, he would be worth a lot. He has 1 freaking year left on his deal. He's not worth a top pairing D signed for longer, he's just not. With 1 year left, he's not really worth a #3 D signed longer term. There is no evidence to suggest that he could be used to obtain that. Some of the names that have been thrown around, like Scandella, are a bit light on value for the Islanders, but again, Lee is signed for 1 more year. People can think a player is going to regress to the mean a little and still think they are a good player. Things aren't so black and white in player (e)valuation.
Again, where are all these stats I'm supposedly ignoring? You keep screaming that you're supplying all these facts as to why Lee will regress, and then every post is full of:
"Lee will get worse. This is fact."
"His numbers are unsubstainable and that is a statistic."
Tarasenko was better than Lee 4 seasons ago, and again 3 seasons ago. Players improve, yet somehow you Blues fans insist Lee is still the same player he was 4 seasons ago, and these past two seasons have been ridiculous anomalies that will never happen again, as opposed to a young player improving his game and hitting his prime.
I'm sorry but "Lee is gonna suck next season because I say so" is not proven correct by trotting out Tarasenko's 2014 numbers. Don't throw half-baked opinions at me and then call them FACTS and STATS.
First of, did you read any of Easton's original post? or the subsequent 3 after that? Full of stats. I haven't provided any because I have no horse in this race. This all started and had nothing to do with Blues fans or Tarasenko. A well respected mod, who happens to be a Blues fan, provides some historical evidence as to why HE, and HE alone would be worried about Lee maintaining his production. All he did was lay out some facts for people to consider and use to form their own opinion. Why did Islanders fans take such offense to that? It's an opinion, backed up by statistical evidence that supports that concern. He never said he didn't like Lee and Lee sucks and deserves to be in the AHL. He said exactly the opposite actually. Having concerns about the sustainability of some stats that are significantly out of the norm is somehow a cardinal sin to Islanders fans and god forbid they be questioned.
What stats have Islanders fans presented, or really any evidence (statistical or otherwise) at all, to support the notion that this is how Lee will produce for the foreseeable future? There are some legitimate concerns as to how he will produce in the future without Tavares and/or on another team.
If you can show me anywhere in this thread, word for word, that any of the bolded in your post was said, I'll concede that Lee = Kucherov, Lee > Tarasenko, whatever "fact" you want me to say. Good luck.
are you kidding?
Zero interest in aging stars whose best yrs are well behind them and who have awful contracts.
Seriously would not take that contract off waivers.
Yes, it was all proven statistically incorrect because he was comparing Lee's shooting percentages with more skilled players (Stamkos initially, now with Tarasenko) who play a different style of hockey. Like comparing Erik Karlsson's numbers to Colton Parayko's without taking into consideration that one is really good at quarterbacking the power play and the other at leading the penalty kill. So comparing Lee's numbers to Stamkos, or "everyone else in the NHL" as Easton did, is a faulty comparison because - and this was literally addressed in the first post after Easton - Lee's style of play gets more goals and a better shooting percentage.
Much in the same way if you look at NBA stats, the top 10 leaders in Field Goal Percentage (that's % of baskets made/shots taken) are all Power Forwards and Centers.
2017-18 Regular Season NBA Player Stats and League Leaders - Scoring Per Game - National Basketball Association - ESPN
You wouldn't directly compare DeAndre Jordan to Russell Westbrook, you wouldn't directly compare Erik Karlsson to Colton Parayko, so why lump Anders Lee in with playmakers and snipers as "evidence" his goal numbers will drop?
Yes, it was all proven statistically incorrect because he was comparing Lee's shooting percentages with more skilled players (Stamkos initially, now with Tarasenko) who play a different style of hockey. Like comparing Erik Karlsson's numbers to Colton Parayko's without taking into consideration that one is really good at quarterbacking the power play and the other at leading the penalty kill. So comparing Lee's numbers to Stamkos, or "everyone else in the NHL" as Easton did, is a faulty comparison because - and this was literally addressed in the first post after Easton - Lee's style of play gets more goals and a better shooting percentage.
Much in the same way if you look at NBA stats, the top 10 leaders in Field Goal Percentage (that's % of baskets made/shots taken) are all Power Forwards and Centers.
2017-18 Regular Season NBA Player Stats and League Leaders - Scoring Per Game - National Basketball Association - ESPN
You wouldn't directly compare DeAndre Jordan to Russell Westbrook, you wouldn't directly compare Erik Karlsson to Colton Parayko, so why lump Anders Lee in with playmakers and snipers as "evidence" his goal numbers will drop?
There's no reason to read past your first sentence because you clearly didn't read Easton's initial post. Did Stamkos' name get brought up? Yeah, but it was just a name. The broad stats he provided compared Anders Lee to EVERY MFING PLAYER SINCE 1967.
He is not elite nor is he worth what you think he is. Once JT leaves his numbers will drop. His shooting% will drop. Just sign him and keep him for the next 4-6 years. Cause you will never get the value from other teams that you think he is worth
Oh joy. The condescending "I'm too smart to even read what you've said" post. Coincidentally after a post they don't have a counter for.
Honestly, what are you going on about now? I'm not trying to counter, I'm telling you, read the post that you initially started arguing with and realize that what you're arguing makes no sense given the context of the post. You say "the argument makes no sense because he compared him to Stamkos and they're different players." I agree they're different players but that isn't the only comparison that was made. He compared him to every player in the NHL since 1967 and somehow you can't agree that statistical evidence (again, since you don't seem to get it, presented by Easton, not me, I haven't made any "claims" here or even brought an opinion) would show that Lee, despite playing a style that would lend itself to a higher shooting percentage, is still a crazy outlier for a SH%. You seem to be willing to pick a fight with anyone over anything, no matter how insufferably obtuse you're being about the differing opinion and subsequent discussion that has gone on in this thread.
Why would I bother to read your whole post when you're clearly not doing it with anybody else's? Saying I won't read the whole post isn't condescending when your entire argument was going off of an argument that was never made. Simply stating that reading any further would be a waste of my time because whatever information you were going to present wasn't pertinent to the discussion at hand.
So comparing Lee's numbers to Stamkos, or "everyone else in the NHL" as Easton did, is a faulty comparison because - and this was literally addressed in the first post after Easton - Lee's style of play gets more goals and a better shooting percentage.
Dude if you're not gonna read my responses why are you writing this many words and why do you expect me to read it?
Good lord. This isn't basketball. Everyone needs help to produce.
I went back to the post in question since you got so offended and want to focus on this little nugget right here. You are saying that Anders Lee, a guy that has 207 career points, plays such a different style than any other player that has played in the NHL since 1967, that we can't use those stats to raise concerns about his production? Can't wait for all of the 5-10 year olds right now that will make the NHL and credit Anders Lee's style of play as why they made it because its such a revolutionary way to play the game of hockey.