BJJ Scout:Khabib vs Kevin Lee/Poirier

[Franc Mittelo]

Most posters don't post shit that is worth spending 30 seconds on.

So, why do many posters who are not interested bother taking those 30 seconds to throw personal insults and post silly cartoons? LOL

 

[Shammon]

There is absolutely 0 chance that Lee controls Khabib on the ground. He might be able to take him down a couple of times, but Khabib is by far the much superior grappler in totality.

I have no clue about Kevin's TDD so I don't know how successful Khabib would be in routinely taking him down but if he did manage to take him down, I don't think Lee has every shown anything off his back that suggests that he wouldn't get mauled.

Khabib has the better striking based on the pure numbers and also the fact that he's never been rocked, dropped, KO'd ,etc whereas Lee seems like he gets rocked anytime he gets hit with a big shot. I can see Khabib outpointing him on the feet and putting up significant volume in the clinch.

 

[Franc Mittelo]

I work in Finance, I understand the value of looking at the numbers. I also understand that numbers alone almost never tell the complete story.

You simply cannot conclude that Kevin Lee is a better striker than Eddie Alvarez solely because he has a higher striking accuracy in his UFC fights. You have to take into account the amount of damage they are doing with their strikes, and the quality of opponents that each fighter has faced. Alvarez has only faced the best of the best during his time in the UFC, and his last several fights in Bellator. Which is not the case with Kevin Lee, save for his last 2-3 fights. Additionally, Lee has never really had anyone in trouble from his striking, while Alvarez has on numerous occasions in several of his fights. I urge you to watch a few Eddie fights and a few Kevin Lee fights, it's abundantly clear that his striking technique and the amount of damage he inflicts on the feet is levels above Kevin Lee's striking.

Also I think your accuracy stats include ground strikes as well, which completely skews them. Lee's obviously going to have a higher percentage of strikes landed since he spends way more time on the ground than Eddie, and ground strikes have a much higher chance of landing. That does not in any way make him a better striker.

I'm not sure why you're so rattled, I definitely appreciate you putting in the work to put together these numbers. I was simply pointing out how looking at the numbers alone lead you to two incorrect conclusions. This is why, in all sports, it is important to use a combination of statistics and actual visual analysis when coming to conclusions. Particularly in a sport as complex and with as many nuances as MMA.

Do you think Eddie Alvarez is a better striker than Kevin Lee? If yes, then tell me why.

 

[Franc Mittelo]

So what they do is not their style?

I meant that you listed a bunch of different styles of wrestling, but didn't demonstrate that the fighter you are referring to actually uses these wrestling styles consistently in his fighters.

I am not fanboy who gets easily persuaded by the narrative of "such and such is an Olympian/NCAA wrestler, and that guy is a BJJ black belt and etc..." I need to see it in the Octagon on a consistent basis.

I haven't seen this high level wrestling you are talking about from Eddie Alvarez in the UFC. The numbers support this observation. So, I am not going to change my stance until I am presented with something more than personal feelings.

 

[DS66]

Do you think Eddie Alvarez is a better striker than Kevin Lee? If yes, then tell me why.

I touched on it in my previous post.

I've watched all of Kevin Lee's UFC fights, and all of Eddie Alvarez's UFC fights and a few of his Bellator fights. I've never seen Kevin Lee finish anyone on his feet, and I honestly don't really think I've seen him rock or badly hurt ANYONE in any of his fights while striking (please correct me if I'm wrong here, I'm just going off memory). His striking definitely looked much improved in his last fight with Edson, but he still did the vast majority of the damage on the ground in that fight.

Eddie on the other hand, has finished multiple fights while striking and regularly inflicts serious damage on the feet. Here's a few examples:

Drops Aoki with a perfectly timed uppercut and finishes him:

Knocks Pitbull the fuck out with this head kick:

Finishes RDA (former world champ) with strikes:

Murders Justin Gaethje with this devastating knee (and about 200 other strikes in the fight):

I'll say it one more time, if you watch all of Eddie's fights and you watch all of Kevin Lee's fights, I cannot imagine anyone coming to any conclusion other than that Eddie is a much better striker than Kevin. Which is why, again, you can't just make conclusions solely based off of stats like striking accuracy %.

 

[Franc Mittelo]

I touched on it in my previous post.

I've watched all of Kevin Lee's UFC fights, and all of Eddie Alvarez's UFC fights and a few of his Bellator fights. I've never seen Kevin Lee finish anyone on his feet, and I honestly don't really think I've seen him rock or badly hurt ANYONE in any of his fights while striking (please correct me if I'm wrong here, I'm just going off memory). His striking definitely looked much improved in his last fight with Edson, but he still did the vast majority of the damage on the ground in that fight.

Eddie on the other hand, has finished multiple fights while striking and regularly inflicts serious damage on the feet. Here's a few examples:

Drops Aoki with a perfectly timed uppercut and finishes him:

Knocks Pitbull the fuck out with this head kick:

Finishes RDA (former world champ) with strikes:

Murders Justin Gaethje with this devastating knee (and about 200 other strikes in the fight):

I'll say it one more time, if you watch all of Eddie's fights and you watch all of Kevin Lee's fights, I cannot imagine anyone coming to any conclusion other than that Eddie is a much better striker than Kevin. Which is why, again, you can't just make conclusions solely based off of stats like striking accuracy %.

I appreciate the effort. However, you are just stating your personal favorite and backing it with random GIFs, and your feelings. There is no objective evidence for me to analyze and accept or reject.

Kevin Lee has KO/TKO'd 2 opponents in the UFC this is not a fact, it is the truth. Saying that he does no damage with his striking is absolutely contradictory to the truth.

I don't respect records outside the UFC. Al my opinions are based on what fighters have done in the UFC. I don't care about fights that happened years ago in the Beta Leagues. This is my personal opinion.

Why do I hold this opinion? The UFC is the highest paying promotion, so we can safely assume the UFC has better fighters than other promotions, since this is prize fighting. Also, if we are going to compare two fighters, it is more valid and reliable to eliminate confounding variables.

In conclusion, your opinion is not convincing to me because it is not backed by any recent objective evidence.

 

[RandomHero86]

I appreciate the effort. However, you are just stating your personal favorite and backing it with random GIFs, and your feelings. There is no objective evidence for me to analyze and accept or reject.

Kevin Lee has KO/TKO'd 2 opponents in the UFC this is not a fact, it is the truth. Saying that he does no damage with his striking is absolutely contradictory to the truth.

I don't respect records outside the UFC. Al my opinions are based on what fighters have done in the UFC. I don't care about fights that happened years ago in the Beta Leagues. This is my personal opinion.

Why do I hold this opinion? The UFC is the highest paying promotion, so we can safely assume the UFC has better fighters than other promotions, since this is prize fighting. Also, if we are going to compare two fighters, it is more valid and reliable to eliminate confounding variables.

In conclusion, your opinion is not convincing to me because it is not backed by any recent objective evidence.

If you dont take into account anything that happens outside of the UFC, I'm assuming that it's because you don't feel that the opponents are of a high enough quality, so then I have to assume you are looking at quality of opponent as a big part of your analysis, correct?

IF that's true, then you also have to look at the quality of opponents that Alvarez has fought vs the quality of opponents that Lee has fought and weight those stats accordingly. Statistically speaking, facing a better opponent should usually yield worse numbers, so the fact that Alvarez has consistently fought against top tanked fighters should be considered in the analysis. If you don't take that into account, then I think you should take into account all fights, even those that happened outside of the UFC.

 

[DS66]

I appreciate the effort. However, you are just stating your personal favorite and backing it with random GIFs, and your feelings. There is no objective evidence for me to analyze and accept or reject.

Kevin Lee has KO/TKO'd 2 opponents in the UFC this is not a fact, it is the truth. Saying that he does no damage with his striking is absolutely contradictory to the truth.

I don't respect records outside the UFC. Al my opinions are based on what fighters have done in the UFC. I don't care about fights that happened years ago in the Beta Leagues. This is my personal opinion.

Why do I hold this opinion? The UFC is the highest paying promotion, so we can safely assume the UFC has better fighters than other promotions, since this is prize fighting. Also, if we are going to compare two fighters, it is more valid and reliable to eliminate confounding variables.

In conclusion, your opinion is not convincing to me because it is not backed by any recent objective evidence.

Alright man. I don't know how there can be any evidence more objective than actually watching the fights. I'm at a loss there.

The fact that you use Kevin Lee's two KO's, which were finishes of Jake Matthews via GnP and Barboza via doctor stoppage due to damage primarily done on the ground, as evidence of Kevin Lee's striking ability, shows me that you either haven't watched any fights or don't have a basic understanding of what striking is. It's clearly not worth debating. And the fact that you don't recognize any fights that took place outside of the UFC only confirms this, particularly since some of Eddie's championship fights in Bellator were against higher level opponents than several of Kevin Lee's fights in the UFC. All I can say is that I hope you do go back and watch some of these fights so that you can get a better feel of what each fighter brings to the table.

 

[Kowboy On Sherdog]

155 is Stacked!!! Plus when we get Mcgregor and Ferguson back. The champion will have some awesome fights to be made. Would be a sweet top 8 Grand Prix.

 

[Franc Mittelo]

Alright man. I don't know how there can be any evidence more objective than actually watching the fights. I'm at a loss there.

The fact that you use Kevin Lee's two KO's, which were finishes of Jake Matthews via GnP and Barboza via doctor stoppage due to damage primarily done on the ground, as evidence of Kevin Lee's striking ability, shows me that you either haven't watched any fights or don't have a basic understanding of what striking is. It's clearly not worth debating. And the fact that you don't recognize any fights that took place outside of the UFC only confirms this, particularly since some of Eddie's championship fights in Bellator were against higher level opponents than several of Kevin Lee's fights in the UFC. All I can say is that I hope you do go back and watch some of these fights so that you can get a better feel of what each fighter brings to the table.

Watching the fights is not evidence. It is an observation. Even with 3 experienced judges watching the same fights, we sometimes get very contrasting judgments. What is the definition of GnP?

I have seen enough of Eddie Alvarez in the UFC and what I have seen is reflected in the numbers. I am not going to change my mind based other people's personal opinions.

The numbers are telling me that Kevin Lee is a better striker than Eddie Alvarez. Even if they fight, and Eddie Alvarez wins, unless his numbers look better than Eddie Alvarez, I will still say Kevin Lee is the better striker. The only way I am changing my mind is the numbers change.

If measured with validity and reliability, then the numbers don't lie. However, we should definitely be careful about what we infer from the numbers.

 

[Franc Mittelo]

If you dont take into account anything that happens outside of the UFC, I'm assuming that it's because you don't feel that the opponents are of a high enough quality, so then I have to assume you are looking at quality of opponent as a big part of your analysis, correct?
IF that's true, then you also have to look at the quality of opponents that Alvarez has fought vs the quality of opponents that Lee has fought and weight those stats accordingly. Statistically speaking, facing a better opponent should usually yield worse numbers, so the fact that Alvarez has consistently fought against top tanked fighters should be considered in the analysis. If you don't take that into account, then I think you should take into account all fights, even those that happened outside of the UFC.

The main reason I don't consider non-UFC records is because I want to compare the fighters on an even playing field. Quality of Opponent is a big part of analysis. However, doing a quality of opponent analysis requires a long regression. It requires looking, not only at the opponent, but the opponents of the opponent and their opponents. It will take forever. LOL

For example, Fighter A fights Fighter B (the champ of a lower division), and Fighter A loses. So, you may conclude that Fighter A lost to a quality opponent who was a champion. Then you look at Fighter B's record, and you realize, wait a minute, 50% of the fighters on his record only had 3-and-something records and/or short notice opponents at the time they fought Fighter B (the champ of lower division who beat Fighter A). Even worse, in one fight, Fighter B (who you are willing to declare a quality opponent) got tired and was choked out by an opponent who has just more than 1 week to prepare for the fight. This opponent doesn't even have an impress record

Is Fighter B still a quality opponent after you find out all this information? How can anybody think "yes" until they look at the records of all the 3-and-something and short-notice opponents (at the time they fought Fighter B, no hindsight credits).

Quality of Opponent is a regression that takes a lot of time to analyze. In my opinion it is good when debating GOAT contenders, not necessarily when debating hypothetical matches. Quality of opponent is a good idea when debating the total weight of a fighter's record. However, in a Fighter A versus Fighter B scenario, I think it is more helpful to look at the most recent fights and record to see what each fighter likes to do, and if they will be able to do it to the opponent.

When I look at Eddie's record, I see an average striker who likes to keep the fight standing.

 

[fubot]

BJJ Scout says a lot and tries really hard, but has no real insight.

The irony of calling him a "try hard". Lots of insight there buddy

 

[MMACroatia]

I meant that you listed a bunch of different styles of wrestling, but didn't demonstrate that the fighter you are referring to actually uses these wrestling styles consistently in his fighters.

I am not fanboy who gets easily persuaded by the narrative of "such and such is an Olympian/NCAA wrestler, and that guy is a BJJ black belt and etc..." I need to see it in the Octagon on a consistent basis.

I haven't seen this high level wrestling you are talking about from Eddie Alvarez in the UFC. The numbers support this observation. So, I am not going to change my stance until I am presented with something more than personal feelings.

I didn't mention Eddie Alvarez but Lee and Khabib who do exactly what i said,winch is their style.

 

[RandomHero86]

The main reason I don't consider non-UFC records is because I want to compare the fighters on an even playing field. Quality of Opponent is a big part of analysis. However, doing a quality of opponent analysis requires a long regression. It requires looking, not only at the opponent, but the opponents of the opponent and their opponents. It will take forever. LOL

For example, Fighter A fights Fighter B (the champ of a lower division), and Fighter A loses. So, you may conclude that Fighter A lost to a quality opponent who was a champion. Then you look at Fighter B's record, and you realize, wait a minute, 50% of the fighters on his record only had 3-and-something records and/or short notice opponents at the time they fought Fighter B (the champ of lower division who beat Fighter A). Even worse, in one fight, Fighter B (who you are willing to declare a quality opponent) got tired and was choked out by an opponent who has just more than 1 week to prepare for the fight. This opponent doesn't even have an impress record

Is Fighter B still a quality opponent after you find out all this information? How can anybody think "yes" until they look at the records of all the 3-and-something and short-notice opponents (at the time they fought Fighter B, no hindsight credits).

Quality of Opponent is a regression that takes a lot of time to analyze. In my opinion it is good when debating GOAT contenders, not necessarily when debating hypothetical matches. Quality of opponent is a good idea when debating the total weight of a fighter's record. However, in a Fighter A versus Fighter B scenario, I think it is more helpful to look at the most recent fights and record to see what each fighter likes to do, and if they will be able to do it to the opponent.

When I look at Eddie's record, I see an average striker who likes to keep the fight standing.

Honestly if you do take that into account, it would show you that Eddie's average opponent's ranks are much higher than Lee's, which stands to reason that his statistics don't look as good on paper because he's fighting better guys. If you went the other way and took into account his entire career, statistically he'd absolutely be the better striker on paper. You're picking and choosing which statistics you find meaningful in order to support your argument.

So, if fighter A fights a guy with average striking defense and lights him up, and fighter B fights a guy with very good striking defense and doesn't do as well, how can you compare them unless both fighters fight both opponents and then you analyze the sample set.

I understand that you're drawing conclusions based on stats, but as you said unless you analyze all of the other variables and you have control experiments you can't just go on stats when the variables are so varied, especially if you just pick and choose which fights are meaningful.

Alvarez and Chandler went 1-1 in Bellator and both fights were very back and forth. Alvarez may be the better striker, but in those fights neither guy really had a clear edge over the other. Alvarez just KOd Gaithje who is 1-2 in the UFC. Can you say with absolute confidence that Gaithje is a better striker than Michael Chandler just because he hasn't fought in the UFC?

 

[Franc Mittelo]

Honestly if you do take that into account, it would show you that Eddie's average opponent's ranks are much higher than Lee's, which stands to reason that his statistics don't look as good on paper because he's fighting better guys. If you went the other way and took into account his entire career, statistically he'd absolutely be the better striker on paper. You're picking and choosing which statistics you find meaningful in order to support your argument.

So, if fighter A fights a guy with average striking defense and lights him up, and fighter B fights a guy with very good striking defense and doesn't do as well, how can you compare them unless both fighters fight both opponents and then you analyze the sample set.

I understand that you're drawing conclusions based on stats, but as you said unless you analyze all of the other variables and you have control experiments you can't just go on stats when the variables are so varied, especially if you just pick and choose which fights are meaningful.

Alvarez and Chandler went 1-1 in Bellator and both fights were very back and forth. Alvarez may be the better striker, but in those fights neither guy really had a clear edge over the other. Alvarez just KOd Gaithje who is 1-2 in the UFC. Can you say with absolute confidence that Gaithje is a better striker than Michael Chandler just because he hasn't fought in the UFC?

(1) UFC ranking is based on a fighter's popularity, hype and recency bias. I don't use UFC rankings to determine "Quality of Opponent." I have my own algorithm:

A) Longest winning streak in the UFC. 0 = Average, 1 to 2 = Lower tier good fighter, 3 to 5 = Upper tier good fighter, 6 to 8 = Lower tier better fighter, 9 to 12 = Upper tier better fighter, and the best fighters have 13 or more consecutive wins (based on GSP's current record, and since he is the least controversial GOAT contender, I made him the current standard).
B) Quality of The Opponent. So, you have to repeat point A, B and C for every single opponent and their opponents to get a better idea of these fighters' quality.
C) Finishing rate. Self-explanatory.​

This is the criteria I use to judge Quality of Opponent. I don't care about UFC rankings, they don't mean anything to me.

(2) You are wrong about Eddie having average numbers because he is fighting better opponents. Here is a fighter who has arguably faced the very best in his division and for much longer than Eddie Alvarez. Compare his numbers to Eddie's.

GSP: 2470 attempted strikes 53% accuracy with 73% striking defense. 122 attempted TD's 74% completion with 84% TDD. The numbers don't lie. If you are as good as your fans say you are then it will reflected in the numbers. The more better athletes join the sport, the more this will get closer to being the truth.

(3) Of course I am picking and choosing statistics to support my argument. That is what I am suppose to do, until you can demonstrate that the statistics I am using are not valid and reliable.

A) MMA has two major domains A) Striking (on the feet, in the clinch and on the ground) and B) Grappling. An MMA fight will always happen in one of those two major domains. When you throw a strike, it is counted. When you duck a strike, it is counted, and when you are struck, it is counted against you. The same for TD and TDD.

It is really this simple. So, I am really flabbergasted that you implying I am just picking random stats. I am picking the stats that have to do with the two major domains of MMA. What are you using to back up your opinion?

B) I have looked at the stats of GSP, Anderson, Jon Jones, and Demetrious Johnson. These 4 widely argued as the Top 4 greatest fighters in the UFC to date, and their numbers match the record and how reasonable fans feel about them. This how I am further convinced that the numbers tell a better story that is closer to the truth than UFC hype and fan feelings.​

(4) Michael Chandler doesn't fight in the UFC. This debate is about who is the better matchup for Khabib between Kevin Lee, Dustin Poirier and Eddie Alvarez. All these 3 guys fight in the UFC and the UFC.com has their stats.

I looked at the stats, and also my recollection of their most recent fights, and I concluded, on paper, the best matchup for Khabib is Dustin Poirier, Kevin Lee then Eddie Alvarez. This is my opinion based on the current stats.

 

[ViD]

Lee has a chance to win a round.

 

[RandomHero86]

(1) UFC ranking is based on a fighter's popularity, hype and recency bias. I don't use UFC rankings to determine "Quality of Opponent." I have my own algorithm:

A) Longest winning streak in the UFC. 0 = Average, 1 to 2 = Lower tier good fighter, 3 to 5 = Upper tier good fighter, 6 to 8 = Lower tier better fighter, 9 to 12 = Upper tier better fighter, and the best fighters have 13 or more consecutive wins (based on GSP's current record, and since he is the least controversial GOAT contender, I made him the current standard).
B) Quality of The Opponent. So, you have to repeat point A, B and C for every single opponent and their opponents to get a better idea of these fighters' quality.
C) Finishing rate. Self-explanatory.​

This is the criteria I use to judge Quality of Opponent. I don't care about UFC rankings, they don't mean anything to me.

(2) You are wrong about Eddie having average numbers because he is fighting better opponents. Here is a fighter who has arguably faced the very best in his division and for much longer than Eddie Alvarez. Compare his numbers to Eddie's.

GSP: 2470 attempted strikes 53% accuracy with 73% striking defense. 122 attempted TD's 74% completion with 84% TDD. The numbers don't lie. If you are as good as your fans say you are then it will reflected in the numbers. The more better athletes join the sport, the more this will get closer to being the truth.

(3) Of course I am picking and choosing statistics to support my argument. That is what I am suppose to do, until you can demonstrate that the statistics I am using are not valid and reliable.

A) MMA has two major domains A) Striking (on the feet, in the clinch and on the ground) and B) Grappling. An MMA fight will always happen in one of those two major domains. When you throw a strike, it is counted. When you duck a strike, it is counted, and when you are struck, it is counted against you. The same for TD and TDD.

It is really this simple. So, I am really flabbergasted that you implying I am just picking random stats. I am picking the stats that have to do with the two major domains of MMA. What are you using to back up your opinion?

B) I have looked at the stats of GSP, Anderson, Jon Jones, and Demetrious Johnson. These 4 widely argued as the Top 4 greatest fighters in the UFC to date, and their numbers match the record and how reasonable fans feel about them. This how I am further convinced that the numbers tell a better story that is closer to the truth than UFC hype and fan feelings.​

(4) Michael Chandler doesn't fight in the UFC. This debate is about who is the better matchup for Khabib between Kevin Lee, Dustin Poirier and Eddie Alvarez. All these 3 guys fight in the UFC and the UFC.com has their stats.

I looked at the stats, and also my recollection of their most recent fights, and I concluded, on paper, the best matchup for Khabib is Dustin Poirier, Kevin Lee then Eddie Alvarez. This is my opinion based on the current stats.

If you're really that confident in your stats, then you must be winning money hand over fist betting fights using your "algorithm".

Stats don't, and never will, tell the whole story.

Hypothetically, if Khabib fought all 3 and got knocked out by Eddie, lost a decision to Kevin Lee and won a decision against Poirier, would you still argue for your stats legitimacy?

 

[Franc Mittelo]

If you're really that confident in your stats, then you must be winning money hand over fist betting fights using your "algorithm".

Stats don't, and never will, tell the whole story.

Hypothetically, if Khabib fought all 3 and got knocked out by Eddie, lost a decision to Kevin Lee and won a decision against Poirier, would you still argue for your stats legitimacy?

(1) This is a hypothetical discussion. I don't know anything. I am just making an opinion based on some evidence. I am not a gambler. It doesn't appeal to me.

(2) Of course, the numbers don't tell us everything. I have admitted this. My only argument is that, if they were measured with validity and reliability, then they wouldn't lie. How one chooses to interpret the numbers is another thing.

I have explained why I have used the numbers that I used to support my opinion. You don't agree with this usage, and yet, you have yet to provide a better alternative.

(3) Absolutely. I don't think you are truly considering the statements you are making. Even if Shaquile O'Neal came out of retirement, and made a game winning 3 point shot, I would say that Stephen Curry is a better shooter than Shaquile O'neal.

Eddie Alvarez is a 42% accuracy fighter, but he has KO/TKO'd 2 opponents. So, he has a puncher's chance against Khabib. All I am saying is, when I look at the numbers, I am led to believe Dustin Poirier has the biggest puncher's chance, then Kevin Lee and Eddie Alvarez is last.

I believe this. I don't know it. There is a difference.