Robert E. Lee was a far better commander than Grant, he simply lacked the resources to defeat Grant. However, Lee made one serious blunder, and that was trying to invade the North and then trying it again a year later. Losing at Antietam was a huge blow to the South's morale and then it was followed by the defeat at Gettysburg. Had Lee simply let the North come to him, public opinion would have eventually won the war for the South. This would have basically been the same tactic that Washington had used in the Revolution.
Other commanders on your list should be: Julius Caeser, William the Conquerer, Wellington, John Paul Jones, Patton, Eisenhower (though he was a lousy president), MacArthur and Schwarzkopf.
Lee also ordered the disastrous Pickett's charge, a futile slaughter of his men. He was not facing Grant until the end, and Grant made a quick end of him.
Robert E. Lee was a far better commander than Grant, he simply lacked the resources to defeat Grant. However, Lee made one serious blunder, and that was trying to invade the North and then trying it again a year later. Losing at Antietam was a huge blow to the South's morale and then it was followed by the defeat at Gettysburg. Had Lee simply let the North come to him, public opinion would have eventually won the war for the South. This would have basically been the same tactic that Washington had used in the Revolution.Perhaps. But Lee had the 'initiative' and he didn't want to keep handing it back to the more massive Union armies. Sooner or later they'd improve. Plus, it was generally agreed that the Confederacy had to win a major battle on Union soil in order to get the international recognition of their independence. Time was not on their side (Union Blockade, loss of the Mississipi, etc.).