No way. Lee sucked at getting his men food, clothing and amuniiton. He was a berzerker who routinely took casualties in the range of 45-50% (that he could inspire his men to take that kind of beating shows he had great potential to inspire, but that is only part of the job.
And he never seemed to care about the greater victory, he only focused on a narrow part of his purview. He should have sent longstreet off to deal with Grant, rather than marching north into PA. When Longstreet was sent to help Bragg, the resulting victory nearly eliminated the north's victories of the previous two years. Sending Longstreet 5 months earlier to stop Grant could have changed the course of the war and saved thousands of lives.
Grant was lot better. His men were fed, he knew where he was going (the confederates opposite him usually didn't, and his worst casualties were no more than 30% of the forces engaged, which is way better than Lee's best records.
Lee was very lucky in his subordinates. He had Jackson and Longstreet, but he was never strategically inspired. Grant was responsible for the crossing of the James, the capture of Vicksburg, the re trivial of the disaster at Chattanooga. Lee has nothing remotely comparable.
