Why do people still act like Lee Sin and Zed are still the best?
NA LCS Pick/Ban stats
Junglers Jarvan IV: 63.1% P/B, 51.4% Win Rek'Sai: 47.7% P/B, 46.9% Win Vi: 33.8% P/B, 66.7% Win Lee Sin: 26.2% P/B, 53.6% Win*
Mid Lissandra: 69.2% P/B, 87.5% Win Kassadin: 61.5% P/B, 56.3% Win Ahri: 40% P/B, 50% Win LeBlanc: 38.5% P/B, 36.8% Win Xerath: 21.5% P/B, 40% Win Zed: 20% P/B, 76.5% Win* Azir: 20% P/B, 37.5% Win
In solo que, both champions have below 47% win rate.
Meanwhile, people whine when champions with much better statistics like Ahri, Kassadin, and J4 are nerfed. People are acting like there is a "Lee Sin bar" and "Zed bar", and any champ that approaches that bar is nerfed, and thus facilitating their dominance. In reality, these champions are nerfed before Zed and Lee Sin, because they were better than Zed and Lee Sin, in both competitive play and solo que.
Does it mean that Lee and Zed don't deserve any nerfs? No. But Riot is not "favouring" Zed and Lee Sin over others. They are nerfing champions in the order of who is, statistically speaking, the best. Zed and Lee are not the best, therefore they are not nerfed as soon or as hard.
I don't think people here care about how strong a champion actually is. What they really care about is how long a champion have been strong. No one whines about Lissandra, Rek'Sai, or Xerath because they were only meta recently. The "freshness" is still there and that's why they are more likeable. Meanwhile, champions that have dominated in the recent past, or have been strong for over 6 months, are intensely hated.