I remember an interview with a GM/coach a while ago. I think it was Phoenix. I'll have to paraphrase the gist of the article, but I think it is relevant to a discussion of Mete (and players like him). GM/coach was talking about evaluating some "defensive genius" they were considering acquiring. Someone who had this league wide reputation as a defensive stopper.
Reviewing the tape, the GM/coach talked about how the guy was great defensively, but when they dug deeper they realized that he was CONSTANTLY recovering from bad defensive situations. The issue was that he couldn't pass or handle the puck. So whenever they puck ended up in the defensive zone, it never got out and ended up as a scoring chance or a faceoff in the defensive zone. The guy had tons of turnovers in the defensive zone.
The GM/player then contrasted that with Yandle and how, despite his terrible defensive reputation, his metrics weren't that bad. Yandle wasn't nearly as good defensively as "Player X", but he got the puck out so much easier, there was less opportunity to exploit the shortcoming, and less opportunity to cycle the puck or generate a turnover in the offensive zone for the other team. Which was why, the gm/coach theorized, Yandle was still able to be so positive 5 v 5.