I think it cuts both ways a little.
He didn't have the offensive help, but he also didn't have the defensive expectations either. As a result, Phoenix just kept throwing him out there and gave him a very long leash.
The result produced offensive numbers that are comparable to what ADA did if we look at his second of last year and first half of this year. If we just look at this year, they're slightly below what ADA's done.
But, in that same age (24), Yandle was also getting more than 4 mins more per night, or roughly 20 percent more ice time. When you combine the point differential thus far, including goals, and you factor in 20 percent less ice time, at worst ADA is on-par with him. Personally, I'd argue he's far more dangerous than Yandle was at the same point. To me, Yandle was the player you counted on to get the puck to the guy who wins the game for you. ADA is the player who can either get the puck to the guy who wins it for you, or just says "**** it" and does it himself.
And that leads me to the non-offensive attributes of ADA. I like the edge he plays with, the passion, and his ability to set a tone for a game. I never really saw Yandle as a great tone setter. He's a guy who does well if the game is going well, and he contributes to why it does well. But I never saw him as a guy who can turn a game around. I see that with ADA. I think he's driven to be a game disrupter --- and that's someone you win with.
Yandle did, and to some extent continues to do his best work on "good" teams, but not necessarily great teams. To me, ADA has a chance to do his best work on great teams --- not unlike a Dan Boyle. Boyle was a guy who could give you something, even if he was held off the official score sheet. Yandle, eh, I always thought that was iffy.
And so ultimately that's what it comes down to for me. I think ADA has a chance to be Dan Boyle, and I take a prime Dan Boyle over a prime Keith Yandle without too much consternation.
