HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Prospects (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Tarasenko vs Landeskog (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1299927)

FoppaForsberg* 11-30-2012 05:46 PM

Tarasenko vs Landeskog
 
Which one would you take on your team for now and the future?

5RingsAndABeer 11-30-2012 05:48 PM

Landeskog. I think Tarasenko will be better offensively but Landeskog brings so much to the table.

CoachBadkitten 11-30-2012 05:54 PM

Landeskog. although I do think Tarasenko might score more points.

TheKingSlayer 11-30-2012 05:55 PM

That is a tough call, but I take the more cerebral and better offensive player in Tarasenko.

topchowda 11-30-2012 06:01 PM

Good comparison. I would think Landeskog would be a better fit on the blues for his 2 way play and Tarasenko would do well on the avs with Duchene

rumrokh 11-30-2012 06:02 PM

As a Blues fan, I'm conflicted. The Blues already have gritty, two-way scoring line players and they need high-octane scoring. If I were choosing a player to build or rebuild around, or if my team already had gamebreaking scoring, I'd likely choose Landeskog; but I think I just need to see Tarasenko in NHL games before pretending I could make this call.

5RingsAndABeer 11-30-2012 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rumrokh (Post 56148925)
As a Blues fan, I'm conflicted. The Blues already have gritty, two-way scoring line players and they need high-octane scoring. If I were choosing a player to build or rebuild around, or if my team already had gamebreaking scoring, I'd likely choose Landeskog; but I think I just need to see Tarasenko in NHL games before pretending I could make this call.

I'm so confused now. In another thread, some Blues fan said the opposite - they don't want any high-offense guys because they could disrupt the team identity. Is there any consensus among Blues fans on what they need?

Multimoodia 11-30-2012 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5RingsAndABeer (Post 56149139)
I'm so confused now. In another thread, some Blues fan said the opposite - they don't want any high-offense guys because they could disrupt the team identity. Is there any consensus among Blues fans on what they need?

Yes, good two-way players who can magically score 80 pts/per.



It somewhat depends upon the how the player plays offense. Tarasenko will have to backcheck at least to a point. I would say to at least Perron level. With the number of two-way forwards the Blues have they can afford to have one player on each line which is a bit less concerned about defense than the other players on the team.
Currently that is McDonald, Perron and Stewart. You can play two of them on the same line as long as (preferably) Backes or Berglund is centering.

It is all about balance...which some people have issues with.




And for the record, I would say until I say Tarasenko in an NHL uniform I would have to go with Landeskog since he has proven he can play in the NHL whereas Tarasenko is still a bit of a mystery.

rumrokh 11-30-2012 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5RingsAndABeer (Post 56149139)
I'm so confused now. In another thread, some Blues fan said the opposite - they don't want any high-offense guys because they could disrupt the team identity. Is there any consensus among Blues fans on what they need?

One guy doesn't represent a fanbase. I think that's nuts. Gimme a high scoring player any day.

XO 11-30-2012 07:00 PM

I'd take Landeskog without hesitation. Tarasenko MIGHT become a better scorer in the NHL but no one can guarantee that, Landeskog is also pretty good at scoring himself so to me it's an easy choice if you add his great leadership etc to it.

bluemandan 11-30-2012 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5RingsAndABeer (Post 56149139)
I'm so confused now. In another thread, some Blues fan said the opposite - they don't want any high-offense guys because they could disrupt the team identity. Is there any consensus among Blues fans on what they need?

:shakehead That guy was me.

I've tried to clarify and re-clarify myself on this.

I did not say that I don't want high-offense guys.

I said I don't want one-dimensional players whose only dimension is offense because of the cracks it would create in the team chemistry.

The Blues are successful because of their team defense. Their defense is good because everyone commits to it. Even guys like McDonald, Perron, and Stewart are required to back-check and play defense. The system doesn't work if they don't. Are they good at it? Not particularly, but the effort is there, and the effort is required.

The Blues biggest hole currently? A game-breaking go-to offensive threat. However, that threat HAS to play within the Blues system, or the system doesn't work. Kovalchuk would work. Ovechkin wouldn't. Give me a Toews, a Datsyuk, a Malkin. Great offensive players who play both ends of the ice.

That said, the reports from Russia concerning Tarasenko suggest that he is completely willing to play defense. So I'm not opposed to him being on the Blues, even though he is known more for his offense.

All of that said, it would be hard not to take the 6'1", 204 lbs, RotY who put up 22-30-52 with a +20 and great defense. There is still a bit of a question as to how Tarasenko's game will adapt to the N.A. ice surface. The experts aren't concerned, but it is still a question mark.

However, Tarasenko's potential offense wins the day for me since it is the bigger need for the Blues. Hitchcock will make sure he commits to playing both sides of the puck, and things will be good.

Money Baer 11-30-2012 08:00 PM

Landeskog easy for me. Brings so much to the table.

Goalscoring
Big hits
Leadership
Defensively responsible

Falco Lombardi 11-30-2012 08:02 PM

Because of the way the Blues are set up, I say Tarasenko.

Otherwise I'd say Landeskog. Tarasenko fills a bigger team need for us.

Nordik 11-30-2012 08:51 PM

Tarasenko, LITTLE doubt. i am hoping for 70pts+ season,

Landeskog is an exciting and complete player but i don't see him being a huge point producer.

i am not saying tarasenko Will do 70pts+ season...let him skate at least one game in an nhl rink before and...we'll see after, but he have the potential.

Rhaego 11-30-2012 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nordik (Post 56152945)
Tarasenko, no doubt. i am hoping for 70pts+ season,

Landeskog is an exciting and complete player but i don't see him being a huge point producer.

i am not saying tarasenko Will do 70pts+ season...let him skate at least one game in an nhl rink before and...we'll see after, but he have the potential.

No doubt? jesus HF never change

Nordik 11-30-2012 09:01 PM

Changed original reply...but I still belive he will have an big impact..just hoping that he will not struggle in st.louis's system, but risk aren't high

Btw don't call me jesus...I don't deserve it....yet

The Nuge 11-30-2012 09:21 PM

Tarasenko definitely has higher upside, but its risky to take him over Landeskog

MrFunnyWobbl 11-30-2012 10:10 PM

Taradeskog.

bluemandan 11-30-2012 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrFunnyWobbl (Post 56154831)
Taradeskog.

He's got nothing on Landesenko!

rumrokh 11-30-2012 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrFunnyWobbl (Post 56154831)
Taradeskog.

Landenko.

Sounds like some kind of Australian wildlife.

Lars The GOAT Eller 11-30-2012 10:35 PM

Tarasenko

Rowdy Roddy Peeper 11-30-2012 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nordik (Post 56152945)
Tarasenko, LITTLE doubt. i am hoping for 70pts+ season,

Landeskog is an exciting and complete player but i don't see him being a huge point producer.

i am not saying tarasenko Will do 70pts+ season...let him skate at least one game in an nhl rink before and...we'll see after, but he have the potential.

You...do realize that Landeskog scored 52 points as an 18 year old rookie, right? Projecting the kid to be a 70+ point scorer seems pretty reasonable.

rumrokh 12-01-2012 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rowdy Roddy Peeper (Post 56156109)
You...do realize that Landeskog scored 52 points as an 18 year old rookie, right? Projecting the kid to be a 70+ point scorer seems pretty reasonable.

I think Landeskog certainly has that potential - more, even, but some players hit the NHL with a pretty refined game and don't improve a whole lot. Landeskog, of all youngsters, is physically mature and has a pretty refined game. Possible that he regularly breaks 70 points? Sure. Reasonable, or likely? Not necessarily.

tfriede2 12-01-2012 12:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wally31 (Post 56151685)
Landeskog easy for me. Brings so much to the table.

Goalscoring
Big hits
Leadership
Defensively responsible

Those same attributes could also be used to describe Tarasenko though. But Landeskog has actually done it in the NHL. We'll see soon enough (whenever that is...hopefully sometime in 2013) how Tarasenko fares.

ThatGuy22 12-01-2012 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rowdy Roddy Peeper (Post 56156109)
You...do realize that Landeskog scored 52 points as an 18 year old rookie, right? Projecting the kid to be a 70+ point scorer seems pretty reasonable.

Not that it matters all that much in this conversation, but Landeskog was one of the older draftee's in the 2011 and was 19 for the majority of his rookie campaign. That said Taransanko is still a full year older than Landeskog.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:22 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.