MrazekFanBoy 223 Report post Posted August 4, 2015 Nyquist will prove he's atleast just as valuable as Tatar this year, I see him netting 30 and with the additions of Green and Richards plus pulks blasting from the blue line 70 points isn't out of the question for him Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
number9 3,297 Report post Posted August 4, 2015 I want to know who number9 really thinks is better as of now. Not even I know at this point Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drwfan1916 1 Report post Posted August 4, 2015 I think I have to go with Tatar. Like many before have said, I like his drive and tenacity. Ultimately I like both and if either one, preferably both, become more consistent then we definitely have something to look forward to. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted August 4, 2015 PK Subban has a lot of drive and tenacity. Lidstrom was always calm and laid back. I guess this means Subban realgud. More realgud than Lidstrom. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,522 Report post Posted August 4, 2015 PK Subban has a lot of drive and tenacity. Lidstrom was always calm and laid back. I guess this means Subban realgud. More realgud than Lidstrom. Because what's true in the case of any two players must be true in the case of EVERY two players? Realgud thinking. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted August 4, 2015 Because what's true in the case of any two players must be true in the case of EVERY two players? Realgud thinking. Oh boy I seem to have offended you. EVERYYY Realgud. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted August 4, 2015 Switched my vote to Nyquist. I think Nyquist will be better because he doesn't need to rely on drive and tenacity to score 28 goals. Guess he does it naturally without needing those two factors. Two factors that could easily diminish as a player's career goes on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Franzine 739 Report post Posted August 5, 2015 I deleted my vote for Tatar then voted for Tatar so I could feel the satisfaction of making the right choice again. 2 number9 and derblaueClaus reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lomekian 201 Report post Posted August 5, 2015 I prefer Tatar for his enthusiasm and hustle, but I think Nyquist is the better player. Better defensively, better playmaking for others and he just has a higher hockey sense. The downside is that he is more of a confidence player and thus more likely to blow hit and cold. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) I deleted my vote for Tatar then voted for Tatar so I could feel the satisfaction of making the right choice again. Edited - wanted to post the link but may be inappropriate. It was Satisfaction by Benny Benassi Edited August 5, 2015 by kickazz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheDetroitRedWings 286 Report post Posted August 5, 2015 Such a tough choice here. They're both basically at the same level. Which is great considering how young they still are. I went with Tatar, but Nyquist is obviously highly skilled as well. And the great thing is they will both likely get even better as their careers go along. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
number9 3,297 Report post Posted August 5, 2015 Realgud points everyone. I've been swayed and forced to change my vote again! The major difference between Nyquist and Tatar is that Nyquist is a goose, and Tatar is a Mexican water bug. Now the thing about geese is that some can lay golden eggs, like Gus did during the 13-14 season. However, to lay golden eggs, geese have to be loose. Hence the phrase "loosey goosey". Because geese are not always loose, a goose like Nyquist will be streakier from time to time. Being a Mexican water bug, Tatar is obviously more lively and quick with the puck. But the main advantage of being a Mexican water bug is that it is a made-up insect that only exists inside the mind of Mickey Redmond. So basically the sky is the limit on Tatar's potential and what he will develop into. Don't ask me why Mickey's made-up bug is Mexican. I know it's boring nerdy science stuff i got from a spread sheet, but the facts are there. Each has their strengths and weaknesses. 4 wingsfan4795, BottleOfSmoke, amato and 1 other reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Helmethead 235 Report post Posted August 5, 2015 Do water bugs only exist in Mexico? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,522 Report post Posted August 5, 2015 Realgud points everyone. I've been swayed and forced to change my vote again! The major difference between Nyquist and Tatar is that Nyquist is a goose, and Tatar is a Mexican water bug. Now the thing about geese is that some can lay golden eggs, like Gus did during the 13-14 season. However, to lay golden eggs, geese have to be loose. Hence the phrase "loosey goosey". Because geese are not always loose, a goose like Nyquist will be streakier from time to time. Being a Mexican water bug, Tatar is obviously more lively and quick with the puck. But the main advantage of being a Mexican water bug is that it is a made-up insect that only exists inside the mind of Mickey Redmond. So basically the sky is the limit on Tatar's potential and what he will develop into. Don't ask me why Mickey's made-up bug is Mexican. I know it's boring nerdy science stuff i got from a spread sheet, but the facts are there. Each has their strengths and weaknesses. So, if you could only draft one (Goose vs. Mexican Water Bug), which would you choose? I'd go outside the box and pick a Mule. Better than bugs and/or water fowl. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted August 5, 2015 I picked Nyquist in a similar poll a few years ago and my opinion hasn't changed since then. I believe that Nyquist is definitely the better all around player, and as much as I love both players, I'd choose Nyquist over Tatar every single time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted August 6, 2015 Realgud points everyone. I've been swayed and forced to change my vote again! The major difference between Nyquist and Tatar is that Nyquist is a goose, and Tatar is a Mexican water bug. Now the thing about geese is that some can lay golden eggs, like Gus did during the 13-14 season. However, to lay golden eggs, geese have to be loose. Hence the phrase "loosey goosey". Because geese are not always loose, a goose like Nyquist will be streakier from time to time. Being a Mexican water bug, Tatar is obviously more lively and quick with the puck. But the main advantage of being a Mexican water bug is that it is a made-up insect that only exists inside the mind of Mickey Redmond. So basically the sky is the limit on Tatar's potential and what he will develop into. Don't ask me why Mickey's made-up bug is Mexican. I know it's boring nerdy science stuff i got from a spread sheet, but the facts are there. Each has their strengths and weaknesses. You've convinced me. I picked Nyquist in a similar poll a few years ago and my opinion hasn't changed since then. I believe that Nyquist is definitely the better all around player, and as much as I love both players, I'd choose Nyquist over Tatar every single time. I miss your old avatar tbh. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joesuffP 1,746 Report post Posted August 6, 2015 Imo, Nyquist is the best sniper on the team. Most his goals he's beating the goalie clean. Tatar is more tenacious and probably better around the net. I voted Nyquist. I think he'll really surprise everyone and just continue getting better and better with experience Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,522 Report post Posted August 6, 2015 Its not as hard to beat the goalie clean on a power play. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kickazz 5,459 Report post Posted August 6, 2015 Apparently it's 'as hard' for a lot of players not named Nyquist on the team seeing as though no one hit the double digits in PP goals except for him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,522 Report post Posted August 6, 2015 (edited) Lol. You're arguing that its harder to score on the power play? Cute. Its cool though, think what you want. I like the guy who played his way on to the top line and led the team in goals and was among the league leaders in puck possession. You like the guy who is a whiz on the power play and lost his spot in the top six to Erik Cole (until his injury). Edited August 6, 2015 by kipwinger Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BobL 28 Report post Posted August 6, 2015 I think Tatar is the better player right now, and Nyquist is probably going to be the better player over the course of their careers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joesuffP 1,746 Report post Posted August 6, 2015 Lol. You're arguing that its harder to score on the power play? Cute. Its cool though, think what you want. I like the guy who played his way on to the top line and led the team in goals and was among the league leaders in puck possession. You like the guy who is a whiz on the power play and lost his spot in the top six to Erik Cole (until his injury). Tatar was gifted a spot on the top line with Datsyuk for the entire year despite his defensive short comings and playing poorly for stretches. There was no rhyme or reason for it and it benefited him immensely while only scoring 1 more goal than Nyquist. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kipwinger 8,522 Report post Posted August 6, 2015 Tatar was gifted a spot on the top line with Datsyuk for the entire year despite his defensive short comings and playing poorly for stretches. There was no rhyme or reason for it and it benefited him immensely while only scoring 1 more goal than Nyquist. Gifted? He started the season on the third line. Roughly half his goals were set up by Sheahan. The rhyme and reason was that he was leading our team in goals despite being given significantly less icetime. So they gave him more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joesuffP 1,746 Report post Posted August 6, 2015 Gifted? He started the season on the third line. Roughly half his goals were set up by Sheahan. The rhyme and reason was that he was leading our team in goals despite being given significantly less icetime. So they gave him more. Actually Tatar had a terrible start playing with Sheahan and was up playing with Dats by November after our first slump. Nyquist lead our team in goals for the first part of the season Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
amato 3,210 Report post Posted August 6, 2015 It's situational.. Nyquist is better if you have a cold and Tatar is better if you are eating a nice fish dinner. ....I'll see myself out.. 2 TheXym and derblaueClaus reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites