Good study model suggestions?

I read in many places that you should take a few of someone's games and study them to adopt their thinking system.  The trouble is there are so many good players, though many have a stylistic clash.  I tried Leko and Topalov before, but they seem very mechanical and technical. 

I have Chessbase 12 and the Big Database 2013 so finding games isn't an issue.

I'm currently thinking of Botvinnik, who certainly had a mechanical bend but also a nice balance between attack and defense, and tactical and positional (not that there's a real segregation there anyway as tactics suppliment strategy) leaning toward the attacking side. 

Petrosian also has some nice games, though he sometimes gets into lost positions and overlooks tactics. 

The criteria are as follows for a model:

-Year really isn't important, though the more modern the better.

-If after the establishment of ELO anyone 2400 and up just to broaden the horrizon since not many 2600 and up play the Leningrad Dutch or Nimzo-Larsen attack (main 1.d4 but 1.b3 is good once in awhile I even have Jacobs and Tait's Nimzo-Larsen Attack book)

-Usually plays for a win (instead of not losing, so Andersson is out)

-Goes for sound chess instead of cheap tactical tricks (not a problem with the established criteria anyway but just in case)

-Most games don't require too much calculation (Kasparov is out though I'll still look at some of his games every now and then)

-Positions don't usually devolve into sterility

I guess what I'm trying to say is a reasonable attacking player and am currently thinking about using Marshall as a model, maybe Steinitz. 

lajos portisch, david bronstein, boris spassky