Sedins: $63 Million Over 12 Years Each, Genius or Ludicrous?
The wheels have finally started to turn.
Two of the summer's hottest upcoming unrestricted free agents, Daniel and Henrik Sedin, have finally broken the silence as to what kind of contract they're hoping to sign if the Vancouver Canucks wish to keep them around for years to come.
How does $63 million over 12 years each sound?
At first glance it may look as though the Sedins fell completely off their rockers when asking for such a massive contract (times two, no less) but if that is in fact your conclusive belief, I advise you to look again.
The Sedins were Vancouver's top offensive players last season with 82 points each and respectable playoff point production. They have consistently hit the 70-point mark since the 2005-2006 season which the same cannot be said for most other players who have signed very lucrative long-term deals with their respective teams.
Chris Drury, Scott Gomez, Daniel Briere, Ryan Smyth, to name a few.
With their contracts expiring, the Sedins have expressed major interest in continuing their careers with the Canucks and it seems as though they are ready and willing to take a pay cut if need be.
Broken down, $63 million over 12 years is $5.25 million per year, significantly less money than most other players of the Sedin's offensive calibre make.
On top of that is the fact the Sedins are now only coming into their prime and something tells me that there is still more to come from this pair of offensively-savvy Swedish twins, especially if they turn up their physical game which we did see rise a bit over past years this season.
Sure, I agree that 12 years is a very long time and a lot can change between 28 and 40, but how will we ever know if a chance isn't taken?
It's the exact same chance the Canucks would have to take if they were to let the Sedins go in favour of superstars like Marian Hossa and Marian Gaborik who are likely going to ask for similar contracts length-wise but at a higher cost.
I say to not give up on the Sedins just because the Canucks failed to make an effective playoff run once again and build off them, especially at the steal price that they're willing to stay in Vancouver for. Because if anything can be said it's that you don't know how good you have it till it's gone.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?