2) We can not recall a time when two players were ever treated as one before. Brian Burke pulled off a draft day coup in 1999 that set this series of bizarre moves into motion. Back then Vancouver had the 3rd overall pick, but using other assets Burke attained the 2nd pick as well, and used them to pick up the swedish-twins. Since that time both have signed identical contracts, and have played on the same line for their entire careers. WE have in the past pondered what would happen if/when one of the twins became significantly better than the other? They were briefly separated last winter So far all contracts have been identical (like they are) If they were forced to be separated, would they die? Thankfully for them both have generally played at the same/similar level, so the decision to retain both at or about the same salary shouldn't be an issue.
3) Our issue though is this; is it good business sense to tie your team to these guys? If you're Mike Gillis you have to ask yourself are these guys 'corner stone' players? In the salary cap world its hard enough to have 1 player making big bucks, but if you have two you're gonna have to cut back in other areas to compensate. With 'captain Roberto already making big bucks can Vancouver have two more players making 7+ million and still compete? Especially if not one but BOTH have to be considered one. That's 14+ million in salary that's potentially unmovable! Sorry, these guys in our opinion are not worth it, but much like the dilemma that Minnesota has with regards to Gaborik, the Canucks/Gillis have little option here. So for better or worse the Canucks are married to their identical Twins.