View Single Post
Old
06-07-2012, 08:12 AM
  #66
jrgtml67
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 587
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by grits207 View Post
Not true at all, you are talking out of your ass. According to Pierre Lebrun the Panthers are "very interested" in Luongo and despite Yzerman's comments I'm sure the Lightning will at least kick the tires on him as well, especially if the asking price for Bernier is too high.

First of all Yzerman said he is looking for a goalie with in Tampa's current system, not getting one via trade. Also saying that leaves an option for Toronto to land Roloson, albeit he is my last choice. Fla maybe interested but they do not have the money to sign a goalie like Lu without blowing up their core guys, thusly they will be back to where they started the first time they had Luongo. It would be all goalie no team again. The leafs are in the best position to grab him. We have enough talent and depth to make the deal, and we are the richest team in the NHL. With the new CBA the cap is likely to take a nose dive thusly, there maybe a claus where teams can re work current contracts, and best case scenario, we get Lu the CBA allows us to re negiotiate term and money, Burke signs him for more money way less term in the 3-5yr range...probably 5 yrs say 6.5mil --- 7.25mil. People always forget, it doesnt matter who is interested necessarily, do you think Gillis cares if Lu doesnt get to go to Fla? No ! He cares that he get the best deal to move his team forward. I dont see Fla having the guys to do that WITHOUT losing a lot of the talent that got them into the playoffs this past season.

As a side note...again ppl KOMI has to be included in a deal for Luongo because of the cap, that is the ONLY reason, it is not because Van would want him BUT the cap is Burkes bargaining chip here. Ya know...hey Mike look that contract is a hefty one so here what I want to do..I'll send you Franson, Mac, and 2013 2nd rounder, and Komisarek to make up the contractual difference.

jrgtml67 is offline   Reply With Quote