ESPN.com: Did reluctance for Luongo trade cost Burke?

[bunjay]

That's my thinking as well, it makes it harder for the Leafs to land Luongo. Gillis must be laughing his butts off. They'll have to overpay.

errr...no. Huge contracts on players that have to be traded actually bring back minimal return.





Source: Rick Nash trade.

 

[Guy Boucher]

1. They say they fired him because of his attitude/demeanour: But his demeanour was known 6 months ago when they could have fired him (and apparently discussed doing so, but decided not to).

2. They could say they fired him because of his record: But they hired someone who was directly involved in the accumulation of his record.

3. According to Anselmi on the Fan 590, they (the board) wanted to hold interviews for the job but he had to tell them that the time was not conducive for a search since the team needed to play next week and needed someone in place now.

All of that screams to some type of incident taking place which caused this to occur.

You might argue it wasn't the Luongo issue. You might be right or wrong, but some of his friends have said it was the issue. Either way, something must have happened.

I mean, the alternate explanation is he said a couple of things that really rubbed people on the board the right way. Is that a better reason to fire a GM? Either way, in my opinion, it's stupidity.

 

[A1LeafNation]

That's my thinking as well, it makes it harder for the Leafs to land Luongo. Gillis must be laughing his butts off. They'll have to overpay.

You assume MLSE wants Luongo. Consider teh fact we are still rebuilding and Luongo makes no sense for a rebuilding team.

 

[LeafsNation75]

errr...no. Huge contracts on players that have to be traded actually bring back minimal return.





Source: Rick Nash trade.

Plus Luongo also asked for a trade and told the media about it. So that also effects the value coming back, just like Rick Nash did when he told the media he asked for a trade out of Columbus.

 

[Tak7]

One of the most telling things that came out of the reports after Burke's firing, was how heavily involved he was in CBA negotiations.

I heard a few times that he was heavily involved in the cap-savings penalty/Luongo rule being implemented into the new CBA. Which makes absolute sense; especially when you consider just how dead against circumvention contracts Burke was under the old CBA.

It makes sense to me - he doesn't like cap circumvention deals, he worked hard to penalize teams that have those deals in this new CBA, and doesn't want Luongo who represents that very sort of contract.

While it might not have all been on Luongo, I think the loggerheads that the board and Burke found themselves in in regards to Luongo definitely had a huge influence on the decision to get rid of Burke.

 

[Kingstonian84*]

You assume MLSE wants Luongo. Consider teh fact we are still rebuilding and Luongo makes no sense for a rebuilding team.

MLSE lets face it has been rebuiding/retooling (call it what you want) since 2005, the result is no playoffs since 04' which is nearly 10 years ago. Actually it makes perfect sense for Luongo to be here, if you look back the leafs best years is when they were backstopped by Cujo/Belfour. Cujo was not much younger then Luo when he signed here and he gave us 4 solid to great years, Belfour was 37 when he signed here and he gave us two great years as well. Luongo is 33 (turning 34), he is still in his prime and in great fitness, he easily gives us 4-6 years of elite goaltending and IMO the best since the days of Belfour/Cujo.