Skip navigation
Favorites
Sign up to follow your favorites on all your devices.
Sign up

Gillis on Luongo trade talks: “There’s lots of teams that are interested in an all-star goalie”

Boston Bruins v Vancouver Canucks - Game Five

VANCOUVER, BC - JUNE 10: Roberto Luongo #1 of the Vancouver Canucks warms up prior to playing against the Boston Bruins in Game Five of the 2011 NHL Stanley Cup Final at Rogers Arena on June 10, 2011 in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. (Photo by Bruce Bennett/Getty Images)

Getty Images

Canucks general manager Mike Gillis spoke to TEAM 1040 radio this morning in Vancouver to provide an update on Roberto Luongo and the club’s attempts to trade the 33-year-old goalie.

According to Gillis, there’s no shortage of interest out there.

“We talk to teams every day,” said Gillis. “There’s lots of teams that are interested in an all-star goalie, even though some people refuse to believe that, which is stunning to me because great players are so difficult to get.”

But when asked if a deal was inevitable, Gillis wouldn’t commit to anything.

“Maybe, maybe not,” he said. “We have a lot invested in Roberto, and it may or may not come to pass.

“I could get a phone call in 10 minutes with an offer that is something we would have to consider and would consider and see where it went. You may not get one for two weeks and calls that we’re making may not result in what we’re looking for.

“It’s very difficult to make trades in this business, but oftentimes as the framework’s being laid, something happens, something’s inserted, a player’s included, or a player’s excluded, and suddenly you can make a deal.”

It’s believed Luongo’s first choice is a trade to Florida; however, it’s not known if he’d consider other destinations like Toronto or Columbus.

Nor is it known which teams are interested in Luongo, who everyone knows comes attached to a rather lengthy contract.

And if teams are interested, how interested are they? Enough to give up an asset? Or, are they only willing to send a liability (aka a bad contract) back the other way?