So, let's assume there is an NHL general manager who agrees with what I've stated in this article *cough - Brian Burke.
If a GM does trade for Luongo, with the belief that all will be fine, and it doesn't work out..he could have an out clause.
For those who don't know, the NHL collective bargaining agreement expires on Sep. 15, 2012. For most fans, this is a terrifying fact which means another lockout could be looming. But for some, it simply means the NHL will have a slightly different look next season, as the new CBA (assuming one will be reached), will present some new rules in the league.
One of these potential changes, is adding an amnesty clause to the NHL. For those that aren't familiar with the concept, it basically means that each team can rip up one contract they please, sending whichever player to free agency. Each team would still be bound under the contract, and must still pay the player his salary, but that salary would no longer count against the cap. This would either be a one-time thing, or permitted one time ever x amount of years.
Now, the general managers are the ones who would vote this clause in, and are also the ones who would make the trade for Luongo. This means that if GMs truly believe that an amnesty clause is coming, picking up Luongo becomes much less risky.
So let's go back to the Toronto example. Imagine Brian Burke did make a run for Roberto Luongo, with the belief that he will get past his playoff struggles. If a few years down the road, it's clear that he was wrong and Luongo continues to choke in the postseason, he could use the amnesty clause to get rid of Luongo's cap hit.
Of course, this is contingent on the fact that the amnesty clause does become a reality. But again, no one has more insight into that possibility than the general managers.