Sturm trade on hold per Bob Mckenzie: Medical Issues

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Sturm trade on hold per Bob Mckenzie: Medical Issues

    The wording of the CBA with reference to condition stints has left me undecided on timing and cap implications.  He would still count against the cap while on a conditioning stint, which leads me to think the team would still get relief.

    Does he have to be activated to be sent on one?  He apparently doesn't need to be activated to be assigned regularly, otherwise all this talk about possibly sending him to Providence is hogwash.  If he doesn't need to be activated, we get back to this fuzzy area where the team can't activate him without clearing space, but there doesn't seem to be any consequences for not activating him, and no one has any clue what happens to his cap hit.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Sturm trade on hold per Bob Mckenzie: Medical Issues

    There is something awfully fishy about this deal.  It would be one thing if it was reported by some random blog, but for TSN to lead with it and NHL.com to confirm it, you have to think that it was more than an agreement in principle.  I can't believe that it would have been confirmed by those outlets if LA was still waiting for medical records to decide.

    You have to wonder if Lombardi pulled a fast one on account of buyer's remorse.  This situation really screws the Bruins because now everyone in the league knows that the B's are trying to give Sturm away for nothing -- there is no pretending that they want something back in the deal anymore.  Chiarelli is totally compromised moving forward.  Someone should be angry about this. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Sturm trade on hold per Bob Mckenzie: Medical Issues

    In Response to Re: Sturm trade on hold per Bob Mckenzie: Medical Issues:
    In Response to Re: Sturm trade on hold per Bob Mckenzie: Medical Issues : 'Concerns' is a vague word, isn't it?  I wouldn't toss this deal in the shredder just yet.  It may just mean they want to give up less now, or they want to see him play (in Providence?) first.  Certainly a buzz-kill though.  It would have been nice heading into the weekend not thinking about who's going to be shipped out just to fit under the cap. Posted by DrCC


    That quick releif Bayer that Chiarelli is looking for is probably Paille for now as I don't see him making it through the weekend nothing is going to slow Marchand down. Looking at where Marco is at from Lombardi's point of view is "Umm when will Sturm actually be ready Doc ?" LA needs scoring help yesterday.

    No not in the shredder no but the look on Ryder's face when he saw Marco put his bag back in his locker stall must have been well "Priceless!"

    PS. capgeek #nhl #bruins are $46,128 under the cap post-Sturm, spending $309,646 of allowable $309,894 per day http://bit.ly/eClPSq
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from boborielly224. Show boborielly224's posts

    Re: Sturm trade on hold per Bob Mckenzie: Medical Issues

    Sturm will still go to LA, His rehab is still in a two weeks process and once he clears the medical test LA will make the final deal. I am content with Marco being traded. Marco will waive is trade to go to western league team and still efficient enough to help teams with scoring, pp and pk. I would aslo see STL. being interested in marco.

    (A) It will give the Bruins a cap relief to persue extra help either a good d man or a experience forward someone mention Satan or Geurin that would be a good low cost signing. Me personally would like to see more capspace room to get Yandle, Beuachemin or Wienewski from NYI. My ultimate d man would be Weber and is OK to dream sometimes.

    (B) it will keep our young prospects caron seguin and marchand actiove all season

    (C) Maybe boston will add Paille to the trade to secure things every team will always like to have a consistent PK player.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from nash99. Show nash99's posts

    Re: Sturm trade on hold per Bob Mckenzie: Medical Issues

    The Kings are cheap. They talk about signing players but never do. Why would they want to pay Sturm when he is a month away from even playing. If they continue to sux they will probably make this deal in January. If they get back to winning then they will blow off Sturm and the Bruins. I'd rather have Sturm here and when someone gets hurt they can bring him into the lineup. Otherwise send him to Providence.......
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from I-Like-Hockey. Show I-Like-Hockey's posts

    Re: Sturm trade on hold per Bob Mckenzie: Medical Issues

    In Response to Re: Sturm trade on hold per Bob Mckenzie: Medical Issues:
    . I'd rather have Sturm here and when someone gets hurt they can bring him into the lineup. Otherwise send him to Providence.......
    Posted by nash99



    That isnt possible. See Salary Cap.

    and Bob'o Paille+Sturm are hardly worth those players you mentioned and barely nets enough cap space take on thier cap hit.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Wheatskins. Show Wheatskins's posts

    Re: Sturm trade on hold per Bob Mckenzie: Medical Issues

    Both Dreger and McKenzie jumped the gun.

    The Sturm deal was in the works, but the medical clearances (records and physical) had never taken place. No deal is possible before this happens.

    I'm sure that Sturm was informed of the deal, he had to waive the no trade clause, and perhaps he figured the deal was done not realizing the medical clearance issue.

    Don't forget, he hasn't been cleared to play by the Bruins. Why would anyone take a player who has not been cleared to play?
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share