Not sure why people are saying there's no point in getting someone like him. If we're looking for a replacement for Pouliot as the third line wing, how could you not go for Ott over him? He's grittier than anyone on the Bruins, can play multiple positions, is great on faceoffs, very sound defensively and will chip in about 40 points on offense.
Yes, he's a *****, but so is Marchand, and people have grown to like him here. And we know the benefits of having an agitator. As for the question about tearing apart the locker room based on the Bruins history with playing him in Dallas once a year, I don't buy it. They're professionals.
Yes you do if they improve your team. Chris Nilan was depised in Boston and he filled his roll well for two years.
Think Dale Hunter would have made a difference here in the late 80's early 90's? Chris Chelios paired with Bourque on D?
You do what makes your team better, if Ott can be had for a good price you add him and have an upgrade over Poulliot and Caron on the third line, as long as he does not effect team chemistry.
I hate Jaormir Jagr, if he makes the team better for a good cap hit you add him if you think he will not disrupt team chemistry, same goes for Ott, if the players really have an issue with him you talk to your leaders before making the deal and see what they think. If he effects the chemistry poorly you don't touch him.