In response to Fletcher1's comment:
Very interesting responses. I don't think Subban is bad defensively, for the record. I think he's more of a risk taker than the others in his pay grade, and I think that can hurt the team (when the opponent actually makes him pay...ahem...). I don't think he stays in position as much as he should, but I realize that some of his more impactful plays are contingent on having the freedom and creativity to play instinctively.
I thought he put himself way out of position against the Bruins a few times (one badly missed run at Lucic comes to mind) in key points of the games, and the Bruins were infuriating to watch bumbling the opportunities. I didn't think he looked real good defensively against the Rangers either.
That said, being the best skater on the ice never hurts. I think his outlet passing and changing directions is fantastic and he seems to work out of jams with ease. He can render the forecheck useless. He keeps you guessing defensively too, because he can easily flatten you one time (ask Marchand) or just take the puck the next time. Obviously he's a terror offensively for any Bruin fan.
I think they overpaid though. Whether it really matters or whether they "had too" is a different issue to me. I don't think he's a top-5 league player. If you think that is just my bias talking, you should have heard me carrying on about Duncan Keith after the Hawks beat the Bruins in the SC. I think Keith is noticeably better than Subban. Maybe that will change -- he should keep getting better. My guess is that in 3 years people are still more likely to view Subban as overpaid than otherwise. Bookmark this thread...
The voice of reason in a thread gone to hell...