Pittsburgh claiming Mike Condon from Montreal is either a good waiver claim or a bad one, depending on your perspective.
Montreal placed Condon on waivers. Ottawa did not need him when he was on waivers. Pittsburgh had an injury at the time so they claimed him. Shortly after Pittsburgh claimed him, Craig Anderson suffered an injury in Ottawa and Pittsburgh's tandem was healthy again. Recognizing their leverage, Pittsburgh refused to put Condon back on waivers. They extorted Ottawa for a 5th round pick.
Condon is notorious for "saving" Ottawa's season that year with above average play in net that kept them in the playoff race until Craig Anderson returned. Ottawa barely squeezed into the playoffs, earning their spot in the last few games of the season.
While Condon barely factored into the actual playoffs, but he did help get them there. Had they not traded for him, they would likely have missed the playoffs that season.
Circling back to how this relates to Pittsburgh, Ottawa and Pittsburgh met in the conference final. Pittsburgh won by 1 goal in game 7 OT, and they went on to win the Stanley Cup. Had Pittsburgh never claimed Condon, he may have passed through waivers, and Montreal might have opted against trading him to a division rival in Ottawa. Claiming Condon on waivers could possibly be indirectly responsible for Pittsburgh winning the cup, because if Ottawa doesn't make the playoffs and beat out two good teams in Boston and New York, maybe Pittsburgh doesn't win the conference final. Or, if you believe that Ottawa was a more difficult matchup for Pittsburgh than any team they faced, then it was a bad waiver claim, because claiming Condon put Pittsburgh a goal away from not winning the cup that season.