You said:
keep in mind that you can only see now how things turned out with the cherem. You do not know how things would have been without it. Did it temper chassidus? Did it keep it within boundaries?
To which I responded:
Huh?
That response translates as: "your response is befitting the title of this thread" (unless this is moved by mods to a thread with a different title).
But now that you have restated your comment saying:
You are making the argument that the way chassidus turned out over 200 years shows that the cherem was misplaced. I am saying that maybe it is only because of the cherem that chassidus turned out the way it did. This would mean that the cherem was successful and was the CAUSE of the success of chassidus.
I understand that you mean וכאשר יענו אותו כן ירבה וכן יפרוץ, but I think you are giving the cherem too much credit here. Chassidus stands on its own merit, and is what the aibershter gave עם ישראל at the time it was needed.