How Bad Was Celtics Shaq?

Shaquille O'Neal is one the greatest centers in NBA history, we know this. Unfortunately, just like it has gone for many players, by the time his hall-of-fame career was winding down, the Diesel was nowhere near the dominant force he was when he joined the Boston Celtics in 2010. The 2010-11 season ended up being O'Neal's final season in the league as his one season in Boston was limited to only 37 games due to injury and limited playing time. The 9.2 PPG he averaged for Boston was by far the lowest total of his career, and as we know today, the limited "highlights" we have from Shaq's Boston stint have been mocked a ton as it has become the go-to Twitter meme to imply something "washed" or not what it was once.

As that meme template has appeared on my feed more and more by the day, it made me ponder the question, how bad was Shaq in Boston? And looking back, of course, he wasn't the he once was or even close to it, his Boston season may not have been as bad as you may think.

Despite the limited time we did see him on the floor, some stats show O'Neal's time with the Celtics was not as bad as you may have assumed.

For example, all though the 9.2 points a night were the lowest of his career, he did put those numbers up only playing an average of 20 minutes, taking only about four shots per game, with a field goal percentage of 66%. Again, not great, but that is a useful role player, especially when he gave you 1.1 blocks a game, as well as grabbing 4.8 rebounds per game.

Of course, the memes of his Celtics tenure will forever be funny to me and the template that it symbolizes, but when he was able to be on the court, the numbers do show that he was actually way more productive than you probably thought. Despite his injuries and age, O'Neal was fairly efficient and useful for the Celtics as a backup big in his limited role.