Why Shaquille O'Neal Will Hurt the Boston Celtics
There is no doubt Shaquille O'Neal is a future NBA Hall-of-famer, but he is too old and too slow to continue playing at a dominant level. The Boston Celtics are aging and lethargic as it is and the last thing they need is this 38-year-old, 7-foot 325 pound giant, lollygagging his way up and down the court.
Sure it's a scary image picturing Shaquille O'Neal playing alongside Kevin Garnett, Glen Davis, Jermaine O'Neal, and Kendrick Perkins, but Shaq will most likely not be effective in this league ever again.
O'Neal will not be able to simply bully his way inside the paint like he's accustomed to, because his speed has become a joke. If defenders can keep Shaq in front of them with steady ground,O'Neal will either commit the offensive foul or bail out and pass the ball.
Also, if O'Neal fails to lose any weight than his defensive game will suffer, with opposing Center's consistently getting past him with ease. Shaq can't use his dominant strength factor if he cannot keep up. Maybe it's just O'Neal's age, but he has always been slow, and it seems as if he's been becomming even slower.
The powerful force in which Shaquille O'Neal once was is no longer. Of course he'll grab some boards here and there and sure he'll swat a few shots, but he will never be a dominant threat in the NBA ever again.
But hey, let's be honest. Shaquille O'Neal is one of the best Center's that the game of basketball has ever seen and has played at a consistent high level of play against high expectations his entire career. Anything is possible and once the season begins all questions will be answered.
In the history of the NBA when extremely dominant players, such as Ewing and Jordan, make the final stretch of their career's they tend to become more of a hinder and hassle than benefit.
This withering legend has seen his finest days, and, in less of some miracle, is making a big mistake remaining in a game that he is no longer fit to play.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?