Game statistics that discriminate winning and losing at the NBA level of basketball competition

Čabarkapa, Dimitrije; Deane, Michael A.; Fry, Andrew C.; Jones, Grant T.; Cabarkapa, Damjana V.; Philipp, Nicolas M.; Yu, Daniel

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0273427

Cited by 22 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, defensive rebounds emerged as a prominent performance parameter associated with securing the desired game outcome during the post-season competitive period (Garcia et al, 2013;Trninic et al, 2002). Similar observations were made in a recently conducted study where field goal percentage and defensive rebounds were found to be two key game-related statistics capable of discriminating between winning and losing game outcomes during both regular and post-season competitive periods at the National Basketball Association (NBA) level of basketball competition (Cabarkapa et al, 2022). Furthermore, it is interesting to note that besides superior scoring capabilities, NBA teams are likely to be more successful when all players, regardless of team status (i.e., starters or non-starters), commit themselves to passing the ball (Melnick, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…Attempting free-throw shots is an uncontested scoring opportunity that can be advantageous in securing the winning game outcome (Cabarkapa et al, 2022;Conte et al, 2018;Csataljay et al, 2012). Therefore, combining a greater number of PF committed by the opposing team that results in more FTA creates an additional home-court advantage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A considerable amount of scientific literature has been focused on quantitative analysis of game-related statistics capable of distinguishing winning from losing game outcomes (Cabarkapa et al, 2022;Conte et al, 2018;Garcia et al, 2013;Lorenzo et al, 2010;Trninic et al, 2002). Lorenzo et al (2010) found that turnovers and assists in close games (i.e., the difference in score ≤9 points), and two-point field goals and defensive rebounds in balanced games (i.e., final score difference between 10 and 29 points) were variables that discriminated winning and losing teams in the Under-16 European Championships.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The home-court advantage in NCAA Division-I men’s basketball

Čabarkapa¹,

Deane²,

Ciccone³

et al. 2023

jhse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the present study was to examine the differences in game-related statistics between home and away games at the NCAA Division-I level of men's basketball competition. The data scraping technique was used to obtain publicly available box scores during the 2018-19 competitive season. Throughout this period, 2181 home and 2205 away box scores were randomly selected across 353 teams, regardless of the winning or losing game outcome. The findings of the present study revealed that the game-related statistics influenced by the game location, listed in descending order of magnitude, were: assists (AS), personal fouls (PF), field-goal percentage (FG%), free-throw attempts (FTA), blocks (BL), defensive rebounds (DRB), turnovers (TO), steals (ST), and threepoint shooting percentage (3P%). During home games, the teams tended to display better decision-making processes (i.e., more AS and ST, and less TO), defensive performance (i.e., more DRB and BL), shooting efficiency (i.e., greater FT% and 3P%), and minimize tactical errors (i.e., less PF and more FTA). Overall, these findings suggest that playing on a home-court provides a significant advantage in securing the desired game outcome and provides insight into what game-related statistics contribute most to this effect.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The home-court advantage in NCAA Division-I men’s basketball

Čabarkapa¹,

Deane²,

Ciccone³

et al. 2023

jhse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This can be achieved by attempting free-throw, two-point, and three-point shots. The efficiency of the aforementioned shooting motions has been shown to be one of the key factors in securing the desired game outcome across various levels of basketball competitions [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]. Therefore, it is of critical importance that each player possesses elementary knowledge regarding the proper shooting form as well as what biomechanical adjustments are needed when increasing the shooting distance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Distance and Proficiency on Shooting Kinematics in Professional Male Basketball Players

Čabarkapa

Cabarkapa

Philipp

et al. 2022

JFMK

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shooting efficiency is one of the key performance parameters related to securing the desired game outcome at various levels of basketball competition, and it is largely influenced by the biomechanical adjustments incorporated during the preparatory and release phase of the shooting motion. Thus, the purpose of the present study was twofold: (a) to examine the differences in the kinematic characteristics between free-throw, two-point, and three-point shots, and (b) to examine the differences between shooters with excellent (≥80%) and good (<80%) levels of shooting proficiency. A total of 10 professional male basketball players performed 5 free-throw (4.57 m), two-point (5.18 m), and three-point (6.75 m) shots, combining for a total of 150 shots. A high-definition camera recording at 120 fps was used to capture the shooting motion from a sagittal point of view, and video analysis software was used to analyze the kinematic variables of interest. The findings of the present study reveal that the kinematic characteristics during the preparatory phase of the shooting motion remain unchanged between free-throw and two-point shots. Three-point shots required lower elbow positioning, influenced by greater knee and hip flexion when compared to free-throw and two-point shots. The release angle was notably lower for shots attempted beyond the three-point line but remained unchanged between the free-throw and two-point shooting motions. Release height and vertical displacement were significantly greater for two- and three-point shots when compared to free-throw shots, while no difference was observed between the two- and three-point shots. In addition, no significant differences in shooting kinematics were observed between those participants with excellent and good levels of shooting proficiency.

show abstract

“…Basketball is an intermittent, and a complex game where shooting is one of the most important technical skills of the game (Zwierko et al, 2018;Li et al, 2021). More precisely, shooting efficiency is considered one of the crucial performance indicators due to the strong positive relationship between field goal shooting and winning the game (Ibáñez et al, 2009;Lorenzo et al, 2010;García et al, 2013;Cabarkapa et al, 2022b). However, shooting performance in a game can be determined by various endogenous and exogenous factors that disrupt its effectiveness.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance factors that negatively influence shooting efficiency in women’s basketball

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the present study was to examine the influence of selected factors (possession duration, game quarter, defensive pressure, shooting distance from the basket, and heart rate level) on shooting efficiency on Under-19 (U19) and senior level of women’s basketball competition (second division). The analysis procedures included five U19 and six senior-level games, containing 224 and 252 shooting attempts, respectively. Binary logistic regression identified the opponent’s defensive pressure and shooting distance from the basket as significant predictors of shooting efficiency in both categories. When defensive pressure was high, the chance for the missed shot was 3.5 (95% CI; 1.43–8.52) and 3.19 (95% CI; 1.4–7.26) times more likely than it was under the minimum defensive pressure for U19 and senior category, respectively. Shooting efficiency significantly decreased when the horizontal distance from the basket increased. In U19, a chance for a missed shot was 4.63 (95% CI; 2–10.712) and 5.15 (95% CI; 1.91–13.86) times higher for medium and long-distance (respectively), compared to short-range shooting. In the senior category, the chance for the missed shot was 3.9 (95% CI; 1.83–8.31) and 3.27 (95% CI; 1.43–7.52) times higher for medium and long-distance (respectively) when compared to a short distance. The possession duration, game quarter, and heart rate level were identified as insignificant predictors. Therefore, the aforementioned findings suggest that basketball players and coaches may benefit from designing training sessions where the defender puts pressure on the shooting player as in a real game situation and balanced the frequency of shooting from different distances from the basket.

show abstract

Game statistics that discriminate winning and losing at the NBA level of basketball competition

Cited by 22 publications

References 17 publications

The home-court advantage in NCAA Division-I men’s basketball

The home-court advantage in NCAA Division-I men’s basketball

Impact of Distance and Proficiency on Shooting Kinematics in Professional Male Basketball Players

Performance factors that negatively influence shooting efficiency in women’s basketball

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About