Physiological Profile of Speed, Agility and Jumping Ability of Elite U16 Basketball Players

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to record the physiological profile of the U16 elite men basketball players of national teams per playing position as well as to compare the differences of those physiological profiles between the playing positions. The study involved 17 young male basketball players (average weight 84 kg, average height 1.97 cm, average age 15.9 years). Players were classified according to their positions in Guards (G: n = 7), Forwards (F: n = 6), and Centers (C: n = 4). In order to determine the physiological profile of the elite players of the study, tests were performed which were divided into 3 characteristics: speed (5m-10m Sprint), agility (T-drill) and jumping ability / anaerobic power (CMJ, DJ, SJ). In the inductive analysis, the possible differences between the different positions of the players were examined through the one-way ANOVA tests. The main findings suggest that the physiological profile of speed, agility and jumping ability of the U16 male players of the Greek National Basketball Team is at a high level. Specifically, the Guards recorded an average of jump height 41.73 cm for the 3 trials (CMJ, SJ, DJ) and times 0.73 ± 0.03 (s), 1.87 ± 0.04 (s) for the 5m. and 10m. sprints and 8.39 ± 0.23 (s) for the T-drill test. Respectively, the Forwards of the research recorded average jump heights of 40.12 cm for the 3 trials (CMJ, SJ, DJ) and times 0.75 ± 0.07 (s), 1.93 ± 0.12 (s) for the 5m, and 10m sprints, and 8.48 ± 0.47 for the T-drill test. Finally, the Centers recorded an average of jump height 42.82 cm for the 3 trials (CMJ, SJ, DJ) and times 0.74 ± 0.05 (s), 1.89 ± 0.04 (s) for the 5m. and 10m. sprints and 8.48 ± 0.31 (s) for the T-drill test. The findings showed that there were no differences between the 3-position players in the 5m / 10m speed tests as well as in the T-drill agility test. On the other hand, in the jump tests, paradoxically, the elite U16 players from the Centers position had the best performance in general in the 3 jump tests and in particular in the CMJ and SJ and the Guards players had the best performance in the DJ. The Forwards position players had the worst performance in all 3 jump tests.

A Systematic Review: Significance of Plyometric Training on Functional Performance and Bone Mineral Density in Basketball Players of Different Age Groups

“…It is a medical imaging technique used to assess body composition, particularly bone mineral density (BMD), lean mass, and fat mass. The scan provides 2013 [14] 2014 [15,16] 2015 [17,18] 2016 [19] 2017 [20,21] 2018 [22,23] 2019 [24,25,26] 2020 [27,28] 2021 [29,30,31] 2022 [32,33,34,35,36] 2023 [37,38,39] Sample Size Range…”

“…Prepubertal basketball players [16,21,23] Young/Adolescent/High-School basketball players [15, 18-20, 24-28, 31, 32, 34-36, 39] 17 University/Collegiate basketball players [17,29,33] Elite/Professional basketball players [14,22,30]…”

“…Plyometric* [14-20, 23-30, 32, 34-38] 22 Plyometric* + Isometric [21] Plyometric* + Strength + Change of Direction [31] Plyometric* + Whole-body Vibration [33] High Intensity [39] Intervention Trial Type Single Arm Clinical Trial [14,37] Parallel Group Clinical Trial [20] Randomized Controlled Trial [15-19, 21-32, 34-36, 39] 22 Randomized Crossover Trial [33] Intervention Training Period 4 Weeks [17,24,27,29,30] 6 Weeks [14,15,18,19,28,32,34,36] 7 Weeks [23,31] 8 Weeks [37,39] 9 Weeks [16] 10 Weeks [21,26] 12 Weeks [25,35,38] 36 Weeks [20] Period not specified [33] Intervention Training Frequency 2 days per Week [15-19, 21-24, 26, 27, 29, 31] 13 3 days per Week [28,30,32,34,36,37,38,39] 5 days per Week [14,25,35] Frequen...…”

“…Outcome Measure Description Agility -"T" Drill Test (ATT) [14, 16, 21-25, 27, 33, 36, 37] Rapid changes of direction and quick movements in a "T" pattern Hexagonal Obstacle Test (HOT) [14] Navigating through a hexagonal pattern of obstacles Illinois Agility Test (IAT) [24,27,30,34] Quick changes of direction through a specific course Reactive Agility Test (RAT) [29] Reacting to visual or auditory cues to change direction quickly Lateral Hop Test (LHT) [19] Hopping side-to-side over an obstacle or line Lateral Shuffle Test (LST) [19] Shuffling sideways as quickly as possible Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT) [18] Reaching in multiple directions from a single-leg stance Zigzag Barrow Test (ZBT) [22] Running in a zigzag pattern while pushing a barrow/sled, assessing agility, speed and lateral movements 10 m Zig-Zag Test (ZT) [31] Change of Direction in a zigzag pattern over a 10-meter distance, testing agility and speed [36] Back-and-forth running between two points, testing speed and agility with changes of direction 5/10/15/20/30/80/100-Meter Sprint Test (MST) [16, 17, 21, 23-27, 30-34, 37, 38] Sprinting as fast as possible over a 5/10/20/30/80/100-meter distance from a stationary start testing acceleration and top-end speed [32] Assesses anaerobic power and capacity. Involves short, intense bursts of activity like cycling or running to measure peak power output Flamingo Balance Test (FBT) [36] Assessing balance and stability by measuring the duration of one-legged stance.…”

“…The diverse statistical analysis techniques used to examine data in the study articles providing valuable insights into the methods employed to draw meaningful conclusions from the data. The analysis includes tests related to data normality using Shapiro -Wilk test [17,18,[32][33][34][35][36], and Kolmogorov-Smirnov test [21.26, 31], descriptive statistics using mean and standard deviation (Mean ± STD) [14-21, 24, 25, 28, 30-37], variance homogeneity using Levene's test [7,8,13,31], reliability using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) [15,18,26,31], bivariate correlation [3] and Pearson/partial correlation [20], covariance using ANCOVA [16,[19][20][21]26], repeated measures using Univariate -ANOVA [14, 16, 18, 19, 21, 23, 27-31, 33, 34, 35] or Multivariate -MANOVA [15,27], chi-square [14], Paired T-test [17,22] and Unpaired T-test [4,22,24,25,30,32,35,36], and post hoc paired mean difference using Bonferroni post hoc test [29,31,33], LSD de Fisher post hoc test [16] and Wilcoxon paired test…”