Conference PaperPDF Available

DIFFERENCES IN BASKETBALL GAME STATISTICS BETWEEN WINNING AND LOSING TEAMS IN THE SPANISH EBA LEAGUE

Authors:

Abstract

The aim of this study was to identify the indicators which discrimi-nate victory and defeat in the Spanish League of Amateur Basketball (EBA). A total of 182 matches were studied, and analyses were made of 2-and 3-point shots (successful and percentage), free-throws (successful and percentage), rebounds (defensive and of-fensive), assists, steals, turnovers, blocks (made and received), and fouls (committed and received). A discriminant analysis was then performed to identify the predictor vari-ables of performance. The principal conclusion is that the variables of fouls committed, assists, and defensive rebounds discriminate success in an EBA league game, showing that control of defensive actions, team play, and greater possibility of possessions best predicted the results in the sample. Quantitative analysis in the game of basketball is a fundamental process in the explanation of factors that influence success in sport. In this regard, basket-ball is one of the first sports in which the relevance of analysis and treatment of data and statistics was recognized. Coaches and researchers rely on statistics to explain victories and defeats in championships. At present, several studies exist on the discriminatory power of statistics of play in basketball games to pre-dict performance (Karipidis,, 2006). At the world level, the four indica-tors of success are defensive rebounds, percentages of success in both 2-and 3-point shots, and percentage of error in 3-point shots (Karipidis, et al., 2001). In national men's leagues, the determinant variables to win a match in close games are percentages of successful 2-point and free throw shots and defen-sive rebounds (Sampaio & Janeira, 2003). This tendency also exists in women's basketball where, in addition to 2-and 3-point shots, steals and assists are also determinant (Gómez, et al., 2006). In world junior categories, the tendency is again similar, as the determinant indicators are successful 2-point shots, free throws, and rebounds, especially defensive ones (Ibáñez, et al., 2003). There are no studies, however, that analyze these variables in lower-division national categories. The main objective of the present study was to identify indicators discriminating victory and defeat in the Spanish League of Amateur Basketball (EBA) of the Royal Spanish Federation of Basketball (RSFB).
Iberian Congress on Basketball Research, 2007, 4, 76-78. © Ammons Scientic LTD 2008
DOI 10.2466/ICBR.4.76-78
DIFFERENCES IN BASKETBALL GAME STATISTICS BETWEEN
WINNING AND LOSING TEAMS IN THE SPANISH EBA LEAGUE1
ANTONIO GARCÍA, ISABEL PAREJO, ERNESTO DE LA CRUZ,
ANA M. DOMÍNGUEZ, AND JOSÉ M. SAAVEDRA
Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Extremadura
Summary.—The aim of this study was to identify the indicators which discrimi-
nate victory and defeat in the Spanish League of Amateur Basketball (EBA). A total of
182 matches were studied, and analyses were made of 2- and 3-point shots (successful
and percentage), free-throws (successful and percentage), rebounds (defensive and of-
fensive), assists, steals, turnovers, blocks (made and received), and fouls (committed and
received). A discriminant analysis was then performed to identify the predictor vari-
ables of performance. The principal conclusion is that the variables of fouls committed,
assists, and defensive rebounds discriminate success in an EBA league game, showing
that control of defensive actions, team play, and greater possibility of possessions best
predicted the results in the sample.
Quantitative analysis in the game of basketball is a fundamental process in
the explanation of factors that inuence success in sport. In this regard, basket-
ball is one of the rst sports in which the relevance of analysis and treatment of
data and statistics was recognized. Coaches and researchers rely on statistics to
explain victories and defeats in championships. At present, several studies exist
on the discriminatory power of statistics of play in basketball games to pre-
dict performance (Karipidis, Fotinakis, Taxildaris, & Fatouros, 2001; Ibáñez,
Sampaio, Sáez-López, Gimenez, & Janeira, 2003; Sampaio & Janeira, 2003;
Gómez, Lorenzo, Sampaio, & Ibáñez, 2006). At the world level, the four indica-
tors of success are defensive rebounds, percentages of success in both 2- and
3-point shots, and percentage of error in 3-point shots (Karipidis, et al., 2001).
In national men’s leagues, the determinant variables to win a match in close
games are percentages of successful 2-point and free throw shots and defen-
sive rebounds (Sampaio & Janeira, 2003). This tendency also exists in women’s
basketball where, in addition to 2- and 3-point shots, steals and assists are also
determinant (Gómez, et al., 2006). In world junior categories, the tendency is
again similar, as the determinant indicators are successful 2-point shots, free
throws, and rebounds, especially defensive ones (Ibáñez, et al., 2003). There
are no studies, however, that analyze these variables in lower-division national
categories. The main objective of the present study was to identify indicators
discriminating victory and defeat in the Spanish League of Amateur Basketball
(EBA) of the Royal Spanish Federation of Basketball (RSFB).
1 Address correspondence to Prof. José M. Saavedra, Avda. de la Universidad s/n. 10071 Cáceres,
Spain or e-mail (jsaavdra@unex.es).
BASKETBALL WIN/LOSS STATISTICS 77
Me t h o d s
The sample consisted of the results and game statistics of 182 games played
in the regular-season league of the EBA category group D on 26 days. The data
were obtained from the ofcial statistics provided by the Federación Española
de Baloncesto2. Normalization of all the statistics was done to 100 ball posses-
sions (Oliver, 2004). The following variables were analyzed: 2- and 3-point shots
(successful and percentage), free throws (successful and percentage), rebounds
(defensive and offensive), assists, steals, turnovers, blocks (committed and re-
ceived), and fouls (committed and received).
Descriptive statistics means and standard deviations were calculated. Uni-
variate analysis of variance was used to compare the means of winning and
losing teams. The results were analyzed by means of discriminant analysis to
identify the differentiating statistics of the winning and losing teams through
structural coefcients. Structural coefcients 0.30 were considered relevant
(Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001).
Re s u l t s
The basic descriptors for the two contexts (winning and losing teams) are
shown in Table 1. Analysis of the discriminant function, however, only iden-
tied three variables with signicant structural coefcients for the result of
a game: fouls committed (SC = .38), assists (SC = .34), and defensive rebounds
(SC = .30).
TABLE 1
Ba s i c de s c R i p t o R s a n d st R u c t u R a l co e f f i c i e n t s ac c o R d i n g t o t h e co n t e x t (Wi n n e R s o R
lo s e R s )
Game statistics Winners Losers Function 1
M SD M SD SC
Successful 2-point shots 31.49 6.06 29.51 6.08
Percentage 2-point shots 75.70 13.95 66.82 12.87
Successful 3-point shots 12.57 5.21 10.41 4.83
Percentage 3-point shots 51.68 18.37 40.23 16.78
Successful free throws 28.67 11.69 23.56 9.87
Percentage free throws 92.18 18.71 91.29 18.38
Defensive rebounds 42.17 11.71 36.50 11.64 .30
Offensive rebounds 19.20 8.43 17.67 9.03
Assists 20.56 10.28 15.53 7.70 .34
Steals 15.20 7.10 14.35 7.14
Turnovers 23.36 10.94 26.34 13.55
Blocks made 4.33 3.64 3.86 3.81
Received blocks 3.03 2.84 4.00 3.48
Committed fouls 34.62 9.39 40.88 10.94 .38
Received fouls 38.73 9.89 36.05 10.74
Note.—Normalization of all the statistics was done on 100 ball possessions (Oliver, 2004).
2www.feb.es.
A. GARCÍA, ET AL.
78
di s c u s s i o n
The variable with the largest structural coefcient was personal fouls com-
mitted, unlike previous studies (Karipidis, et al., 2001; Ibáñez, et al., 2003; Sam-
paio & Janeira, 2003; Gómez, et al., 2006). This may be explained by the fact
that at the lower play level there are more fouls and therefore these are a deter-
mining factor for a team that has better command of this aspect of the game.
Conversely, another of the variables selected by the discriminant model, the
defensive rebound, was found in all previous studies mentioned above, regard-
less of play level or the sex of players (Karipidis, et al., 2001; Sampaio & Ja-
neira, 2003; Ibáñez, et al., 2003; Gómez, et al., 2006), indicating that the teams
that win most games obtain more defensive rebounds, guaranteeing them more
ball possessions. Finally, the third discriminatory variable, assists, also has been
identied in women’s basketball as a determining factor in games (Gómez, et
al., 2006). This could be an indicator of the quality of collective play, primar-
ily through the creation of imbalances in attack. Fouls committed, assists, and
defensive rebounds discriminated success in these EBA league games, showing
that control of defensive actions, team play, and greater number of possessions,
most inuenced the result.
REFERENCES
gó M e z , M. Á., lo R e n z o , a., sa M p a i o , J., & iB Á ñ e z , s. J. (2006) Differences in game-related statis-
tics between winning and losing teams in women’s basketball. Journal of Human Movement
Studies, 51, 357-369.
iB Á ñ e z , s. J., sa M p a i o , J., sÁ e z -ló p e z , p., gi M e n e z , J., & Ja n e i R a , M. (2003) Game statistics dis-
criminating the nal outcome of junior world basketball championship matches (Portugal
1999). Journal of Human Movement Studies, 45, 1-19.
Ka R i p i d i s , a, fo t i n a K i s , p., ta x i l d a R i s , K. & fa t o u R o s , J. (2001) Factors characterizing a success-
ful performance in basketball. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 41, 385-397.
ol i v e R , d. (2004) Basketball on paper: rules and tools for performance analysis. Dulles, VA:
Brassey’s.
sa M p a i o , J., & Ja n e i R a , M. (2003) Statistical analyses of basketball team performance: understand-
ing teams’ wins and losses according to a different index of ball possesions. International
Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 3, 40-49.
ta B a c h n i c K , B., & fi d e l l , l. (2001) Using multivariate statistics. New York: HarperCollins.
... En relaci?n con las acciones individuales, los rebotes defensivos han sido ampliamente los m?s estudiados, tomando en cuenta su posible influencia en el resultado final del juego. En este sentido, la mayor?a de los autores han encontrado diferencias significativas a favor de los equipos ganadores en cuanto a la cantidad de rebotes defensivos capturados (De Rose, 2004; Garc?a, Parejo, De la Cruz, Dom?nguez, y Saavedra, 2007; Hofer, 1990; Ib??ez, Sampaio, S?enz-L?pez, Gim?nez, y Janeira 2003; Montaner y Montaner, 2004; Sanz y Guti?rrez, 2004). ...
... En relación con las acciones individuales, los rebotes defensivos han sido ampliamente los más estudiados, tomando en cuenta su posible influencia en el resultado final del juego. En este sentido, la mayoría de los autores han encontrado diferencias significativas a favor de los equipos ganadores en cuanto a la cantidad de rebotes defensivos capturados (De Rose, 2004; García, Parejo, De la Cruz, Domínguez, y Saavedra, 2007; Hofer, 1990; Ibáñez, Sampaio, Sáenz-López, Giménez, y Janeira 2003; Montaner y Montaner, 2004; Sanz y Gutiérrez, 2004). El grado de oposición al lanzamiento es otro factor defensivo que ha sido estudiado anteriormente. ...
Article
The objective of the present study was to analyze the various technical and tactical aspects of the defensive phase of Chilean basketball. Therefore, all the attack phases (n=2513) done during 13 play-off games of the 2006 Dimayor Chilean championship were analyzed. In each attack phase the following variables were analyzed in regard to the team on defense: (1) type of defense (man-to-man, zone, combination, other); (2) pressure in the transition offense; (3) defensive switches; (4) defensive help; (5) inside passes; (6) degree of shot opposition (low, medium, high); (7) points allowed; and (8) defensive rebounds. The results indicate that: a) the type of defense that is most used is man-to-man (56.6%); b) defensive factors that are not often used include pressure in transition (in 18.0% of attack phases), defensive switches (0.14 per attack phase), and defensive help to guard the player with the ball (0.52 per attack phase); c) few inside passes are done or allowed (0.17 per attack phase); d) low opposition is the most frequent degree of shot oppo- sition (61.4% of shots); and e) defensive rebounds were made in more than 60% of opportunities.
... Within the study of performance indicators in basketball, most papers analyze aspects related to the offensive phase while few studies analize defense. In the studies that assess defensive actions, the most studied aspect has been the influence of the defensive rebound on the game result, and significant differences are found in favor of the winning teams in relation to the amount of defensive rebounds made (García et al ., 2007). To a lesser extent, information has been found that analyzes the different types of defensive systems(man-to-man, zone, mixed, and others), and most of the results find man-on-man defense is what is most often used (Farinha & Tavares, 2007). ...
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this piece of work was to know the ages of the players with the highest performance, through the participation time and the performance indicators of basketball players in Olympic Games. The final objective is to provide more significant values which allow to guide training processes to trainers and club's youth coordinators. Results showed the following: a) in guard position, players with more than 29 years old are the ones who have better statistical in most of the indicators, either for men or women; b) in forward position, the age range varies between 27-29 in men and between 26-29 in women; c) the age range in centers diversify between 25-28 in most indicators in men, while in women it is above 28 years old.
... Within the study of performance indicators in basketball, most papers analyze aspects related to the offensive phase while few studies analize defense. In the studies that assess defensive actions, the most studied aspect has been the influence of the defensive rebound on the game result, and significant differences are found in favor of the winning teams in relation to the amount of defensive rebounds made (García et al ., 2007). To a lesser extent, information has been found that analyzes the different types of defensive systems(man-to-man, zone, mixed, and others), and most of the results find man-on-man defense is what is most often used (Farinha & Tavares, 2007). ...
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of the present study was to analyze the different defensive performance indicators in basketball, analyzing the difference in relation to success (efficacious or non-efficacious defenses) and the game result (win or loss). All halfcourt offenses (n=1045) from the quarterfinal, semifinal, consolation game, and final of the 2008 Olympics Games were analyzed. In each defense phase, the following variables were analyzed with regard to the team on defense: (1) Type of defense used, (2) Pressure in offense transition, (3) Defensive switches, (4) Helping on defense, (5) Inside passes, (6) Degree of opposition when shooting, (7) Points allowed, (8) Final result of the game, and (9) Defensive efficacy. The most significant results show that : a) the type of defense that was most used was quarter-court man-on-man (man-on-man at 6.25m), but the one that was most efficacious was the half-court zone defense; b) transition pressure was used in 23.83% of the game phases; c) defensive switches were done in 7.85% of the game phases; d) helping on defense was used in 60% of the game phases; e) inside passes were taken in 30.9% of the game phases; f) 38.9% of the shots were done with high opposition; and g) points were scored in 42.28% of the game phases, such that winning teams allowed the opponent to score in 38.81% of the game phases, and losing teams in 45.77%.
... This data is similar to the one obtained in the Spanish amateur league, where free throws occur 16.5% in the first quarter, 22.0% in the second, 25.1% in the third, and 35.8% in the fourth (Ibáñez et al., 2007). Significant differences have also been reported in favor of winning teams in terms of total defensive rebounds captured (De Rose, 2004; Forde, 2002; García, Parejo, De la Cruz, Domínguez, & Saveedra, 2007; Ibáñez, Sampaio, Sáenz-López, Giménez & Janeira, 2003; Karipidis, Fotinakis, Taxildaris & Fatouros, 2001; Montaner & Montaner, 2004, Sanz & Gutiérrez, 2004). Defensive rebounds represent a team´s ability to retrieve the ball after the opponent has failed to shoot, allowing greater opportunity to attempt field goals, increase the score and obviously hope to win the game (Ibáñez et al., 2008). ...
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this study was to analyze and compare the technical performance profile of the four-time Costa Rican Senior Basketball League championship team. A total of 142 games was recorded throughout the 2007, 2008 and 2009 seasons. Performance indicators selected were: two and three-point shots (converted, missed, effectiveness rates), free throws (converted, missed, effectiveness rates), points, offensive and defensive rebounds, fouls, turnovers, assists and ball steals. The information was described based on absolute and relative frequency values. Data was compared by season and by playing period based on the following non-parametric techniques: U-test, Friedman test and Chi-square. In all cases, SPSS version 15.0 was used with a significance level of p ¿ 0.05. Results showed a better profile of technical performance in the 2008 season, characterized by better percentages of two-point shots, free throws, fewer turnovers and more ball steals and assists. In relation to the playing period, the team showed a better technical performance profile during the second half of the matches. In general, the effectiveness rate of two-point shots and free throws was above 60% in both playing periods, while the three-point shot percentage ranged between 26.4% and 29.2%. In conclusion, the team showed a similar technical performance profile to that reported in the literature, as well as a clear evidence of the importance of recording and following up on technical performance indicators in basketball.
Article
Full-text available
This study is observing the changes in the performance of male hammer throwers from 1980 to 2011. In order to explore these al terations, the performance of certain throwers (placing 1st, 5th, and 10th ) in the world ranking list and the average result of the top ten were analyse d. The factors directly influencing changes in the performance of hammer throwers were also investigated. In the 1980s the increase in the performance of h ammer throwers was followed by a sharp decline. This is true for the athletes occupying different positions in the world ranking list, and for the average of the top ten throwers as well. According to our investigations and observations, performances increased in the second half of the 1990s, and after the turn of the 20th. century, a newer, well-documented increase can be observed, although thi s does not reach the peak level of 1988. It is a pity that the trends show a slight decrease in the second half of the decade, dropping to the averages expe rienced at the beginning of the 1980s. Without going into an in-depth analysis of the technical innovations of the 1980s, some important things have to be emph asised (in case of right handed thrower): the effort to increase the radiu s of the hammer’s trajectory with the „counterweight” technique; the proportion o f the two-leg support in turn was increased, with the help of a delayed „lifting off” and the early planting of the right leg; the thrower does not aim to precede the movement of the hammer and does not move ahead of the hammer, as could b e seen in previous techniques. Instead of, he drives the hammer with his whole body; the lifting work of the legs plays a determining role in the tw o-leg support phase during the acceleration of the hammer. We think, besides these technical innovations, another important factor related to improving resu lts are conditioning abilities; the development of the maximum and speed strength to a very high level in harmony with technical elements.
Article
The purpose of this study was to analyze and compare the technical performance profile of the four-time Costa Rican Senior Basketball League championship team. A total of 142 games was recorded throughout the 2007, 2008 and 2009 seasons. Performance indicators selected were: two and three-point shots (converted, missed, effectiveness rates), free throws (converted, missed, effectiveness rates), points, offensive and defensive rebounds, fouls, turnovers, assists and ball steals. The information was described based on absolute and relative frequency values. Data was compared by season and by playing period based on the following non-parametric techniques: U-test, Friedman test and Chi-square. In all cases, SPSS version 15.0 was used with a significance level of p ¿ 0.05. Results showed a better profile of technical performance in the 2008 season, characterized by better percentages of two-point shots, free throws, fewer turnovers and more ball steals and assists. In relation to the playing period, the team showed a better technical performance profile during the second half of the matches. In general, the effectiveness rate of two-point shots and free throws was above 60% in both playing periods, while the three-point shot percentage ranged between 26.4% and 29.2%. In conclusion, the team showed a similar technical performance profile to that reported in the literature, as well as a clear evidence of the importance of recording and following up on technical performance indicators in basketball.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of the present study was to identify the game-related statistics that allow discriminating between winning and losing teams in women's basketball. The sample comprised all 178 regular season games from the 2004/2005 Spanish Women's League and the game-related statistics included: 2 and 3-point field-goal and free-throw percentages, offensive and defensive rebounding percentage, blocks, assists, fouls, turnovers and steals. Results showed that in all games, the game-related statistics that discriminated between both groups were the 2 and 3-point field-goals percentages, steals and assists. In balanced games (final score differences equal or below 12 points), the discriminant game-related statistics were the 3-point field-goal percentages, assists and fouls. In unbalanced games (final score differences above 12 points) the discriminant game-related statistics were the 2 and 3 points field-goals percentages, assists and steals. The 3-point field-goal percentages and the assists were the only game-related statistics common to all three analyses.
Article
Full-text available
SUMMARY The aim of this study was to find out which variables, among those of conventional statistical systems provided by official basketball organisations, were the most discriminant between winning and losing teams in basketball matches during the 6th Men’s Junior World Championship (Portugal, 1999). The most successful teams in this championship were those who had less ball possessions per match and achieved greater efficiency, that is more points per ball possessions in relation to the average values of all the teams in the championship. As long as the final outcome differences increased, more statistical indicators distinguished the winning teams from the losers. The matches analysed have been divided into three different groups. In very close games, the differences statistically significant in the results of the analysed variables lay in defensive rebounds, successful two-point shots and successful free throws. In close games, these differences lay in assists, defensive rebounds, successful two-point shots, unsuccessful three–point shots and successful free throws. In blowout games, the winning teams were differentiated from the losers by the fouls committed, defensive rebounds, offensive rebounds, blocks, successful two-point shots and unsuccessful three–point shots. The results of further statistical analysis (Structural Canonical Coefficients) revealed that in very close games only three game statistics could predict and discriminate between winning and losing teams. These were defensive rebounds, successful two-point shots and successful free throws. The rest of variables do not allow us to predict the differences between winning and losing teams.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of the present paper is to investigate the discriminatory power of game statistics between winning and losing teams in the Portuguese Professional Basketball League. Methodological issues concerning game rhythm contamination and data organization according to game type (regular season or play-off), game final outcome (win or loss), game location (home or away) and game final score differences are discussed. Archival data were obtained for the 1997-1998 and the 1998- 1999 Portuguese Professional Basketball League seasons for (a) all 353 regular season home and away games and (b) all 56 play-off home and away games. Cluster analysis was conducted to establish, according to game final score differences, three different groups for the subsequent analysis (close games, with final score differences between 1 and 8 points; balanced games, with final score differences between 8 and 18 points and unbalanced games, with final score differences above 18 points). Afterwards, discriminant analysis was used to identify the game statistics that maximize mean differences between winning and losing teams according to previously defined factors (type, location, cluster groups). Obtained results allowed us to understand that in balanced and unbalanced games, losing teams performed poorly in all game statistics. In contrast, results from close games allowed us to identify different team performance profiles according to game type and location. Globally, regular season profile was best discriminated by successful free-throws, whereas play-offs profile was best discriminated by offensive rebounding. On the other hand, home wins were best discriminated by committed fouls whereas successful free-throws discriminated away wins. Coaches and players should be aware of these different profiles in order to increase specificity at the time of game planning and control.
Article
Transforming theoretical insight into applicable information that can be utilized in practice is a major goal in sports science. The purpose of this study was to analyse those technical and tactical elements of basketball, which distinguish the winning qualities in modern European basketball. A total of 53 basketball games from the European Basketball Championships in France (1999) and Spain (1997), from the Olympic Games Basketball Tournament in Atlanta (1996) as well as from the World Championship of basketball in Greece (1998), was analysed in this study. Evaluation was made through observation of 53 videotaped basketball games which took place in the aforementioned tournaments. Results indicated that defensive rebounds, successful two and three points shooting and unsuccessful three points shooting were the top four indicators of successful performance.
Basketball on paper: rules and tools for performance analysis
  • D Oliver
oliveR, d. (2004) Basketball on paper: rules and tools for performance analysis. Dulles, VA: Brassey's.