System of the Performance Evaluation Criteria Weighted Per Positions in the Basketball Game

Coll. Antropol. 24 (2000) 1: 217–234 UDC 572.5:796.323 Original scientific paper System of the Performance Evaluation Criteria Weighted per Positions in the Basketball Game S. Trnini}1 and D. Dizdar2 1 Basketball Club »Cibona«, Zagreb, Croatia 2 Faculty of Physical Education, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia ABSTRACT Based upon the expertise performed by ten basketball professionals relative importance coefficients with regard to positions in the game were determined for nineteen performance evaluation criteria. High degree of interobservers agreement was obtained concerning all positions (from 0.91 to 0.98). In concordance with the obtained results the particular play positions were explicitly described, as well as similarities and differences between them were determined from the aspect of the single criteria importance. The following criteria had an above average importance for the: Position 1 – level of defensive pressure, transition defense efficiency, the ball control, passing skills, dribble penetration, outside shots, and transition offence efficiency; Position 2 – level of defensive pressure, transition defense efficiency, outside shots, dribble penetration, offence without the ball, and transition offence efficiency; Position 3 – transition defense efficiency, outside shots, dribble penetration, offense without the ball, free throws, and transition offence efficiency; Position 4 – defensive and offensive rebounding efficiency, inside shots, dribble penetration, efficiency of screening, and free throws; Position 5 – defensive and offensive rebounding efficiency, inside shots, dribble penetration, efficiency of screening, drawing fouls and three-point plays, and free throws. The research results could be usefully applied by the basketball practitioners to selecting and following-up players, the teching-learning process directing and improving, the training process programming and the transformational effects controlling. Introduction ball, that is efficiency estimation of manifested motor behaviour of individual pla- The set of criteria for the actual qual- yers in a match, should inevitably enable ity or performance evaluation in basket- assessment of the situation-related or Received for publication December 20, 1999. 217 S. Trnini} and D. Dizdar: Performance Evaluation Criteria, Coll. Antropol. 24 (2000) 1: 217–234 game efficiency of a single player in rela- the game during the process of creating a tionship to the positions in the game, re- team. gions of the court, and phases of the For the evaluation of the basketball game. That is regarded decisive from the players quality of performance (players standpoint of the high level competitive authentic, actual value estimation and basketball praxis, that is under the im- characterization of his/her play) to be perative to win in a pursuit of significant profound and balanced, authors estab- sport achievements or in a production of lished a set of nineteen criteria that allow sports results1,2. Namely, set of perfor- adequate and maximally close assess- mance evaluation criteria, established ment in regard to their competitive effi- and devised with regard to the above- ciency on defense (seven criteria) and of- mentioned aspects, is the prerequisite for fense (twelve criteria), applicable to all the rational and organized selection of positions in the game5. However, despite players because it provides insight into the fact that the majority of experts in the actual, authentic successfulness of modern basketball do not advocate for each player in the stressful, hence perfor- the traditional classification of positions mance hindering environment of a com- (from 1 to 5), except for the purposes of petition2–5. tactical alignment of players on the court Contemporary trends to establishing within a set, game flow or phases of the comprehensive, integrative performance game and concepts of the game or general critearia for the individual and team as- strategy2,9, the undeniable existence of pects of an individual player's efficiency differences between players who primar- evaluation in sports games are based ily play at a particular position should be upon the growing agreement among sport taken into consideration7,10. These differ- science and sport pedagogy researches ences could be recognized as apparent dif- and practitioners (i.e. teachers and coa- ferences in anthropological characteris- ches) that performance in team sports, tics of players at different positions, hen- beyond the usual fitness components, re- ce different roles, assignments and tasks sults from the interaction of various fac- assigned to an individual player that are ets of strategic and tactical efficiency as eventually manifested as players' beha- well as specific perceptual and motor vour in a match that can be observed and skills 1,3,5–7. That need for the authentic- measured as various performance or situ- ity of the performance assessment in the ation-related efficiency indicators that context of matches, that is in the »natu- contribute variably to a team success. ral« competitive surrounding of sport, is Therefore authors consider determina- equally apparent in education and in tion of a particular criterion relative im- competitive sports in both the teaching- portance coefficient or weight per a par- learning or training process and in the ticular position in the game indispen- sports results »production«, that is win- sable2,5,7,9–12. Namely, weighted criteria ning. Top quality professional or, as they represent an optimal means for evaluat- are usually refered to, »great« basketball ing actual, authentic competitive quali- clubs have at their disposal so called cor- ties of players on both defense and of- porative knowledge 8, and managers have fense. They facilitate assessment of per- information on any high quality, either a formance or situation-related efficiency of mature or prospective basketball player. a player as well as his/her self-evaluation These informations are utilized for the during the training process and under decision making when selecting players the match stressful competitive condi- for the particular positions and roles in tions, which are target oriented to the 218 S. Trnini} and D. Dizdar: Performance Evaluation Criteria, Coll. Antropol. 24 (2000) 1: 217–234 analysis of the strong and weak points in or assess quality of players, in many pre- the individual and team aspect of play. vious research studies the subjective es- Results of such an anylysis allow deter- timation of the performance quality has mination and planning of goals and sub- been executed by independent basketball stages in the process of improving (teach- experts. On the basis of a suggested set of ing-learning and perfecting) both the criteria they have usually estimated the individual and team play of an individ- effectiveness of a basketball player on a ual. Such an integrative approach to the certain measurement scale (most fre- expert evaluation process or monitoring quently utilizing grades from 1 to 5). provides information on a player's game Elbel and Allen3 attempted, back in stability or consistency of performance in 1941, to better evaluate individual and the long term. team performance on the basis of regis- Assessment of player's quality accord- tering play events (besides those evident ing to his/her actual, situation-related ef- in the official statistics of the game) that ficiency at a given points in time is one of took place during the game (factors of the most fundamental and responsible success or failure) and had positive or aspects of coaching because adequate se- negative influence on the eventual match lection of players is the starting point in score. Each factor/ item was subjectively creating a »winning« team for the sports weighted by grades that commensurated achievements production2. Recognition with its contribution to the winning suc- and understanding of the criteria relative cess. Unfortunately, data concerning the importance (coefficients or weights) for a opposing teams play were not recorded particular position provide a higher level neither was the data acquisition proce- of reliability and predictability of the se- dure consistently applied through all the lection process, that is the system of three observed seasons. Authors conclu- weighted criteria per positions decreases ded that most of these events or factors the possibilities for mistakes. occured frequently in the game, hence there was no doubt that they may actu- ally spell the difference between victory Previous research and defeat. Therefore, the proposed mo- One of the fundamental problems in del might be employed in the individual the domain of the kinesiology of sport (i.e. and team performance evaluation. For te applied kinesiology) is the crucial issue of present research it is important to point the impracticability to measure objecti- out that authors clearly discerned both vely overall performance efficiency of in- the individual and team (a player's con- dividual players (entities) and a team in a tribution to the team-mate's situation- game (the criterion variable1,3–6,11,12. The related efficiency) aspect of one's play, reason is undoubtedly a complex, mul- thus making the basketball game analy- tifactorial nature of the game itself, sis more profound and precise. where reactions of players (decision mak- De`man has devised13–16 an expert ing and execution of skills) are strongly system model that comprises the most influenced by constantly changing config-

Load more