Basketball shot types and shot success in different levels of competitive basketball

PLoS One. 2015 Jun 3;10(6):e0128885. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128885. eCollection 2015.

Abstract

The purpose of our research was to investigate the relative frequencies of different types of basketball shots (above head, hook shot, layup, dunk, tip-in), some details about their technical execution (one-legged, two-legged, drive, cut, …), and shot success in different levels of basketball competitions. We analysed video footage and categorized 5024 basketball shots from 40 basketball games and 5 different levels of competitive basketball (National Basketball Association (NBA), Euroleague, Slovenian 1st Division, and two Youth basketball competitions). Statistical analysis with hierarchical multinomial logistic regression models reveals that there are substantial differences between competitions. However, most differences decrease or disappear entirely after we adjust for differences in situations that arise in different competitions (shot location, player type, and attacks in transition). Differences after adjustment are mostly between the Senior and Youth competitions: more shots executed jumping or standing on one leg, more uncategorised shot types, and more dribbling or cutting to the basket in the Youth competitions, which can all be attributed to lesser technical and physical ability of developing basketball players. The two discernible differences within the Senior competitions are that, in the NBA, dunks are more frequent and hook shots are less frequent compared to European basketball, which can be attributed to better athleticism of NBA players. The effect situational variables have on shot types and shot success are found to be very similar for all competitions.

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Age Factors
  • Athletes*
  • Basketball / statistics & numerical data*
  • Biomechanical Phenomena
  • Competitive Behavior / physiology*
  • Humans
  • Logistic Models
  • Physical Endurance*

Grants and funding

The authors have no support or funding to report.