TECHNICAL AND TACTICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF GREEK AND ITALIAN BASKETBALL TEAMS

Lecturer EVANGELOS TSAMOURTZIS,

Democritus University of Thrace Department of Sports Science, Greece

Dr. SAVVAS ZAGGELIDIS, Dr. GEORGIOS ZAGGELIDIS

Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki Department of Sports Science, Greece

Key words: basketball, video-analysis, PC, Greek school, Italian school

Introduction

Analysis of a basketball game is a rather complex process and the results can give very useful information about the game and the performance of the players. Twenty years ago, the elements related with the game were insufficient. There were only references about half-time score, the final score, the number of points each player had scored and if he was expelled from the game with five fouls.¹ Nowadays everybody knows that there is a need for creative statistics which should contain proportions and percentages and also the opportunities that each player has to succeed in the above. The secret which transforms numbers to creative statistics, is their proper use and their classification to a proper category.²

The use of PC in the analysis of the games, has helped very much so that we can have more reliable and complete information.

PC programmes in combination with video are rather widespread, because they supply us with important results, as well as the possibility of analyzing any game, conclusions about the performance of the team and the players, and finally conclusions related to the observation of the opposition.³

Nowadays, all coaches realize the importance of being informed before, during and after the game. Almost every coach uses a statistical method. Even the most capable of coaches can't remember and classify oral information after a game, something which can be done easily if there is a good method of keeping statistics of the games.⁸

Coaches should know the opportunities and the possibilities that exist for a successful fast break or an organized attack, effectiveness of three-point shots from the left, right or any other corner of the court, the low-post game, the opportunities and the percentages of successful shots that result after an offensive or defensive rebound, etc. The coach who is aware of these percentages has the advantage to decrease the probability of errors for his team and thus be in a better position than the opposition.⁴

It is very important when analyzing of a game, to consider every detail of it, either positive (rebound, stealing the ball, percentage of successful two or three-point shots, free shots assists, cuts) or negative (turnovers, missed shots, errors, missed free shots)".²

According to Beard and his co-operators⁵ the importance of defensive rebounds is very big if we consider that most points are scored after a successful defensive rebound. Considering that defensive rebounds are an indicator of the defensive effectiveness of the players, it is obvious that the teams which are not able to control them have few possibilities to win the game. Each time that the team fails to win a defensive rebound, also fails to create its own attack and offers another opportunity to the opposition for a shot.⁶ After an offensive rebound the ball possession and the possibility of a fast break gives the opposition an advantage for a new attack and a high score.⁷

The choice of the right shot at the right moment is one of the rules in basketball training. The aim of all the offensive tactics of a team is to shoot the ball to the opposite basket. According to Zeravitsa and Pavlovits,⁸ a shot is always attempted when there is a perspective for scoring and when the team-mate is in the right position. There is an unwritten rule which should be respected: it is easier for a player to score when he is under the basket. This effort to get a better position under the basket and shoot from there is the best perception for basketball. Another rule for many coaches is that the player should not shoot if he is uncertain of the position of his team-mates (one or two), something which gives the team more opportunities to win the offensive rebound.

According to Nelson,⁹ the aim of every team should always be a good shot. A "Good shot" in the sense that it has been performed under the best possible circumstances and by the right player. In order to achieve high accuracy percentages we should emphasize on four points: 1) we should try to pass the ball near the basket before attempting a shot from a distance, 2) we should force the opponents to commit a foul. This gives an advantage to our team as the opponent defence loses its dynamism and offensiveness, 3) by trying to win a foul near the basket we direct our team to move towards the basket and to create pathways towards it, and 4) the movement towards the basket, also creates opportunities for shots with higher percentage of success, by passing towards the periphery to our free team-mate, as most of the defenders are forced to move, in order to help during an opponents entry.

Zeravitsa and Pavlovits⁸ suggested that a team should not attempt a shot from a distance unless there aren't any choices left to pass the ball under the basket. If this is not possible because of pressing defence, then the players should decide to shoot from middle or even from a longer distance. Nevertheless in recent years the players have become more aware of the importance of long distance shooting and subsequently the percentage of successful shots from 4 to 7 meters has increased.

According to Mikes¹⁰ three-point shots lead to a higher score, help the team which is behind to get back into the game and raise the players' spirit. Nevertheless according to Trupin and Couzens,⁷ it is better for a team to base its game on shots inside the box than on three-point shots, because shots from a distance are a lot riskier and may easily lead the team to a disadvantageous position.

The aim of every team, as we all know, is to put the ball into the basket. As final passes lead directly to two-point shots, from the statistical point of view their value is great. Actually not only the shots but the final passes also are the ones which are related more closely with the score than any other statistical factor.⁷

One of the most fascinating and valuable elements in basketball which is directly related with the shot is the fast break. According to Somers¹¹ fast breaks create the best possible conditions for a quick and easy shot. They also lead to a quick attack before the opposite team has the chance to get organized effectively. The skills which the players of a team should have for a fast break are: endurance, speed, a combination of both endurance and speed, the ability for defensive rebounds and block outs, good and skilful handling of the ball, precision in passing the ball, very good perception of the court in order each time to know where their team-mates are, plus the ability to make quick decisions.⁵ Van Wieran¹² suggested that a team which can effectively perform fast breaks, is equipped with a powerful weapon. With the use of fast breaks, easy and quick points are scored and because of this the enthusiasm of the team gets higher. On the contrary the enthusiasm of the opponents is decreased. Fast breaks also lead to an increase of the score percentages and create suitable circumstances for more free shots. Every team scores an average of 15 to 20 points in each game from free shots. This number represents about 20% to 30% of the total score of the game or, to put it in another way, 1/3 of the total of points scored in a game¹³. So it is obvious that practicing in the free shots is very important. Free shots seem to be the easiest part of the game. The players are all standing still and nobody is going to block the shot. Nevertheless many players although they achieve a great percentage of successful shots during training, they cannot perform the same as well under the pressure of the game. This is proved by the percentages of successful shots which usually range between 50-60%.¹⁴ Every basketball coach should plan a group of exercises of free shots for every phase of the game, which are going to be performed in the same way as in the game.¹⁵

In order to achieve free shots, a foul must be preceded. Fouls are a very important category in basketball. Their proper use can even change the score. Their classification is simple. There are fouls which are performed before an attempt for a shot in which the ball is played from outside, when the seven team fouls are not completed, or they lead to free shots after their fulfilment. There are also fouls which are performed during an attempt for a shot which lead to the line of free shots, or a successful shot with a foul which gives us the possibility for an extra free shot. We also have the offensive foul, the unsporting, and the technical penalty. It is rather difficult to characterise them as positive or negative and that's why we can say that they are very important. Behind all the gained fouls another game is hidden, the "game of fouls", which, unfortunately is very hard to be statistically estimated.

The game with the most statistical elements is basketball. If a coach wants to lead his team properly, he should know the percentages. Then he will have the possibility to decrease the probability of a mistake for his team and to be in a more advantageous position than his opponents. This is a kind of science, a game of percentages, and the aim of each coach is to find a way for his team to score at least one point more than the opponent team. Without any specific statistical elements the coach is "doomed" to rely on personal impressions, intuition or his personal beliefs.¹⁶

From all the above mentioned, it is obvious that in all the studies that have been done up till now, there is always an analysis of every element of a game of basketball. The statistical information which is recorded for games between Greek and Italian teams, is based only on technical elements which are referred in the evaluation system of each player (Tendex) which is calculated with the following mathematical type: points + rebounds + assist + blocks + stealing - failed shots - failed free throws - errors / participation minutes. Studies with reference to comparisons between Greek and Italian basketball teams weren't found in the international bibliography. In this study it is attempted to analyse the technical and tactical characteristics in whole.

To be more specific, the aim of this study was the analysis of the offensive and defensive behaviour of Greek and Italian basketball teams in national and association level, through the method of video analysis with the help of PC, in order to identify similarities and differences in their technical and tactical characteristics and to form the particular tendencies of the Greek and Italian school of basketball.

Table 1

Sample

Methodology:   Sample

1. GREECE - ITALY  67-61 2. GREECE - ITALY    64-56

3. OLYMPIAKOS - BUCKLER 89-64 4. PAOK - SKAVOLINI    84-79

5. PAO - BUCKLER  99-56 6. SKAVOLINI - PAOK    82-70

7. BUCKLER - PAOK  85-68 8. TRIESTE - PANIONIOS   72-71

9. BUCKLER - PAO  69-72 10. PAO - BENETTON    70-67

11. BENETTON - PANATHINAIKOS 83-69 12. BENETTON – OLYMPIAKOS  83-77

13. ARIS - BENETTON  77-73 14. PAOK - BENETTON    85-78

12. VERONA - IRAKLIS  96-62 16. STEFANEL – OLYMPIAKOS  73-71

Sample: The sample was comprised of 16 games. Two of them referred, to the National men's team (European League 1995, World League 1998, and 14 Greek teams in association level in the FIBA championships, during the athletic period 1994-1997).

 Equipment: This study is based on a programme for PC VICAS (Video Computer Analyse-System), which analyses and evaluates actions and movements based on a video and PC, video Mitsubishi M-1000, PC DEL 486 in 66 MH.

 Procedure: In order for this study to be carried out, a video analysis took place and there was a determination of the parameters in the PC (definition), encoding and their analysis. The comparisons were related to: 1) the way of starting the attack, 2) attacking tactics, 3) effectiveness of the attack, 4) two-point shots with "face" and "back" to the basket, 5) free throws, 6) assists and blocks, 7) defending tactics and 8) duration of the attack.

 Data analysis: For the statistical analysis of the data, in the statistical pack SPAD-N, it was used the correspondence analysis and in the statistical pack SPSS, the Crostabs order and check of the independence of prices with the division x² (chi-square).

Results

In the analysis of the way of beginning the attack (defensive and offensive rebound, stealing, a successful shot and the ball from outside), it was found that statistically, there is a big difference in the defensive rebounds [x²(3,84)=5,34] in favour of the Greek teams and against the Greek teams in stealing [ x²(3,84)=8,29] when they play against Italian teams. Defensive rebounds and ball stealing, are two elements with great statistical value because they lead to ball possession, they are indicators of the defensive effectiveness of the players and consequently of the whole team, and they lead directly to a fast break.¹⁷ According to the bibliography¹⁷ 75% of the fast breaks, start from a defensive rebound.

Figure 1. The way of beginning the attack of Greek and Italian teams

Figure 2. Attack tactics of Greek and Italian teams

In figure 2 we notice that statistically there isn't a significant difference between Greek and Italian teams in the attack tactics (1^st fast break x²_(3,84)=0,98, 2^nd fast break x²_(3,84)=0,56, organised attack x²_(3,84)=0,54).

A shot is the most pleasant and valuable part of basketball. The final purpose of all the offensive actions of a team is to shoot the ball to the opponent basket.¹⁸ The foul is a very important part in basketball. Behind gained fouls very often a whole game is hidden. Their proper use may even change the score.²

In table II we can see that Greek teams shoot with statistically important difference, less unsuccessful three-point shots [x²_(3,84)=7,64], win more fouls [x²_(3,84)=7,72] and they make more errors [x²_(3,84)=4,34] than the Italian teams.

Table 2 

Attack effectiveness of Greek and Italian teams

%	2+	2-	3+	3-	Fouls	Turnovers	Total
Greek vs Italian	25,6	20,3	5,4	9,7	24,6	14,4	100
Italian vs Greek	25,3	22,2	7,1	13,3	20,1	12,0	100

Figure 3 shows that the Greek teams shoot with statistically great difference, more two-point shots with "back" than the Italian [x²_(3,84)=5,76]. In figure 4 we can see that the Greek teams shoot with statistically significant difference more free shots than the Italian [x²_(3,84)=17,8] with lower percentages of success.

Figure 3. Two-point shots with "face" and "back" of Greek and Italian teams

Figure 4. Percentages of successful free shoots of Greek and Italian teams

The assist pass is closely associated with the control of the ball and the passing. The player who usually makes the final passes is the one who carries the ball in the court, dribbles against pressure, is more exposed to the stealing of the ball, creates chances for scoring and controls the rhythm of the team. Nevertheless the most important advantage of the assist, is that it leads directly to a two point shot.²

In figure 5 we notice that the Greek team pass with statistically significant difference more assist passes [x²_(3,84)=5,05] than the Italian team.

Figure 5. Assist and block of Greek and Italian teams

As far as defence tactics are concerned, based on the elements of table III, we can notice that Greek teams play with statistically important difference less man to man defences in the 2/4 of the court [x²_(3,84)=8,84] and more zone defences in the 1/4 [x²_(3,84)=4,64] than the Italian teams.

Table 3

 Defenses of Greek and Italian teams

%	1/4 court (3-point shoot)		2/4 court		3/4 court		4/4 court		Distribution of defense kinds
	Greek	Italians	Greek	Italians	Greek	Italians	Greek	Italians	Greek	Italians
Man to man defense	98,4	97,3	0,3	1,6	0,4	0,2	0,8	0,9	76,5	77,9
Man to man defense double-team
Zone defense	100	100							4,7	2,9
Zone-double-team	100	100							0,1	0,5
Defensive transition	88,0	85,0	3,4	3,3	3,9	3,8	4,7	7,9	18,7	18,8
Distribution defense court	96,5	95,1	0,9	1,9	1,0	0,9	1,5	2,2	100	100

Figure 6 shows that there are no statistically significant differences in the duration of the offence between Greek and Italian teams (0-5 sec x²=1,60 < x²_.95,1=3,84, 5-10 sec x²=1,85 < x²_.95,1 =3,84, 10-15 sec x²=3,32 < x²_.95,1=3,84, 15-20 sec x²=2,91 < x²_.95,1=3,84, 20-25 sec x²=0,01 < x²_.95,1=3,84, 25-30 sec x²=1,77 < x²_.95,1=3,84).

Figure 6. Duration of the offense of Greek and Italian teams

The grouping of the Greek School lines, resulted in the formation of 5 classes. The first class (271 lines - 21% of the phases' total) is called "organized attack with two-point shots near the basket". The second class (243 lines - 18,8% of the phases' total) is called "organized attack with two-point shots from medium distance". The third class (386 lines - 29,95 of the phases' total) is called "organized attack with fouls and faults". The fourth class (175 lines - 13,6% of the phases total) is called "three-point shots attack". The fifth class (216 lines - 16,7% of the phases total) is called "fast break with two-point shots".

The grouping of the lines of the Italian School resulted in the formation of five classes. The first class (217 lines - 17,3% of the phases' total) is characterised as "organized attack with two-point shots near the basket. The second class (304 lines - 24,3% of the phases' total) is characterised as "organized attack with two-point shots from a medium distance. The third class (283 lines - 22,6% of the phases' total) is characterised as "organized attack with fouls and faults". The fourth class (228 lines - 18,2% of the phases' total) is characterised as "attack with three-point shots". The fifth class (221 lines - 17,6% of the phases' total) is characterised as "fast break with two or three point shots, fouls and faults".

We realize that the five classes of the Greek School don't differ significantly in their structure from the ones of the Italian school, but they differ in percentages.

In the Greek School the percentage of classes which are characterised as "organized attack with two-point shots near the basket area" and "organized attack with fouls and faults", is higher. In the Italian School the percentage is higher in the classes which are characterised as "organized attack with two-point shots from a medium distance" and "attack with three-point shots".

Table 4

Grouping of the technical characteristics of the Greek and Italian teams

GREEK SCHOOL		ITALIAN SCHOOL
Class	Variable	Class	Variable
1st class   lines 271   percentage 21%	way of starting: offensive rebound way of starting: basket offence tactics: organized attack attack analysis: successful 2-point shot attack analysis: unsuccessful 2-point shot distance: close position: low post kind of shot: jump shot kind of shot: lay up kind of shot: hook shot after: assist after: post up defence tactics: person court: 1/4 duration: 0-5 sec duration: 15-20 sec duration: 25-30 sec	1st class   lines 217   percentage 17,3%	way of starting: offensive rebound way of starting: organized attack attack analysis: successful 2-point shot attack analysis: unsuccessful 2-point shot distance: close position: low post kind of shot: lay-up after: assist after: post up           duration: 0-5 sec
2nd class   lines 243   percentage 18,8%	way of starting: basket way of starting: outside attack tactics: organized attack attack analysis: successful 2-point shot attack analysis: unsuccessful 2-point shot distance: middle position: middle post position: high post position: forward left position: forward right kind of shot: jump shot kind of shot: hook shot after: post up defence tactics: person court: 1/4 duration: 10-15 sec duration: 15-20 sec duration: 20-25 sec duration: 25-30 sec	2nd class   lines 304   percentage 24,3%	way of starting: basket way of starting: outside attack tactics: organized attack attack analysis: successful 2-point shot attack analysis: unsuccessful 2-point shot distance: middle position: middle post position: high post position: forward left position: forward right kind of shot: jump shot kind of shot: hook shot after: post up defence tactics: person court: 1/4 duration: 10-15 sec duration: 15-20 sec duration: 20-25 sec duration: 25-30 sec
3rd class   lines 386   percentage 29,9%	way of starting: basket way of starting: outside attack tactics: organized attack attack analysis: 7 team fouls - attack analysis: 7 team fouls + attack analysis: errors attack analysis: temporary out distance: middle defence tactics: person court: 1/4 duration: 10-15 sec duration: 15-20 sec duration: 20-25 sec	3rd class   lines 283   percentage 22,6%	way of starting: basket way of starting: outside attack tactics: organized attack attack analysis: 7 team fouls - attack analysis: 7 team fouls + attack analysis: errors distance: middle       duration: 15-20 sec duration: 25-30 sec
4th class   lines 175   percentage 13,6%	way of starting: basket way of starting: outside attack tactics: 2nd fast break attack tactics: organized attack attack analysis: successful 3-point shot attack analysis: unsuccessful 3-point shot distance: far position: forward left position: forward right position: guard kind of shot: jump shot defence tactics: person defence tactics: zone court: 1/4 duration: 10-15 sec duration: 25-30 sec 4th class   lines 228   percentage 18,2%		way of starting: basket way of starting: outside attack tactics: 2nd fast break attack tactics: organized attack attack analysis: successful 3-point shot attack analysis: unsuccessful 3-point shot distance: far position: forward left position: forward right position: guard kind of shot: jump shot     duration: 10-15 sec duration: 15-20 sec duration: 25-35 sec
5th class   lines 216   percentage 16,7%	way of starting: defence rebound way of starting: stealing attack tactics: 1st fast break attack tactics: 2nd fast break attack analysis: successful 2-point shot attack analysis: unsuccessful 2-point shot distance: close position: low post kind of shot: lay up after: assist defence tactics: defence transition court: 1/4 duration: 0-5 sec duration: 5-10 sec	5th class   lines 221   percentage 17,6%	way of starting: defence rebound way of starting: stealing attack tactics: 1st fast break attack tactics: 2nd fast break attack analysis: successful 2-point shot attack analysis: successful 3-point shot attack analysis: unsuccessful 3-point shot attack analysis: 7 team fouls attack analysis: errors distance: close distance: far position: low post position: guard kind of shot: jump shot kind of shot: lay up after: assist defence tactics: defence transition court: 1/4 duration: 0-5 sec duration: 5-10 sec

Conclusions

From the analysis of the variable total, which were defined in order to cover as deeply as possible every kind of attack, and based on their statistical importance,^1,2,7 we have come up with important evidence about the offensive and defensive attitude of the Greek and Italian teams.

There are no important differences between the Greek and the Italian school of Basketball with the exception for tendency that the Greek teams have to play closer to the basket area. The most significant technical and tactical characteristics of the Greek teams compared to the Italian are:

1. They win more defensive rebounds than the Italian.

2. They win less stealing of the ball than the Italian.

3. They shoot less unsuccessful three-point shots than the Italian.

4. They win more fouls than the Italian.

5. They make more errors than the Italian.

6. They shoot more two-point shots with "back" than the Italian.

7. They shoot more free-throw shots with lower percentages of success than the Italian.

8. They pass more assists than the Italian.

9. They play less "man to man" defences, in the 2/4 of the court and more "zone" at three-point shots, than the Italian.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was the analysis of the offensive and defensive behaviour of Greek and Italian basketball teams in national and association level as well, using the method of videoanalysis with the help of PC, in order to find out the similarities and differences in their technical characteristics and also to form the tendencies of the Greek and Italian school of basketball.

The sample used, were 16 games during the athletic period 1994-1998. For the analysis of the games the PC VICAS (Video Computer Analyse-System) programme has been used. The comparisons were related to: 1) the way of beginning the attack, 2) the attack tactics system, 3) the effectiveness of the attack, 4) the two point shots with "face" or "back" to the basket, 5) the free shots, 6) the assists and blocks, 7) the defence tactics system, and 8) the duration of the attack. The results showed that there are no significant differences in the tendencies of the game between the Greek and Italian school, except for a tendency that the Greek teams have to play closer to the basket.

References

1. 1. BELLOTTI, R.S. The new statistics. New Jersey: Revelations Night Work Publishing Co., 1988
2. 2. MANLEY, M. Players Position. New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, 1989
3. 3. MCCLAY, I.R., ROBINSON, J.R., ANDRIACCHI, T.P., FREDERICK, E.C., GROSS, T., MARTIN, P., VALIANTI, G., WILLIAMS, K.R. & CAVANAGH, P.R. A profile of ground reaction forces in professional basketball. In: Journal of Applied Biomechanics. USA, 1994, pg. 222-236
4. 4. MIKES, J. Computer Breakdown of Percentage Basketball. In: Scholastic Coach. 12, 14,1987
5. 5. BEARD, B., POPOWITZ, G., SAMSON, D. The fastbreak. Basic Basketball, the complete player. USA, 1985, pg. 76-78
6. 6. KEATING, J. 10 Drills on the defensive board. In: Scholastic Coach. 1989, pg. 18-19, 70-71
7. 7. TRUPIN, J. & COUZENS, G.S. The Stats That Matter. New York, Toronto, London, Sydney, Auckland: Bantam Books, 1989
8. 8. ZERAVICA & PAVLOVIC. Introductory Thoughts on shoots. Thessaloniki: Salto, 1990
9. 9. NELSON, N., 4 Keys to high-percentage shooting. In: Scholastic Coach. 1989, pg. 12, 14
10. 10. MIKES, J. Percentage Basketball: the percentage favor the team that can fast-break the opponents and prevent them from doing the same. 1988, pg. 82, 84
11. 11. SOMERS, T.R. Sideline fastbreak offense. In: Scholastic Coach. 1992, pg. 28-29
12. 12. VAN MIERAN, G. Hope's controlled break and transitional set offense. In: Scholastic Coach.1993, pg.16-19
13. 13. LIDOR, R. Five steps to better foul shooting. In: Scholastic Coach.1994, pg. 58-59
14. 14. HOWARD, R. Drills to improve foul shooting. Strategies. 1993, pg. 20-23
15. 15. KIMBLE, J. Free throw situation drill. In: Scholastic Coach.1994, pg.119, 124
16. 16. MIKES, J. A. Computer Breakdown of %-Age Basketball. In: Scholastic Coach.1987, pg. 94-95, 97-98
17. 17. KIOUMURTZOGLOU, E., TAKSILDARIS, K., TSITSKARIS, G. Fastbreak. Thessaloniki, SALTO, 1994
18. 18. VAMVAKOUDIS E, GIANNOUZAKOS M, DOMVROU M, MENDILIDIS N, TSIBIS I, TSITSKARIS F, HATZIATHANASIOU P. Fastbreak and Fastbreak Conditions. Thessaloniki: Publishing Service of Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki, 1985
19. 19. RIPOLL, H. Analysis of usual patterns of Volley-ball players in a problem solving task. In: International Journal of Sport Physiology. 1988, p. 9-25
20. 20. STARKES, J.L. & LINDLEY, S. Can we hasten expertise by video stimulations? In: Quest. 1994, p. 211-222, 247-262