This study aimed to quantify the physical load of defensive pick-and-roll (PnR) actions according to court location (middle or side), defensive option employed (switch, drop/ice, or trap), and effectiveness (successful or unsuccessful) during official basketball games. Twenty-four male basketball players (age: 20.5 ± 1.1 years; stature: 191.5 ± 8.7 cm; body mass: 86.5 ± 11.3 kg; playing experience: 8.5 ± 2.4 years) from two teams competing in the Lithuanian third division were recruited, with data collected across six official games. Participants were monitored using a combination of video-based time–motion analysis (TMA) and inertial measurement units (IMUs), allowing the calculation of duration, PlayerLoad (PL), and PL·min−1 for each of the 364 defensive PnR actions identified. No significant differences were found based on court location or defensive option employed (p > 0.05). By contrast, unsuccessful plays resulted in significantly higher physical loads than successful ones (duration: p < 0.001, ES = 0.46; PL: p < 0.001, ES = 0.41; PL·min−1: p = 0.047, ES = 0.24). Overall, these findings highlight a consistent physical load based on court location and defensive option adopted and an increased physical load when the defensive effort failed. Therefore, basketball coaches are suggested to consider the physical load of different defensive PnR scenarios when planning training drills, defining performance profiles of defensive strategies, and managing team rotations during games.
A Dual-Tech Approach to Measuring Defensive Physical Demands in Basketball Pick-And-Rolls During Official Games: Inertial Sensors and Video Analysis
Sansone P;
2025-01-01
Abstract
This study aimed to quantify the physical load of defensive pick-and-roll (PnR) actions according to court location (middle or side), defensive option employed (switch, drop/ice, or trap), and effectiveness (successful or unsuccessful) during official basketball games. Twenty-four male basketball players (age: 20.5 ± 1.1 years; stature: 191.5 ± 8.7 cm; body mass: 86.5 ± 11.3 kg; playing experience: 8.5 ± 2.4 years) from two teams competing in the Lithuanian third division were recruited, with data collected across six official games. Participants were monitored using a combination of video-based time–motion analysis (TMA) and inertial measurement units (IMUs), allowing the calculation of duration, PlayerLoad (PL), and PL·min−1 for each of the 364 defensive PnR actions identified. No significant differences were found based on court location or defensive option employed (p > 0.05). By contrast, unsuccessful plays resulted in significantly higher physical loads than successful ones (duration: p < 0.001, ES = 0.46; PL: p < 0.001, ES = 0.41; PL·min−1: p = 0.047, ES = 0.24). Overall, these findings highlight a consistent physical load based on court location and defensive option adopted and an increased physical load when the defensive effort failed. Therefore, basketball coaches are suggested to consider the physical load of different defensive PnR scenarios when planning training drills, defining performance profiles of defensive strategies, and managing team rotations during games.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
