United States Sports Academy - "America's Sports University"

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the preferential individual offensive strategies of male Taiwanese collegiate students. A self-designed questionnaire was utilized to evaluate students' perception on offensive strategies. Subjects were asked to select top-5 preferential strategies from nine choices as they were put at specific spots based on the role of a position. Among the 185 completed surveys, the number of valid surveys was 163 that yielded a 78% return-rate. The statistical methods for analyses included descriptive statistics and Chi-square analyses. The alpha level was set at .05. Based on the results of Chi-square, there were significant differences existed among subjects' choices on offensive strategies (p<0.05). No significant differences (p<0.05) were found when subjects' choices were compared at different side of blocks. The descriptive analyses indicated that the number-one offensive choice at the both sides of low post area for center, power forward, and point guard were "pivoting", "screening", and "catching the ball", respectively. The favorite offensive strategies of small forward and shooting guard were "catching the ball" and "getting open" at the right block, and their choices were simply switched at the other block. At the top of the key, the number-one offensive choice for center, power forward, small forward, shooting guard and point guard were "setting screen", "pivoting", "getting open", "getting open", and "catching the ball", respectively. Apparently, subjects' top-three choices on offensive strategies had clearly demonstrated the common mentalities that were instructed by many basketball coaches. However, since "shooting" was not a top-3 choice at any spot for any role, coaches may need to encourage students to take more shots.

Introduction

Purpose of the Study
Basketball is one of the most popular sport activities among Taiwanese collegiate students. It is also the most popular sport among all of the PE curriculums at the collegiate level in Taiwan. Basketball involves several basic playing skills such as running, jumping, catching, passing, rebounding, shooting, dunking and various combinations of movements. Due to variances in size, fitness level, specific technique, and offensive strategies, players usually are assigned to different playing roles and positions. Generally their roles can be divided into the following five different positions: power forward, small forward, center, point guard, and shooting guard (Lee, 2000; and Huang & Wang, 2002). Based on players' specific roles on the court, each position usually would demonstrate a unique style of play at different spots of the court. For examples, forward players can be extremely active around the free-throw line extended area. They should be able to score both in the paint and perimeter. They are usually the best scorers of the team, and should involve in some rebounding and passing duties. This is why most of forwards need to possess great size, speed and leaping ability (Wu, 1998). Most of the centers work in an area less than 5m away from the basket (Wong, 1999b). They work at an area that is always under heavy traffic. Since they usually initiate the attack at the low-post area, they must possess skills to catch the ball firmly, seal off the defender, and use all kinds of fake moves to score (Wong, 1999b; Wang & Wang, 2002). Centers must have ability to score one-on-one and secure rebounds. Defensively, they usually provide the best help on penetrations (Wang, 1997b); therefore, the strength of the center may indicate the success of the team. Guards are usually the "core" of a basketball team. They are usually the leaders and the organizers of the team offense. They normally operate at the top of the key and try to create shooting opportunities for other teammates by making good pass and penetration. They should be a good long and mid-range shooter, and also score in penetrations (Huang & Wang, 2002). In order to fully maximize the playing ability of each specific position, coaches would also teach necessary techniques to elevate players' individual skills. Possessing strong individual offensive skills is an essential element to build the team offenses and success. The skills that players have acquired would naturally become preferential moves under circumstances.

Many of the previous researches on offenses had geared toward the analyses of a team's offensive patterns (Chao & Chao, 1995; Lu, 1996; Pan, 1997; Wong, 1998 and 1999a; and Hsu 2002). They provided less information on individual offensive skills and teaching tips for collegiate students to learn the individual skills. The authors of the article wish to examine how collegiate students perceive a specific situation and formulate their offensive strategies at certain locations. Hopefully, this study can provide useful concepts and norms to help students build up understanding of the game and acquire proper offensive techniques.

This study examines the individual offensive strategies of students by observing how they would initiate a movement in a designated situation without concerning the presence of defenders. Although in reality, the presence of defenders certainly would affect a player's determination on moves, this study would neglect this factor and directly record the preferential response of players at a particular location. Since there are always some certain preferential acts that a person may engage based on the human behavior, we can all assume that there must be some types of preferential offensive movements that players may like to make in certain situations. The purpose of this study would attempt to investigate those preferential individual offensive strategies of Taiwanese collegiate players. The research questions would focus on how a player initiate the decision to make a move at various spots based on players' perceptions of playing roles.

Methods

Subjects and Scope of the Study
Two hundred and seven male students of the Mingchuan University who have enrolled in the Spring Semester of the year 2001 were invited to participate in this study. They came from seven different basketball classes and were varied in class-levels. Researchers had obtained 185 returned questionnaires, and 22 copies were invalid. The number of valid copies was 163 that yielded 78% of return-rate. The average height and weight of subjects were 170.72 + 7.9 cm and 62.57 + 10.02 kg, respectively.

Research Tools
This study utilized a self-designed questionnaire to evaluate students' perception on offensive strategies. The contents of the survey included two parts. The first part contained demographic information such as height, weight, class-level, varsity experience, and playing position. The second part of the survey examined players' offensive strategies. Three spots were designated for the purpose of the study. They were both right and left low-post blocks, and top of the key. Each student had viewed and perceived the question based on the role of a specific position, such as center, point guard, or small forward, etc. Then he would select the top five preferential choices as the offensive strategies according to the location and the role that he had perceived. Nine offensive strategies that were available for chosen included:

1. dribbling,
2. pivoting,
3. catching the ball,
4. shooting,
5. cutting down,
6. dribble penetration,
7. getting open,
8. setting a screen, and
9. rebounding.

These strategies were common basketball skills that were adapted by players in different situations (Pan, 1997; Wang, 1998; Huang & Wang, 2002; and Wang & Wang, 2002).

Data Analyses
There were163 valid copies available for data analyses after eliminating 22 copies of invalid questionnaires. The data were analyzed by the SPSS for Window 10.0 program. The statistical methods for analyses include descriptive statistics and Chi square analyses. The alpha level was set at .05?

Results

General Information of Descriptive Analyses
The general information listed subjects' class-level, varsity experience, and playing position. Basing on the class-level distribution, sophomore was the biggest class that consisted 50 subjects (30.5%). Twenty-eight seniors (17.1%) made up the smallest class. Most of the subjects (N= 89; 54.3%) had participated for the intramural basketball teams or even high levels before; and there were 75 (45.7%) subjects who have never played an official basketball game yet. In term of players' playing positions, 65 (39.6%) people had played forward position. The numbers of players who played at guard and center positions were 73 (44.5%) and 26(15.9%) respectively.

Preferences on Offensive Moves at Each Designated Spot
The descriptive analyses concluded the following statements. At the right low-post block, the number one offensive choice for center, power forward, small forward, shooting guard and point guard were "pivoting", "screening", "catching the ball", "getting open", and "catching the ball", respectively. At the top of the key, the number one offensive choice for center, power forward, small forward, shooting guard and point guard were "setting screen", "pivoting", "getting open", "getting open", and "catching the ball", respectively. The favorite offensive strategies of center, power forward, and point guard at the left low-post block were exactly the same as theirs at the right side. The exceptions were the choices of small forward and shooting guard. Their choices just simply switched as the side had changed. The Table 1. listed the top-3 preferences of subjects at each different spots.

Table 1. The top-3 preferences of subjects at each different spots

Location	Preference	Role of Positions
		Center	Power Forward	Small Forward	Shooting Guard	Point Guard
Right block	1	(2)	(8)	(7)	(3)	(3)
	2	(5)	(7)	(3)	(7)	(1)
	3	(1)	(5)	(6)	(6)	(8)
Top of the key	1	(8)	(2)	(7)	(7)	(3)
	2	(7)	(3)	(3)	(8)	(7)
	3	(9)	(6)	(8)	(3)	(1)
Left block	1	(2)	(8)	(3)	(7)	(3)
	2	(5)	(6)	(7)	(3)	(7)
	3	(6)	(9)	(8)	(6)	(1)

* (1) dribbling, (2) pivoting, (3) catching the ball, (4) shooting, (5) cutting down, (6) dribble penetration, (7) getting open, (8) setting a screen, and (9) rebounding

Based on the results of Chi-square, there were significant differences existed among subjects' choices on offensive strategies (p<0.05). This means that students actually favor certain kind of choices at each spot in term of viewing themselves through a specific role of positions. However no significant difference (p<0.05) was found when subjects' choices were compared for different side of blocks.

Conclusions and suggestions

According to results of the study, there were significant differences existed among subjects' choices (p<0.05) in term of viewing from a specific role of positions. Since each position usually has been trained to follow a specific role, the results of the study clearly show this phenomenon. Perimeter players such as point guard, shooting guard and small forward would try to receive passes or get open for clear passes at the low-post block. They are usually taught by the coaches to get open in order to score an easy basket under the rim or shoot from outside (Huang & Wang, 2002). Inside players such as center and power forward would demonstrate the fundamental low post move by showing "the pivot" move. They were also taught to set screens at both high- or low-post (Lu, 1996; and Wong & Shuei, 1998). Apparently, subjects' top-three choices on offensive strategies have demonstrated the common mentalities that were instructed by many basketball coaches.

A good sign to notify is that subjects did not perceive their offensive strategies differently at the opposite side of the block, either. This means that players may not decide to do one thing at a particular side, but never intend to do the same move at the opposite side. Otherwise, they choice will become very predictable at one spot.
Surprisingly, "shooting" was not a top-3 choice at any spot according to any role. This may indicate that players are probably too cautious about their move, or they are afraid of taking shots (perhaps due to lack of confidence). Most of the coaches in the United States will emphasize the importance of power plays. It is probably more appropriate to see those who play at center and power forward positions looking for shots more often (Wong, 1999b). Taiwanese coaches may need to point out this fact during classes and practices.

References

Chao, C.P., & Chao, J.C. (1995). Zone defenses in basketball. University and College
Physical Education, 16, 66-74.

Hsu, H.H. (2002). Three-men offense in basketball. University and College
Physical Education, 60, 39-42.

Huang, H.H., & Wang, L. (2002). Analysis of woman basketball skills. Journal of Deh
Yu College of Nursing and Management, 17, 53-63.

Lee, C.H. (2000). An easy way to learn basketball. Taipei, Taiwan: Er-chiang Publishing.

Lu, C.S. (1996). A study of male college Secondary Class basketball players in attacked-
defense skill. Journal of National Art Institute, 59, 376-386.

Pan, Y.H. (1997). The analyses of defensive and offensive strategies in basketball.
University and College Physical Education, 32, 103-108.

Wang, T.M. (1997a). The team-offense skills and their instructional designs for post
players in basketball. University Taiwan University Physical Education, 28, 55-61.

Wang, T.M. (1997b). Both offensive and defensive skills and their instructional designs
for post players in basketball. University Taiwan University Physical Education, 28, 63-72.

Wang, Y.M., & Wang H.C. (2002). Different types of fakes in basketball. Physical
Education of College and University, 60, 17-21.

Wong, T.L., & Shuei, H.P. (1998). Move without the ball as an offensive strategy in
basketball games. National Education, 39(2), 66-70.

Wong, T.L. (1999a). Team offenses. National Education, 39(4), 34-39.

Wong, T.L. (1999b). The offensive strategies of inside moves for low post players.
Taiwan Sports, 102, 36-39.

Wu, B.Y. (1998). Developing a forward player. Journal of Tungnan College, 21, 219-224.