| Abstract | Glavni cilj ovog istraživanja je utvrditi karakteristične pojave i razlike u pojedinim vrstama obrane te vrednovati vrste obrane u odnosu na varijablu Ishod obrane. Za ostvarenje navedenog cilja istraživanja postavljen je model operacionalnih definicija pojedinih vrsta obrana u košarkaškoj igri. Tretiranjem faze obrane kao entiteta, notacijom je prikupljeno i promatrano 5427 obrana iz uzorka od 30 slučajno odabranih utakmica završnog doigravanja europske i američke profesionalne košarke (15 utakmica Eurolige, n = 2540; 15 utakmica NBA lige, n = 2887) u sezoni 2013./14. Mjerom unutarnjeg slaganja notatora i mjerom
slaganja između različitih notatora utvrđen je stupanj pouzdanosti prikupljenih podataka te se pristupilo obradi i analizi podataka. Temeljem dobivenih rezultata utvrđeno je kako se u vrhunskoj europskoj košarci odigra ukupno 169,3 obrana unutar jedne utakmice, odnosno 4,2 obrane po minuti, dok se u američkoj profesionalnoj košarci odigra 192,5 obrana po utakmici, odnosno 4 obrane u minuti. Najzastupljenija obrana i u europskoj i u profesionalnoj američkoj košarci je pozicijska obrana (82,9% zastupljena u Euroligi, 85,9% u NBA ligi), slijedi tranzicijska obrana (10% Euroliga, 8,1% NBA) dok su ostale obrane zastupljene sa 7,1% u europskoj i 6% u američkoj profesionalnoj košarci. Dobiveni rezultati ukazuju na nejednaku zastupljenost pojedinih vrsta obrana u oba košarkaška sustava. Tako su u tranzicijskoj obrani u američkoj profesionalnoj košarci gotovo podjednako zastupljene tranzicijska obrana od primarnog kontranapada (40,6%) i tranzicijska obrana s brojčanom nadmoći obrane (38%), dok je obrana od sekundarnog kontranapada (21,4%) najmanje korištena tranzicijska obrana. U europskoj košarci najzastupljenija je obrana od primarnog kontranapada (45,8%), zatim obrana od sekundarnog kontranapada (36%), a kao najmanje korištena, među tranzicijskim obranama, je tranzicijska obrana s brojčanom nadmoći obrane (18,2%). Kod pozicijske obrane, u američkoj profesionalnoj košarci najviše se koristi obrana čovjek na čovjeka (99,4%), zonska obrana se gotovo i ne koristi (0,6%). Unutarnja raspodjela kod pozicijskih obrana čovjek na čovjeka pokazuje da je obrana čovjek na čovjeka bez preuzimanja (77,9%) dominantna obrana u američkoj košarci dok je zastupljenost pozicijske obrane čovjek na čovjeka s preuzimanjem 21,5%. Od svih modaliteta obrane s preuzimanjem (niski-niski, visoki-visoki, niski-visoki ili visoki-niski) najviše se preuzima između igrača visoki-niski i obratno 66%, između niskih igrača 21,9% i između visokih igrača 12,1%. U europskoj košarci dominantna obrana je obrana čovjek na čovjeka 96,1%, dok je zonska obrana zastupljena s 3,9%. Unutarnja raspodjela pozicijske obrane čovjek na čovjeka tj. njenih modaliteta glasi: obrana čovjek na čovjeka bez preuzimanja 65,7%, obrana čovjek na čovjeka s preuzimanjem 30,4%, unutar koje su dominantna preuzimanja između igrača visoki-niski, niski-visoki 66,3%, niski-niski 19,7% i visoki-visoki 14%. Udvajanja unutar obrane čovjek na čovjeka pojavljuju se u europskoj košarci u postotku od 11,7%, a u profesionalnoj američkoj košarci 9,9%. U europskoj košarci češća su udvajanja na niskom postu 74,7%, dok su udvajanja na ostalim dijelovima terena zastupljena s 25,3%. U profesionalnoj američkoj košarci taj podatak je drugačiji i iznosi 53,3% udvajanja na niskom postu, a 46,7% udvajanja na ostalim dijelovima terena. U europskoj košarci više se koriste zonske obrane (3,9% nasuprot 0,6%) i obrane s prijelazom iz presing obrane u postavljenu obranu (3,5% nasuprot 0,2%). Dobivene razlike u raspodjeli pozicijske obrane i njenih modaliteta potvrđuju tezu da je europska košarka bogatija taktičkim varijantama igre u obrani i više timska, dok je američka profesionalna košarka više orijentirana na individualnu komponentu igre u obrani. Promatrajući obranu od pick and roll/pop igre, vidljivo je da se u vrhunskoj europskoj košarci odigra 90,8 obrana od pick and roll/pop igre unutar jedne utakmice, a 86,2 u američkoj profesionalnoj košarci. Unutar jedne obrane branjenje od pick and roll/pop igre u Euroligi dogodi se 0,54 puta, u NBA ligi 0,45 puta. Visoki igrači najčešće brane pick and roll/pop igru zoniranjem (Euroliga 59,1; NBA 60%), preuzimanjem (Euroliga 22,1%; NBA 22,7%) te iskakanjem (Euroliga 14,2%, NBA 14,2%). Najmanje zastupljena obrana, u oba sustava, je izguravanjem (Euroliga 2,9%, NBA 0,9%) i udvajanjem (Euroliga 1,7%, NBA 2,2%). Niski (vanjski) igrači brane pick and roll/pop igru najviše preko bloka (Euroliga = NBA 70,8%), ispod bloka se brani u 29,2% slučajeva.
Uspoređujući vrhunsku europsku i profesionalnu američku košarku u vrstama obrane u odnosu na varijablu ishod obrane, pokazuje se statistički značajna razlika i u tranzicijskim i u pozicijskim vrstama obrana. Jedino gdje nije bilo razlika između ova dva sustava u odnosu na varijablu ishod obrane je u: obrani čovjek na čovjeka s udvajanjem i u „drugim“ obranama. Najveće razlike u gotovo svim vrstama obrane u odnosu na varijablu ishod obrane zabilježene su u neutralnom ishodu gdje su europske ekipe uvijek bilježile veće frekvencije događaja, najčešće kod modaliteta: osobna pogreška obrambenog igrača, novi napad ubacivanjem lopte iza graničnih linija za napadača i neuspješan šut iz igre i zadržan posjed lopte napadača. Kod obrane od pick and roll/pop igre i visokog i niskog igrača najveće razlike u odnosu na ishod bilježe se u neutralnom ishodu u sljedećim modalitetima: osobna pogreška obrambenog igrača, novi napad ubacivanjem lopte iza graničnih linija za napadača i neuspješan šut iz igre te zadržan posjed lopte napadača, gdje europske ekipe bilježe veći broj takvih događaja (21,7% nasuprot 13,7%) te negativnom ishodu, gdje američke ekipe bilježe značajno veći broj takvih događaja (43,5% nasuprot 36%). Razlike u negativnom ishodu najviše se očituju u modalitetu: uspješan šut za dva poena i u modalitetima koji se odnose na osobne pogreške obrane, koje rezultiraju minimalno jednim uspješnim slobodnim bacanjem. Pozitivan ishod kod obrane od pick and roll/pop igre pokazao je podjednaku zastupljenost u oba sustava (42,4% Euroliga, 42,8% NBA liga). Pozitivan ishod u oba sustava najviše se očituje kroz modalitete: neuspješan šut iz igre, osvojen posjed lopte, obrambena ekipa osvojila loptu – lopta u igri. |
| Abstract (english) | The main purpose of this research is to identify the characteristic occurrences and differences in certain types of defense and to evaluate the types of defense versus the outcome of the defense. In order to achieve the research objective, a model of operational definitions of certain types of defense in the basketball game was set up. By treating the defensive phase as an entity, 5 427 defenses were taken out of the sample of 30 randomly selected European and American professional basketball matches (15 games of Euroleague, n = 2540, 15 NBA league games, n = 2887) in season 2013/14. By the measure of the internal arrangement of the notary and the agreement between the various notaries, the degree of reliability of the collected data was established and data processing and analysis started. Based on the results obtained, a total of 169,3 defenses were awarded in one of the top European basketball tournaments, ie 4,2 defenses per minute, while 192,5 defenses per game or 4 defenses per minute in American professional basketball. The most prominent defense in
both European and professional American basketball is position defense (82,9% in Euroleague, 85,9% in NBA league), followed by transition defense (10% Euroleague, 8,1% NBA) while other defenses are represented by 7,1% in European and 6% in American professional basketball. The results obtained indicate unequal representation of certain types
of defense in both basketball systems. Thus in transitional defense in American professional basketball, transitional defense against the primary counterattack (40,6%) and transitional defense with the highest defense supremacy (38%) were almost equally represented, while the defense of the secondary counterattack (21,4%) was the least used transitional defense. In
European basketball the most represented one was the defense from primary counterattack (45,8%), followed by defense from secondary counterattack (36%) and the least used, among the transitional defenses, is the transitional defense with a numerical superiority of defense (18,2%). In position defense, US-based professional basketball uses the highest defense of man-to-man defense (99,4%), zone defense is almost unused (0,6%). Internal distribution within position defenses man to man shows that the man to man defense without switching (77,9%) is dominant defense in American basketball while representation of positional switching man to man defense is 21,5%. From all switching man to man defense models
(short-short, tall-tall, short-tall or tall-short) the most switching are between tall-short, shorttoll players 66%, between short players 21,9% and between tall players 12,1%. In European basketball dominant defense is man to man defense 96,1%, while zone defense is represented by 3,9%. Internal distribution within man to man positional defense, or its models are: defense man to man without switching 65,7%, and man to man switching defense 30,4%, within which the dominant are switches between tall-short players, short-tall players 66,3%, followed by short-short 19,7% and tall-tall 14%. Doubling within man to man defense appear in European basketball in percentage of 11,7%, and in professional American basketball in 9,9%. In European basketball doublings are more often on low post at 74,7%, while doublings on other parts of court are represented with 25,3%. In professional American basketball that data is different and amounts to 53,3% doublings on low post and 46,7% doublings on other parts of the court. In European basketball more used are zone defenses (3,9% against 0,6%) and defense from pressing defense to positional defense (3,5% against 0,2%). The differences in the distribution of positional defense and its modalities confirm the thesis that European basketball is richer in tactical variants of defense and more team defense, while American professional basketball is more oriented to the individual component of the defense game. Observing the pick and roll/pop defense, it is noticeable that in top European basketball 90,8 defenses from pick and roll/pop game are played within one game and 86,2 in American professional basketball. Within one defense defending from pick and roll/pop in Euro league appears 0,54 times and in NBA league 0,45 times. Tall players mostly defend
pick and roll/pop by zoning (Euro league 59,1; NBA 60%), by switching (Euro league 22,1%; NBA 22,7%) and by popping up – show (Euroleague 14,2%, NBA 14,2%). The least represented defense, in both systems, is by extrusion (Euro league 2,9%, NBA 0,9%) and doubling (Euro league 1,7%, NBA 2,2%). Small (guard, point guard and small forward) players defend pick and roll/pop game mostly over the screen (Euro league = NBA 70,8%), below the screen is defended in 29,2% cases. Comparing top European and professional American basketball in types of defenses related to variable Outcome of defense statistically significant difference in transitional and positional types of defenses is revealed. The only position where there were no differences between those two systems related to variable Outcome of the defense is in defense man to man with doubling and in „other“ defenses. The most significant differences in almost all types of defenses related to variable Outcome of the defense are recorded in neutral outcome where European teams always recorded more frequent events, mostly in modalities: personal foul of the defense player, new attack by throw-in ball behind boundary lines for defense player and unsuccessful shot from game, retained possession of ball of the defense player. In the case of the pick and roll/pop defense play and big players and small players the most significant differences related to outcome are recorded in neutral outcome, in following modalities: personal foul of the defense player, new attack by throw-in ball behind boundary lines for defense player and unsuccessful shot from game, retained possession of ball of defense player, where European teams recorded higher number of such events (21,7% against 13,7%), and neutral outcome, where American teams recorded significantly higher number of such events (43,5% against 36%). Differences in the negative outcome are mostly manifested in modality: a successful two point shot and in modalities related to personal fouls of defense,
resulting in at least one successful free throw. The positive outcome of the pick and roll/pop defense play showed equal representation in both systems (42,4% Euro league, 42,8% NBA league). Positive outcome in both system is mostly manifested within following modalities: an unsuccessful shot from the game, the possession of the ball, the defense team won the ball – ball in the game. |
