Influence of non-scorer floater and numerical superiority on novices’ tactical behaviour and skill efficacy during basketball small-sided games

Abstract

The study compared the tactical behaviour and skill efficacy of young novice basketball players during small-sided games (SSGs) in situations of numerical equality (3vs.3), numerical superiority (3vs.2), and a non-scorer floater (3vs.3 + 1). A total of forty-five schoolchildren (11.55 ± 0.49 years) from both sexes with no previous experience in basketball participated in ten four-minute SSGs of each format for four 1-h sessions. The Game Performance Assessment Instrument was used to analyse tactical behaviour and skill efficacy. Friedman’s test, Dunn’s post hoc test, and r effect size were used to compare the variables between SSGs. Pass inefficacy (3vs.3 > 3vs.2; p = 0.004; large effect), rebound efficacy (3vs.2 > 3vs.3 + 1 and 3vs.3; p = 0.002; large effect), support (3vs.3 > 3vs.3 + 1 e 3vs.2; p = 0.002; medium effect), and guard/mark (3vs.2 > 3vs.3 and 3vs.3 + 1; p = 0.001; medium effect) showed significant differences between SSGs. The results support the hypothesis that an unbalanced SSG is less complex than an SSG with numerical equality, as the technical-tactical performance is higher in unbalanced SSGs.

Multidimensional analysis of players’ responses in basketball small-sided games: The impact of changing game rules

“…A qualitative analysis of this variable in each SSG provides coaches with an important insight for a pedagogical prescription of SSGs during training, especially considering an adequate progression of the use of rules for the development of offensive performance, with the 4vs.3 increasing players' success to create space and the close-shot rule (similarly to the defensive pressure) representing a challenge for athletes to create space. Previous results also support this analysis, suggesting higher offensive performance in numerical superiority compared to numerical equality 22,32,33 and in game situations with a lower level of opposition. 34 We also expected the 4vs.3 to decrease individual actions to create space through dribbling since passing the ball would be more effective with one extra player in offense.…”

“…The concentration of players in the lane with a consequent reduction in the effective playing area in this game may reduce players' physical and physiological responses, as suggested in previous studies on basketball SSGs. 7 Finally, offensive numerical superiority (4vs.3) represents an advantage for players in offense 22,23 ; the always-free offensive player (additional player or floater) facilitates passing the ball among teammates and creating shooting opportunities without dribbling. In this case, defenders would need to fluctuate more toward the basket to provide defensive help/switch or to quickly get close to free opponents with the ball (closeout).…”

Additional players and half-court areas enhance group tactical-technical behavior and decrease physical and physiological responses in basketball small-sided games

“…24 The increase in this action is probably related to the presence of the additional player, who is either free (non-scorer floater) or probably under less defensive pressure (in the case of numerical superiority) to receive a pass. Indeed, a previous study on basketball SSGs showed higher efficacy of passes in numerical superiority (3 vs. 2) compared to numerical equality (3 vs. 3), 12 supporting the increased ease to pass in the former. There was also a reduction of space creation with ball dribbled (individual action) in the 3 versus 3 + 1, but not in the 4 versus 3 compared to 3 versus 3.…”

“…3 vs. 3 + 1). 12 In a set offense, we can expect SSGs with numerical superiority to stimulate more passes between teammates to perceive the best opportunity to shoot on the basket due to the constant adjustments made by the defenders playing in numerical inferiority. On the other hand, a non-scorer floater is an always-free teammate who can provide new possibilities to pass and receive, facilitating the interaction between two or more offensive players.…”

Effectiveness of Video Modeling in Improving Technical Skills in Young Novice Basketball Players: A Quasi-Experimental Study

“…A 3 vs. 3 small-sided game in a half-court with only one hoop, excluding the lateral lanes (14 × 9 m) in order to guarantee a better interaction between players (42 m²) and the width per player near the basket (1.5 m²) was performed [ 44 ]. The game consisted of three blocks of 4 min with at least 2 min of passive rest in between [ 44 , 45 ]. All International Basketball Federation (FIBA) rules were respected, except for time-outs and free throws.…”