The purpose of the present study was to examine differences in game-related statistical parameters between National Basketball Association (NBA) regular and post-season competitive periods and to determine which variables have the greatest contribution in discriminating between winning and losing game outcomes. The data scraping technique was used to obtain publicly available NBA game-related statistics over a three-year span (2016–2019). The total number of games examined in the present investigation was 3933 (3690 regular season and 243 post-season games). Despite small to moderate effect sizes, the findings suggest that NBA teams’ style of play (i.e., tactical strategies) changes when transitioning from the regular to post-season competitive period. It becomes more conservative (i.e., fewer field goal attempts, assists, steals, turnovers, and points scored), most likely due to greater defensive pressure. Discriminant function analysis correctly classified winning and losing game outcomes during the regular and post-season competitive periods in 82.8% and 87.2% of cases, respectively. Two key game-related statistics capable of discriminating between winning and losing game outcomes were field goal percentage and defensive rebounding, accounting for 13.6% and 14.2% of the total percentage of explained variance during the regular season and 11.5% and 14.7% during post-season competitive periods. Also, overall shooting efficiency (i.e., free-throw, 2-point, and 3-point combined) accounted for 23–26% of the total percentage of explained variance.

Although different strategies have been implemented to manage recovery-fatigue status in athletes, there is still a lack of consensus on which recovery protocols have the greatest impact and effectiveness when implemented with basketball players, including both physiological and psychological recovery methods. Thus, the purpose of this systematic review is to: (a) determine which recovery methods attain the greatest benefit in restoring the process of attenuating fatigue and (b) provide sports practitioners with guidelines on how some of the most effective recovery strategies can be used to optimize athletes’ recovery and ultimately enhance their performance. Using the PRISMA guidelines, a total of 3931 research reports were obtained through four database searches (i.e., PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science), from which only 25 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The recovery protocols analyzed in this systematic review were: sleep, nutrition, hydration, ergogenic aids, cold-water immersion, compression garments, massage, acupuncture, tapering, mindfulness, and red-light irradiation. The results revealed that all recovery strategies are capable of attenuating fatigue and enhancing recovery in basketball players to a certain degree. However, an individualized approach should be promoted, where a combination of proactive recovery modalities appears to result in the most rapid rates of recovery and athletes’ ability to maintain high-level performance. Recovery should be programmed as an integral component of training regimens. Also, cooperation and communication between coaches, players, and the rest of the team staff members are essential in minimizing the risk of non-functional overreaching or injury and optimizing basketball players’ on-court performance.

Basketball is a sport that is characterized by various physical performance parameters and motor abilities such as speed, strength, and endurance, which are all underpinned by an athlete’s efficient use of the stretch-shortening cycle (SSC). A common assessment to measure SSC efficiency is the countermovement jump (CMJ). When performed on a force plate, a plethora of different force-time metrics may be gleaned from the jump task, reflecting neuromuscular performance characteristics. The aim of this study was to investigate how different CMJ force-time characteristics change across different parts of the athletic year, within a sample of elite collegiate male basketball players. Twelve basketball players performed CMJ’s on near-weekly basis, combining for a total of 219 screenings. The span of testing was broken down into four periods: pre-season, non-conference competitive period, conference competitive period, and post-season competitive period. Results suggest that basketball players were able to experience improvements and maintenance of performance with regards to various force-time metrics, transitioning from the pre-season period into respective later phases of the in-season period. A common theme was a significant improvement between the pre-season period and the non-conference period. Various force-time metrics were subject to change, while outcome metrics such as jump height remained unchanged, suggesting that practitioners are encouraged to more closely monitor how different force-time characteristics change over extended periods of time.

Strength is one of the key physiological performance attributes related to optimal on-court basketball performance. However, there is a lack of scientific literature studying how strength relates to shooting proficiency, as a key basketball skill capable of discriminating winning from losing game outcomes. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to examine the relationship between maximal upper and lower body strength and free-throw, two-point, and three-point shooting accuracy. Ten males and seven females performed bench press and back squat one repetition maximum (1RM) and basketball shooting testing during two laboratory visits. The shooting protocol consisted of five sets of 15 free-throw, two-point, and three-point shots performed in sequential order. Each set was separated by a 30 min rest interval to minimize the influence of fatigue. Each subject attempted 225 shots, combining for a total of 3825 shots. The average free-throw, two-point, and three-point shooting accuracy for men were 74.5 ± 11.9, 68.4 ± 9.9, and 53.3 ± 14.9%, and for women 79.2 ± 11.2, 65.5 ± 8.4, and 51.2 ± 15.3%, respectively. The average bench press and back squat 1RM for men was 88.2 ± 18.6 and 117.0 ± 21.2 kg, and for women, 40.6 ± 7.5 and 66.9 ± 9.9 kg, respectively. The findings of the present study revealed no significant relationships between maximal upper and lower body strength and basketball shooting performance for both male and female participants. Neither bench press nor back squat 1RM was a good predictor of free-throw, two-point, and three-point shooting performance.

While various quantifiable physical attributes have been found to contribute to athletes’ performance, there is a lack of scientific literature focused on examining how they relate to success during competition performance. The aim of this study was to investigate different countermovement jump (CMJ)-derived force–time characteristics and their utility in distinguishing high from low performers within a measure of on-court contribution (i.e., minutes per game played). Twenty-nine collegiate athletes (n = 15 males and n = 14 females) volunteered to participate in this investigation and performed CMJs on dual force plates sampling at 1000 Hz, weekly over the course of their basketball season. The athletes’ average of their three best test-days across the season was used for further analysis. To identify their on-court contribution, athletes were divided into groups with high and low minutes per game, based on a median-split analysis. The findings suggest that at the overall group level (i.e., both genders), the modified reactive strength index (mRSI) and braking rate of force development (RFD) revealed the greatest between-group magnitudes of difference, with athletes playing more minutes per game showing greater performance. At the team-specific level, the braking RFD, average braking velocity, and mRSI were shown to be the greatest differentiators between groups for the men’s team. The women’s high-minutes group displayed greater magnitudes of mRSI and jump height. By identifying the neuromuscular qualities seen in top performers within their respective populations, the attributed physical performance underpinning these qualities may be identified, providing practitioners with insights into physical performance qualities and training methodologies that have the potential to influence basketball performance.

Shooting efficiency is one of the key performance parameters related to securing the desired game outcome at various levels of basketball competition, and it is largely influenced by the biomechanical adjustments incorporated during the preparatory and release phase of the shooting motion. Thus, the purpose of the present study was twofold: (a) to examine the differences in the kinematic characteristics between free-throw, two-point, and three-point shots, and (b) to examine the differences between shooters with excellent (≥80%) and good (<80%) levels of shooting proficiency. A total of 10 professional male basketball players performed 5 free-throw (4.57 m), two-point (5.18 m), and three-point (6.75 m) shots, combining for a total of 150 shots. A high-definition camera recording at 120 fps was used to capture the shooting motion from a sagittal point of view, and video analysis software was used to analyze the kinematic variables of interest. The findings of the present study reveal that the kinematic characteristics during the preparatory phase of the shooting motion remain unchanged between free-throw and two-point shots. Three-point shots required lower elbow positioning, influenced by greater knee and hip flexion when compared to free-throw and two-point shots. The release angle was notably lower for shots attempted beyond the three-point line but remained unchanged between the free-throw and two-point shooting motions. Release height and vertical displacement were significantly greater for two- and three-point shots when compared to free-throw shots, while no difference was observed between the two- and three-point shots. In addition, no significant differences in shooting kinematics were observed between those participants with excellent and good levels of shooting proficiency.