Michael Rogers1, Alyson J Crozier2, Natasha K Schranz2,3, Roger G Eston2, Grant R Tomkinson2,4. 1. Alliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity (ARENA), Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia. michael.rogers@mymail.unisa.edu.au. 2. Alliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity (ARENA), Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia. 3. Wellbeing SA, Adelaide, SA, Australia. 4. Department of Education, Health and Behavior Studies, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about which indicators of performance elite athlete coaches (i.e., professional coaches who coach at the national or international levels) consider to be important for basketball. OBJECTIVE: Using a Delphi procedure, the aim of this study was to identify the non-game performance indicators elite athlete coaches consider to be important for the recruitment/selection of basketball players. METHODS: Ninety elite athlete coaches (basketball coaches (n = 71) and strength/conditioning coaches (n = 19) who coached men (n = 60), women (n = 23), or both (n = 7)), employed in 23 countries across six continents, participated in a three-round online Delphi survey. Round 1 asked coaches to identify the non-game performance indicators (i.e., measures other than game statistics) they currently used (or would like to use) for player recruitment/selection, with common indicators combined into single indicators. Round 2 asked coaches to rate the importance of each performance indicator using a Likert scale (range: 0 = no importance whatsoever to 10 = extremely important). Round 3 asked coaches to identify the single best test measure for each indicator rated ≥ 6 (i.e., important to extremely important) in Round 2. Results were reported descriptively. RESULTS: A total of 608 responses (344 after removal of duplicates) were reported in Round 1, which were collapsed into 35 indicators, all of which were rated as 'important' in Round 2. Psychological and game intelligence indicators were typically rated as very important to extremely important (i.e., median = 9), with physical fitness and movement skills typically rated as very important (i.e., median = 8). For most indicators, coach observation was identified as the best test measure, with unique objective performance/anthropometric tests identified for all physical fitness indicators. CONCLUSION: This study identified a range of psychological, game intelligence, physical fitness, and movement skill indicators that were considered by elite athlete coaches to be important to extremely important for the recruitment/selection of basketball players. These findings may inform the development of a basketball-specific test battery for recruiting/selecting and monitoring players.
BACKGROUND: Little is known about which indicators of performance elite athlete coaches (i.e., professional coaches who coach at the national or international levels) consider to be important for basketball. OBJECTIVE: Using a Delphi procedure, the aim of this study was to identify the non-game performance indicators elite athlete coaches consider to be important for the recruitment/selection of basketball players. METHODS: Ninety elite athlete coaches (basketball coaches (n = 71) and strength/conditioning coaches (n = 19) who coached men (n = 60), women (n = 23), or both (n = 7)), employed in 23 countries across six continents, participated in a three-round online Delphi survey. Round 1 asked coaches to identify the non-game performance indicators (i.e., measures other than game statistics) they currently used (or would like to use) for player recruitment/selection, with common indicators combined into single indicators. Round 2 asked coaches to rate the importance of each performance indicator using a Likert scale (range: 0 = no importance whatsoever to 10 = extremely important). Round 3 asked coaches to identify the single best test measure for each indicator rated ≥ 6 (i.e., important to extremely important) in Round 2. Results were reported descriptively. RESULTS: A total of 608 responses (344 after removal of duplicates) were reported in Round 1, which were collapsed into 35 indicators, all of which were rated as 'important' in Round 2. Psychological and game intelligence indicators were typically rated as very important to extremely important (i.e., median = 9), with physical fitness and movement skills typically rated as very important (i.e., median = 8). For most indicators, coach observation was identified as the best test measure, with unique objective performance/anthropometric tests identified for all physical fitness indicators. CONCLUSION: This study identified a range of psychological, game intelligence, physical fitness, and movement skill indicators that were considered by elite athlete coaches to be important to extremely important for the recruitment/selection of basketball players. These findings may inform the development of a basketball-specific test battery for recruiting/selecting and monitoring players.
Authors: Alexandra H Roberts; Daniel A Greenwood; Mandy Stanley; Clare Humberstone; Fiona Iredale; Annette Raynor Journal: J Sci Med Sport Date: 2019-05-17 Impact factor: 4.319
Authors: Masaru Teramoto; Chad L Cross; Randall H Rieger; Travis G Maak; Stuart E Willick Journal: J Strength Cond Res Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 3.775