Ukljucite javascript
Register Log in

Archive > Year 2020, Number 4

Scoring efficiency in the Euroleague basketball: Analysis of center’s shooting positions related to the rule changes


Božović Branislav, Faculty of Sports and Physical Education, University of Belgrade


The purpose of this study was to examine the shooting structure of basketball players at position 5, so-called Centers’. Shooting structure is related to the type of the shot, position of the shot and shooting efficiency. The data were collected from Euroleague Top 8 and Final Four games in two seasons 2008/09 and 2018/19. Thirty-two Centers’ from sixteen teams were included in this study (2008/09 - Body height 211±6.17cm, Age 28.38±3.95 yrs.; 2018/19 - Body height 210.69±6.54cm, Age 29.81±3.89 yrs.). Each game was analyzed separately using notational analyses. Confirmative factorial analyses show that Centers’ shooting characteristics for 2008/09 season had 7 different components, while 2018/19 season had 6 different components, as a dominant characteristic of scoring, affecting the total scoring efficiency. Results of the study indicate that focusing on mastering the shooting techniques instead of position specialization would increase Centers’ scoring efficiency. As an important part of overall playing quality, shooting structure, primarily shooting efficiency provides significant information about the way that Centers’ play which is especially affected by the rule changes. Basketball coaches and Centers’ should work to improve overall shooting technique.


Post-up, setting the screen, one-dimensional players, multidimensional players

Download full article


  1. Csataljay G, O’Donoghue P, Hughes M, Dancs H. Performance indicators that distinguish winning and losing teams in basketball. Int J of Perform Anal Sport 2009; 9:60-66.
  2. Csataljay G, Hughes M, James N, Dancs H. Pace as an influencing factor in basketball. In: Hughes, M., Dancs, H., Nagyvaradi, K., Polgar, T., James, N., Sporis, G., Vuckovic, G., Jovanovic, M. (Eds.). Research methods and performance analysis, (pp. 178-187), Hungary: University of West Hungary, 2011.
  3. Cui Y, Liu F, Bao D, Liu H, Zhang S, Gomez MA. Key anthropometrics and physical determinants for different playing positions during national basketball association draft combine test. Front Psychol 2019; 10:2359.
  4. Erčulj F, Štrumbelj E. Basketball shot types and shot success in different levels of competitive basketball. PloS one 2015; 10:e0128885.
  5. Ferioli D, Rampinini E, Bosio A, Torre AL, Azzolini M, Coutts AJ. The physical profile of adult male basketball players: Differences between competitive levels and playing positions. J Sports Sci 2018; 36:2567–2574.
  6. García J, Ibáñez SJ, De Santos RM, Leite N, Sampaio J. Identifying basketball performance indicators in regular season and playoff games. J Hum Kinetics 2013; 36:161-168.
  7. Grehaigne JF, Bouthier D, David B. Dynamic-system analysis of opponent relationships in collective actions in soccer. J Sport Sci 1997; 15:137-149.
  8. Gryko K, Kopiczko A, Mikołajec K, Stastny P, Musalek M. Anthropometric variables and somatotype of young and professional male basketball players. Sports 2018; 6:9, doi:10.3390/sports6010009.
  9. Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC. Multivariate data analysis (5th Ed.)., Upper Saddle River, NJ Prentice Hall, 1998.
  10. Jimenez Sanchez AC, Calvo AR, Saenz-Lopez Bunuel P, Ibanez Godoy SJ. Decision-making of the Spanish female basketball team players while they are competing. Rev de Psicol del Deporte 2009; 18:369-373.
  11. Karalejić M, Jakovljević S. Teorija i metodika košarke. Beograd: Fakultet sporta i fizičkog vaspitanja, 2008. (in Serbian).
  12. Lebed F. A dolphin only looks like a fish: Players’ behaviour analysis is not enough for game understanding in the light of the systems approach – a response to the reply by McGarry and Franks. Eur J Sport Sci 2007; 7:55-62.
  13. Lorenzo A, Gomez MA, Ortega E, Ibánez SJ, Sampaio J. Game related statistics which discriminate between winning and losing under-16 male basketball games. J Sports Sci Med 2010; 9:664-668.
  14. Mandić R, Jakovljević S, Erčulj F, Štrumbelj E. Trends in NBA and Euroleague basketball: Analysis and comparison of statistical data from 2000 to 2017. PLoS ONE 2019; 14:e0223524.
  15. Marmarinos C, Apostolidis N, Kostopoulos N, Apostolidis A. Efficacy of the “Pick and Roll” offense in top level European basketball teams. J Hum Kinetics 2016; 51(2):121-129.
  16. O'Donoghue P. Research methods for sports performance analysis. Park Square, Oxon: Routledge, 2009.
  17. Ortega E, Cardenas D, Sainz de Baranda P & Palao JM. Differences between winning and losing teams in young basketball games (14 – 16 Years Old). Int J Appl Sport Sci 2006; 18:1-11.
  18. Shortridge A, Goldsberry K, Adams M. Creating space to shoot: quantifying spatial relative field goal efficiency in basketball. J Quant Anal Sports 2014; 10:303-313.
  19. Stojanović E, Stojiljković N, Scanlan AT, Dalbo VJ, Berkelmans DM, Milanović Z. The activity demands and physiological responses encountered during basketball match-play: a systematic review. Sports Med 2018; 48:111-135.
  20. Štrumbelj E, Vračar P, Robnik-Šikonja M, Dežman B, Erčulj F. A Decade of Euroleague basketball: an analysis of trends and recent rule change effects. J Hum Kinet 2013; 38:183-189.
  21. Zarić I, Kukić F, Jovićević N, Zarić M, Marković M, Toskić L, Dopsaj, M. Body height of elite basketball players: Do taller basketball teams rank better at the FIBA World Cup?. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020; 17:3141.