Manuel António Janeira

Background: Although adolescent basketballers differ in body size, shape, and composition, less is known about how these factors interact during physical development. Aim: We used ontogenetic allometry to identify the optimal body size and shape characteristics associated physical performance in adolescent basketball players, and investigate the effects of training experience, training volume, maturity status, and club characteristics on physical performance development. Subjects and methods: Two hundred and sixty-four male basketballers, from five age-cohorts (11-15 years of age), were followed consecutively over three years. Three physical performance components, anthropometrics, training information, and biological maturation were assessed bi-annually. Longitudinal multiplicative allometric models were developed. Results: Players with a physique that had a dominant ectomorphic component performed better in all physical performance components. When adjusting for confounders other than size, the development of running speed was independent of body size. Players advanced in maturation were physically fitter. Training data had no significant effect on developmental trajectories of running speed or lower body explosive strength. Club characteristics had no significant association with any physical performance trajectories. Conclusion: Leaner players have advantages in physical performance and individual characteristics play an important role, over and beyond club structure, in developing physical performance.

This study investigated developmental stability, or tracking, in the development of technical skills in youth male basketball players and retrospectively profiled stable and unstable tracking patterns over time. A total of 97 basketball players were tracked bi-annually over 3 consecutive years. Players were divided into two age-categories according to their age at baseline: under-12; and under-14. Technical skills were assessed using the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance test battery. Anthropometric, body composition, biological maturation and physical performance data were collected. Cohen’s kappa (κ) was used to estimate tracking. With the exception of defensive movement in the under-12 age-category, tracking was low in all skill tests for both under-12 (0.22 ≤ κ ≤ 0.33) and -14 (0.20 ≤ κ ≤ 0.26) groupings. The overall technical skill showed moderate tracking for under-12 players (κ = 0.47) and low tracking for under-14 players (κ = 0.26). At baseline, players who were consistently more skilled or became more skillful (in the under-12 age-category) over time had a better growth-motor performance profile and most of them were selected to be members of regional teams. In conclusion, tracking of individual skill trajectories was low-to-moderate. Moreover, a better growth-motor performance profile seems crucial to maintain high levels of skill performance over time. It is recommended that basketball coaches track the developmental trajectories of their players to better understand the erratic nature of skill development and help design more effective practice regimes.

Although successful performance in basketball requires high levels of muscular strength during adolescence, its development is confounded by the effects of normal growth. We examine the timing, intensity and sequence of muscular strength according to biological age (years from peak height velocity (PHV)) and hypothesize that young basketball players attain their peak muscular strength spurts around PHV. A total of 160 adolescent male basketballers, aged 11–15 years, were followed bi-annually over 3 consecutive years. The years from attainment of PHV and peak weight velocity (PWV) were estimated and five muscular strength measures (sit-ups, handgrip, seated medicine ball throw, squat jump and countermovement jump) were aligned to years from PHV in 3-month intervals. Strength velocities were estimated using a non-smooth mathematical model. The mean ages at-PHV and at-PWV were 13.90 ± 1.40 years and 13.90 ± 1.79 years, respectively. Maximal velocity in sit-ups was attained 6 months prior to attainment of PHV (intensity = 10.69 repetitions·year⁻¹), whereas maximal velocity in squat jump occurred 6 months after-PHV (intensity = 3.93 cm·year⁻¹). Handgrip strength, seated medicine ball throw and countermovement jump maximal velocity peaked at-PHV (intensity = 8.47 kgf·year⁻¹, intensity = 0.75 m·year⁻¹, intensity = 5.59 cm·year⁻¹, respectively). In general, maximal velocity spurts did not differ in their timing, with the velocities reaching a peak concurrent with PHV and PWV or within 6 months of its attainment. Basketball coaches, as well as strength and conditioning trainers, should consider individual differences in strength development and be aware of rapid periods of growth in stature when planning and designing muscular strength training regimes.

In this paper, we outline a systematic testing programme developed to help identify excellence in youth basketball players. We examine the links between biological maturation and training experience with anthropometry, body composition, physical performance, technical and tactical skills from five age-cohorts, and characterize, in detail, facets of their environment. In total, 238 young basketball players aged 11–15 years, clustered into five age-cohorts (11, 12, 13, 14, 15 years) were recruited. We assessed measures across three domains: (1) biological [anthropometry, body composition, biological maturation and physical performance]; (2) skill/game proficiency [technical skills and tactical skills]; and (3) contextual [family support, coach knowledge and competence and club context]. The data were analysed using one-way ANOVAs and multivariate analysis of covariance adjusting for biological maturation and training experience. We report significant differences favouring older basketball players on most biological and skill/game proficiency variables. However, differences between age-cohorts in physical performance and technical skills were mitigated after controlling for the effects of both covariates. In conclusion, our findings highlight the important role of both biological maturation and training experience on youth basketball players’ performance and development. We discuss the implications of these findings for research as well as for athletes, parents, coaches and clubs.

Data relating physical performance to the timing of the adolescent growth spurt are limited. Aim: This study identifies: (i) age-at-peak height velocity (APHV), (ii) physical performance spurt patt...

This study (1) investigated the effects of age, maturity status, anthropometrics, and years of training on 11–14-year-old male basketball players’ physical performance and technical skills development, and (2) estimated the contribution of maturity status and training years on players’ physical and technical performances. The sample consisted of 150 participants, average age 13.3 ± 0.7 years, grouped by early, average, and late maturation. Biological maturation, anthropometry, and training data were collected using standard procedures. Measures of physical performance assessed included: aerobic fitness, abdominal muscular strength and endurance, static strength, lower body explosive power, upper body explosive power, speed, and agility and body control. Basketball-specific technical skills were also recorded. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) were used to compare group differences. Results indicated that early maturers were taller, heavier, and had greater strength, power, speed, and agility (p < 0.05). When controlling for age, height, and body mass, early maturers remained stronger, quicker, and more agile (p < 0.05). They were also more skillful in the speed shot shooting test (p < 0.05). Apart from tests of aerobic fitness, abdominal muscular strength and endurance, and lower body explosive power, maturity status was the primary contributor to the variance in the physical performance tests. Years of training was the primary contributor to the variance in the technical skills tests. Whilst physical performance was dependent on maturity status, technical skills were influenced by years of training. Since both biological maturation and years of training play an important role in basketball performance, we recommend that coaches consider the effects of these two confounders when recruiting and selecting youth basketballers.

This study investigated the roles of growth, maturation, physical fitness, and technical skills on selection onto an under-14 years basketball team. The sample consisted of 150 male players, aged 13.3 ± 0.7 years, divided into selected (SE—top players chosen by coaching staff to form an elite regional team) and non-selected (NSE—remaining players) groups. Anthropometry, body composition, biological maturation, and training experience data were collected using standard procedures. Physical fitness was assessed using the Yo-Yo IE2, sit-ups, handgrip, squat jump, countermovement jump, 3 kg medicine ball throw, 20 m sprint, and T-Test. Technical skills were acquired using the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance (AAHPERD)’s basketball-specific test battery. Groups were compared using a Student’s t test and multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA), with training experience and biological maturation as covariates. A forward stepwise discriminant function analysis was employed to identify variables that maximized the separation between groups. The results showed that SE players were taller, had greater fat-free mass, greater strength, power, and agility, and were technically more skillful compared with NSE players (p < 0.05) when controlling for training experience and maturation. It was also found that players were best discriminated by the 3 kg medicine ball throw and control dribble, revealing the importance of qualified training to achieve excellence in youth basketball. 92.7% of the basketballers were correctly classified into their original groups. It is therefore confirmed that the additional effects of training experience and biological maturation positively influenced the performance of young basketball players. We recommend that coaches focus not only on players’ body sizes, but also on their skill level, especially during adolescence, when selecting teams in order to promote sustainable long-term development.

The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of a lower- and upper-body 10-week in-season resistance training program on explosive strength development in young basketball players. Twenty-five adolescent male athletes, aged 14-15 years old, were randomly assigned to an experimental group (EG; n = 15) and a control group (CG; n = 10). The subjects were assessed at baseline and after training for squat jump (SJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), Abalakov test, drop jump, and seated medicine ball throw (MBT). The EG showed significant increases (p < 0.05) in all the variable scores. Conversely, the CG significantly decreased (p < 0.05) in SJ, CMJ, and Abalakov test scores and significantly increased in the results of MBT test (p < 0.05). The groups were similar on pretest, but significant differences (p < 0.05) occurred on posttest in all the variables. The results of this study show that a 10-week in-season resistance training program with moderate volume and intensity loads increased vertical jump and MBT performance in adolescent male basketball players. Coaches should know that such a short resistance training program specifically designed for young basketball players induce increased explosivity levels, which are essential to a better basketball performance, with no extra overload on adolescents' skeletal muscle development.

The aims of this study were to determine the effects of (a) plyometric training on explosive strength indicators in adolescent male basketball players and (b) detraining and reduced training on previously achieved explosive strength gains. Two groups were formed: an experimental and a control group. The former was submitted to a 10-week in-season plyometric training program, twice weekly, along with regular basketball practice. Simultaneously, the control group participated in regular basketball practice only. At the end of this period, the experimental group was subdivided into 2 groups: a reduced training group and a detraining group. All participants were assessed on squat jump, countermovement jump, Abalakov test, depth jump, mechanical power, and medicine ball throw at the beginning and at the end of the 10-week in-season plyometric training and on weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16 of the in-season detraining and reduced training periods. In the first phase of the study, the experimental group significantly increased all the assessed indicators (p < 0.05). In the following phase and in general all the groups maintained the previously achieved results. In conclusion, plyometric training showed positive effects on upper- and lower-body explosive strength in adolescent male basketball players. Moreover, we can state that both detraining and a reduced training program indistinctly contribute to maintenance of strength levels. These results highlight the unique power that basketball-specific training seems to have on the sustainability and maintenance of sport performance.

The purpose of this study was to assess and compare the effects of detraining and of a reduced training program on upper- and lower-body explosive strength in adolescent male basketball players. To study this, 15 subjects, aged 14 to 15 years old, were randomly assigned to 1 of the 2 following groups: reduced training (RT; n = 8) and detraining (DTR; n = 7). The participants were assessed on squat jump (SJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), Abalakov test (ABA), depth jump (DJ), mechanical power (MP), and medicine ball throw (MBT) after a 10-week in-season complex training program (T0) and at the end of 4 (T4), 8 (T8), 12 (T12), and 16 (T16) weeks of detraining and of the reduced training periods. Both groups showed maintenance of explosive strength values and statistical similarity between them whatever the moment of evaluation. In conclusion, 16 weeks of detraining or of reduced training allow for the maintenance of the gains previously achieved by the application of a 10-week in-season complex training program. However, the lack of differences between detraining and reduced training leads to the conclusion that regular basketball practice can sustain by itself the previously achieved explosive strength gains, considering its mainly explosive characteristics.