本文關(guān)鍵詞：2013-2014NBA總決賽馬刺隊(duì)與熱火隊(duì)技術(shù)運(yùn)用對比分析　出處：《太原理工大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： NBA總決賽 馬刺隊(duì) 熱火隊(duì) 技術(shù) 2013-2014 進(jìn)攻 防守

【摘要】：技術(shù)作為籃球運(yùn)動(dòng)競賽中最為重要的制勝因素之一，技術(shù)的運(yùn)用與發(fā)揮情況直接決定著比賽的結(jié)果。通過文獻(xiàn)資料法、專家訪談法、錄像觀察法和數(shù)理統(tǒng)計(jì)法，對2013-2014NBA總決賽馬刺隊(duì)與熱火隊(duì)5場比賽的進(jìn)攻技術(shù)、防守技術(shù)和攻守兼?zhèn)浼夹g(shù)的系統(tǒng)全面地比較，探索高水平籃球比賽中的制勝因素，找出勝利和失敗的原因，為未來籃球訓(xùn)練和競賽工作提供可參考性意見。主要研究結(jié)論如下： （1）第一回合：馬刺隊(duì)內(nèi)線技術(shù)發(fā)揮穩(wěn)定，在罰球得分、二分球得分效率、三分球得分效率、助攻技術(shù)上，馬刺隊(duì)占據(jù)優(yōu)勢，造成對手失誤得分、二分球得分、二分球和三分球貢獻(xiàn)率馬刺低于熱火；第一回合馬刺隊(duì)在緊逼防守技術(shù)的發(fā)揮方面弱于熱火隊(duì)。 （2）第二回合：馬刺隊(duì)在投籃總次數(shù)上占優(yōu)，助攻次數(shù)較多，但內(nèi)線發(fā)揮不好，投籃的命中率不高，熱火隊(duì)主力較高的罰球次數(shù)和較高的罰球命中率，二分球（近距離投籃）貢獻(xiàn)率、快攻得分、內(nèi)線得分和造成對手失誤得分方面，熱火隊(duì)在本場比賽中的發(fā)揮情況均優(yōu)于對手高出馬刺隊(duì)；熱火隊(duì)替補(bǔ)隊(duì)員的緊逼防守和后場籃板技術(shù)的良好發(fā)揮造成馬刺隊(duì)出現(xiàn)較多失誤。 （3）第三回合：馬刺隊(duì)在本場比賽中，三分球貢獻(xiàn)率、替補(bǔ)隊(duì)員在得分貢獻(xiàn)率、總得分效率、罰球次數(shù)、罰球命中率、助攻次數(shù)、搶斷球、蓋帽技術(shù)發(fā)揮、快攻得分技術(shù)方面和內(nèi)線技術(shù)運(yùn)用方面均高于熱火；馬刺隊(duì)在三分球進(jìn)攻、主力二分進(jìn)攻技術(shù)運(yùn)用的時(shí)效性方面弱于熱火隊(duì)。 （4）第四回合：馬刺隊(duì)主力隊(duì)員、替補(bǔ)隊(duì)員比熱火隊(duì)有著較高的近距離得分效率、投籃的命中率、罰球命中率、助攻次數(shù)、前場籃板和后場籃板，馬刺隊(duì)三分球命中率并不表現(xiàn)出較大的差距，三分球貢獻(xiàn)率低于熱火隊(duì)；在搶斷球技術(shù)和緊逼防守技術(shù)運(yùn)用造成對手失誤方面，雙方球隊(duì)并沒有表現(xiàn)出明顯的優(yōu)勢。 （5）第五回合：遠(yuǎn)投技術(shù)的發(fā)揮、得分效率方面，，馬刺隊(duì)明顯優(yōu)于對手，尤其是替補(bǔ)隊(duì)員的優(yōu)勢更為明顯；在助攻技術(shù)、快攻技術(shù)、搶斷球技術(shù)運(yùn)用方面，馬刺隊(duì)在本場比賽中占據(jù)明顯優(yōu)勢，熱火隊(duì)較低的助攻效率，過多依靠個(gè)人技術(shù)強(qiáng)攻也是導(dǎo)致最終失利的重要原因。 （6）場均比較結(jié)果：馬刺隊(duì)替補(bǔ)隊(duì)員進(jìn)攻方面承擔(dān)著更多進(jìn)攻角色，而熱火隊(duì)過多地依賴主力隊(duì)員；馬刺隊(duì)在籃下的整體進(jìn)攻技術(shù)和中近距離投籃技術(shù)方面的發(fā)揮優(yōu)于熱火隊(duì)；馬刺隊(duì)二分球、三分球命中、得分效率、罰球命中率、場均助攻次數(shù)、全場籃板數(shù)量、近距離投籃技術(shù)運(yùn)用的實(shí)施效果，以及緊逼造成對手失誤技術(shù)均高于熱火隊(duì)；在整體上，馬刺隊(duì)內(nèi)線得分優(yōu)于熱火隊(duì)，但熱火隊(duì)主力隊(duì)員的內(nèi)線較強(qiáng)，而替補(bǔ)隊(duì)員的內(nèi)線得分技術(shù)能力與馬刺隊(duì)替補(bǔ)隊(duì)員相比相對較差。
[Abstract]:As one of the most important winning factors in basketball competition, the application and exertion of technology directly determine the result of the game. Through the method of literature, expert interview, video observation and mathematical statistics. In order to explore the winning factors in the high-level basketball match, the attack technique, defense technique and attack and defense technology of the Spurs and Heat in the 2013-2014 NBA Finals are compared in a systematic and comprehensive way. To find out the reasons of victory and defeat, to provide reference for future basketball training and competition. The main conclusions are as follows: The first round: the Spurs inline technique plays the stable, in the free throw score, the two-point goal score efficiency, the three-point score efficiency, the auxiliary attack technique, the Spurs team occupies the superiority, causes the opponent to miss the score. The contribution rate of two-ball and three-point Spurs was lower than that of Heat. The first-leg Spurs were weaker than the Heat in pressing defensive skills. Second round: the Spurs in the total number of shots in the total number of times, more times of assists, but the inside play is not good, shooting shooting rate is not high, the Heat's main force higher number of free throws and a higher percentage of free throws hit. The contribution rate of two-point ball (close shot), fast break score, inside line score and cause the opponent error score aspect, the heat team in this competition performance situation is superior to the opponent high Spurs team; The hot fire team substitute's tight defense and the backcourt backboard technique good display causes the Spurs team to appear many mistakes. Third round: the Spurs team in this game, three-point contribution rate, substitute in the score contribution rate, total scoring efficiency, free throw times, free throw hit ratio, assists, steals, cap play. The fast break score technique and the inside line technical application aspect are higher than the hot fire; Spurs in the three-point attack, the main 2-point attack technology application of the effectiveness of the team is weaker than the Heat. 4th round: the Spurs main player, the substitute team than the Heat has a higher close scoring efficiency, shooting hit rate, free throw hit rate, assists, the front and backcourt rebounds. The Spurs' three-point shooting rate does not show a big gap, the contribution rate of the three-point ball is lower than that of the Heat. The two teams did not show a clear advantage in the use of steals and tight defensive techniques to make mistakes. (5) 5th round: far throw technology, scoring efficiency, the Spurs team is obviously superior to the opponent, especially the advantage of the substitute is more obvious; In the auxiliary attack technology, fast break technology, the use of steals technology, the Spurs in this game occupies a clear advantage, the Heat's low auxiliary efficiency. Too much reliance on personal skills is also an important cause of eventual defeat. The results show that the Spurs substitute plays more offensive roles, while the Heat rely too much on the main players. The Spurs play better than the Heat in the overall offensive technique under the basket and the mid-close shooting technique. Spurs 2 points, 3 points hit, scoring efficiency, free throw hit rate, the average number of assists in the field, the total number of rebounds, the implementation of the use of close shooting technology. As well as pressing to cause the opponent error technology are higher than the heat team; On the whole, the inside score of Spurs is better than that of the Heat, but the inner line of the main players of the Heat is stronger, and the technical ability of the substitute is relatively poor compared with the substitute of the Spurs.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：太原理工大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：G841

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李金橋;譚明義;周學(xué)榮;;2009～2010賽季CBA季后賽制勝因素分析[J];安徽體育科技;2010年06期

2 畢仲春;宮魯鳴;葉慶輝;單曙光;;世界籃球技戰(zhàn)術(shù)發(fā)展新趨勢——以第16屆世界男籃錦標(biāo)賽為例[J];北京體育大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2011年04期

3 李士華;張秀華;;2007-2008年CBA季后賽防守技戰(zhàn)術(shù)運(yùn)用的分析[J];高師理科學(xué)刊;2009年04期

4 成惜今,谷晨;從雅典奧運(yùn)會(huì)看世界男子籃球運(yùn)動(dòng)的發(fā)展趨勢[J];廣州體育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年05期

5 楊振興;張樹來;;2013～2014賽季NBA總決賽馬刺隊(duì)制勝因素分析[J];安徽體育科技;2014年06期

6 印文晟;陳環(huán);;2006—2007賽季CBA總決賽技術(shù)統(tǒng)計(jì)分析[J];哈爾濱體育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年06期

7 李欽;;2009～2010賽季CBA總決賽新疆隊(duì)和廣東隊(duì)技戰(zhàn)術(shù)對比分析[J];哈爾濱體育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2010年04期

8 尹貽偉;;2008～2009賽季CBA總決賽廣東獲勝原因分析[J];軍事體育進(jìn)修學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年03期

9 何惠民;CBA與NBA球隊(duì)防守技戰(zhàn)術(shù)運(yùn)用的比較分析[J];吉林體育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年02期

10 蔣昊;陳麗娟;曾彥;;2009—2010賽季NBA總決賽湖人隊(duì)制勝因素分析[J];吉林體育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年03期

本文編號(hào)：1441131