第31届奥运会中国男篮与澳大利亚男篮攻防RSR值对比分析

发布时间：2018-06-25 14:09

本文选题：第31届奥运会 + 中国男篮　；参考：《广州大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：在2016年8月份结束的第31届里约奥运会男子篮球比赛中,中国男篮与美国男篮、法国男篮、塞尔维亚男篮、委内瑞拉男篮、澳大利亚男篮同分在A组。澳大利亚男篮以4胜1负小组第二的战绩晋级下一轮,而中国男篮五战皆负排名小组垫底惨遭淘汰。以第31届里约奥运会A组所有参赛球队的技术统计数据以及中国男篮和澳大利亚男篮与同组其他球队相互比赛的技术统计数据为调查对象,通过文献资料法、秩和比综合评价法、问卷调查法、数理统计法等研究方法对中国男篮与澳大利亚男篮进攻RSR值、防守RSR值和攻防RSR值以及攻防技术统计指标;中国男篮与澳大利亚男篮各位置球员技术统计指标排名;中国男篮对阵澳大利亚男篮全场及每节比赛技术统计指标进行比较分析,研究结果表明:第31届奥运会中国男篮和澳大利亚男篮相比,中国男篮球队平均年龄低于澳大利亚男篮,但拥有参加世界级大赛经历的球员数量远远少于澳大利亚男篮,球员整体经验不足。本届奥运会男篮小组赛,中国男篮除了场均罚篮排名小组第二;场均盖帽排名小组第二;场均抢断排名小组第三;其他技术统计数据基本都排在小组末尾。澳大利亚男篮除了场均罚篮命中率、场均盖帽、场均抢断排名小组第五,场均罚篮排名小组第四,其他技术统计数据均排在小组前两名。澳大利亚男篮进攻RSR值为0.72,排名小组第二,进攻实力为B等级;防守RSR值为0.65,排名小组第三,防守实力为B等级;攻防RSR值为0.75,排在小组第二,攻防实力为B等级。中国男篮进攻RSR值为0.25,排名小组倒数第一,进攻实力为D等级;防守RSR值为0.43,排在小组倒数第二,防守实力为C等级;中国男篮攻防RSR值为0.3,排名小组垫底,攻防实力为D等级。本届奥运会中国男篮攻弱于守,澳大利亚男篮攻守兼备。中国男篮球队进攻RSR值、防守RSR值、攻防RSR值与澳大利亚男篮相比存在差距。中国男篮与澳大利亚男篮技术统计指标相比,中国男篮除了场均盖帽、场均抢断和场均罚篮领先以外,其他项技术统计指标均落后于澳大利亚男篮。在场均助攻和场均篮板球尤其是场均前场篮板球这些技术指标统计上差距明显。澳大利亚男篮球风剽悍,大赛经验丰富,善于跟对手进行身体对抗,利用身体接触扰乱对手心态。澳大利亚男篮球员拼抢进攻篮板非常积极,掩护配合高质量,在篮板球数(尤其是进攻篮板球)和助攻数上远高于中国男篮。中国男篮跟澳大利亚男篮相比,球员身体对抗能力和大赛经验不足,球员基本功不扎实,团队配合质量较低。小组赛双方直接交手,暴露出中国男篮替补队员整体实力、球员(尤其是中锋位置球员)身体对抗、个人基本功、大赛经验、团队配合质量等方面与澳大利亚男篮的差距。
[Abstract]:In the men's basketball competition of the 31st Rio Olympic Games, which ended in August 2016, the Chinese men's basketball team was in Group A with the American Men's Basketball team, the French Men's Basketball team, the Serbian Men's Basketball team, the Venezuelan Men's Basketball team and the Australian Men's Basketball team. The Australian team advanced to the next round with a 4-1 second in the group, while the Chinese men's basketball team all lost to the bottom of the ranking group in five games Based on the technical statistics of all the teams in Group A of the 31st Rio Olympic Games and the technical statistics of the Chinese men's basketball team and the Australian men's basketball team playing with other teams in the same group, Rank sum ratio comprehensive evaluation method, questionnaire survey, mathematical statistics and other research methods to Chinese men's basketball and Australian men's basketball offensive RSR value, defense RSR value and attack and defense RSR value, as well as attack and defense technical statistical indicators; The Chinese men's basketball team and the Australian men's basketball team each position player technical statistics index rank, the Chinese men's basketball team faces the Australian men's basketball entire court and each section competition technical statistical index carries on the comparative analysis, The results show that the average age of the Chinese men's basketball team in the 31st Olympic Games is lower than that of the Australian men's basketball team, but the number of players with world-class competition experience is far less than that of the Australian men's basketball team. The players as a whole are inexperienced. In the Olympic men's basketball group stage, the Chinese men's basketball team ranked second in the group in addition to the average free throw in the field; second in the group with average blocked shots in the field; third in the group in the steals per game; and most of the other technical statistics were at the bottom of the group. The Australian men's basketball team ranked fifth in the group of steals per game, fourth in the group on average in the field penalty basket, and two in the top two in other technical statistics, in addition to the average shooting rate of the free-throw basket in the field, the average shot in the field per game, the fifth in the group and the fifth in the group. Australian men's basketball team offensive RSR value is 0.72, second group, offensive strength is B grade; defensive RSR value is 0.65, group third, defensive strength is B grade; attack and defense RSR value is 0.75, second in group, attack and defense strength is B grade. The offensive RSR value of Chinese men's basketball team was 0.25, ranking first in the group, and the offensive strength was D grade; the defensive RSR value was 0.43, the second lowest in the group, and the defensive strength was C grade; the RSR value of attack and defense of Chinese men's basketball team was 0.3, which was the bottom of the rank group. Attack and defense strength is D grade. This Olympic Games Chinese men's basketball attack weaker than defense, Australian men's basketball attack and defense both. Chinese men's basketball team attack RSR value, defense RSR value, attack and defense RSR value compared with the Australian men's basketball team there is a gap. Compared with the technical statistical indexes of Australian men's basketball, Chinese men's basketball lags behind Australian men's basketball in other technical statistical indexes, except average cap, average steals in the field and lead in free throw in the field. The statistical difference between the technical indexes of assists and rebounds, especially in the front field, is obvious. Australian men's basketball team, the game experience, good at physical confrontation with the opponent, use physical contact to disrupt the opponent's mentality. Australian men's basketball players are very active in attacking rebounds, covering and cooperating with high quality, far higher in rebounds (especially offensive rebounds) and assists than in Chinese men's basketball. Compared with the Australian men's basketball, the Chinese men's basketball team lacks physical confrontation ability and competition experience, the basic skills of the players are not solid, and the quality of team cooperation is low. The direct exchange between the two sides exposed the gap between the Chinese men's basketball substitute team and the Australian men's basketball team in terms of physical confrontation, personal basic skills, competition experience, team cooperation quality, and so on, including the overall strength of the Chinese men's basketball team, the physical confrontation of the players (especially the players in the center position).
【学位授予单位】：广州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：G841

【参考文献】