Article Title



Dimitrije Cabarkapa1, Andrew C. Fry1, Damjana V. Cabarkapa1, Chloe A. Myers1, Grant T. Jones1, Michael A. Deane1

1Jawhawk Athletic Performance Laboratory – Wu Tsai Human Performance Alliance, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS

While the development of an optimal shooting motion has been a primary focus for many basketball coaches, there is a lack of scientific literature addressing elementary biomechanical attributes. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of shooting approach and distance on basketball shooting motion kinematics for women. METHODS: Twenty-two females (hgt=167.8±7.8 cm; wgt=76.8±4.4 kg; age=23.1±2.6 yrs) performed a total of 1320 shots. Each subject attempted 30 2-point (5.20 m) and 30 3-point (6.75 m) shots using stationary, step-in left-right and step-in right-left shooting approaches. Each shot and shooting approach were separated by 5-10 sec and 1-2 min rest intervals, respectively. Kinematic variables measured with Kinovea (V0.8.27) video analysis software at the initial concentric phase of the shooting motion were knee angle (internal angle between thigh and shank), hip angle (internal angle between torso and thigh), elbow angle (internal angle between upper arm and forearm), ankle angle (angle between the shank and ground), shoulder angle (angle between upper arm and torso), and relative elbow height (perpendicular distance between the olecranon process and the ground divided by subject’s height). MANOVA and follow-up ANOVAs were used to examine statistically significant interactions and main effects (p<.05). RESULTS: A non-significant interaction was observed between shooting approach and distance. Significant differences in elbow height (p=.006), knee (p=.021), ankle (p=.007), and shoulder (p=.027) angles were detected (Table 1). CONCLUSION: The approach had no impact on the kinematic parameters of shooting motion. Along with greater shoulder extension, an increase in shooting distance required greater flexion in the knee and ankle joints which ultimately led to a lower elbow height. These kinematic adjustments may be mainly attributed to the need for greater ground reaction forces necessary to propel the ball to the basket.

Table 1.docx (21 kB)
Table 1

This document is currently not available here.