查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- Constructing a Long-Term Performance Evaluation Method for a Professional Basketball Guard Player
- 運動組織與贊助商對運動贊助目標重要性認同之評估:以超級籃球聯賽為例
- 層級分析法在工程動態品質評鑑之應用--以地下連續壁工程為例
- 模糊與灰色評估方法之比較--以高速鐵路技術型式之評估為例
- 應用層級分析法(AHP)於投標案評選
- 應用層級分析法(AHP)於投標案評選
- 農會信用部再造方案之評估--層級分析法之應用
- 智慧型住宅大樓功能設計之實證研究
- 多目標準則下之決策--層級分析法之應用
- 都市廊道景觀生態功能評估架構之研究--以臺中市東光園道為例
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | Constructing a Long-Term Performance Evaluation Method for a Professional Basketball Guard Player=建構一個評估職業籃球後衛球員長期績效的方法 |
---|---|
作 者 | 游崑慈; 蘇忠信; 莊睿宸; | 書刊名 | 慈濟技術學院學報 |
卷 期 | 12 2008.12[民97.12] |
頁 次 | 頁139-150 |
分類號 | 528.952 |
關鍵詞 | 層級分析法; 技術績效指標; 超級籃球聯賽; Analytic hierarchy process; AHP; Technique performance indices; TPIs; Super basketball league; SBL; |
語 文 | 英文(English) |
中文摘要 | 目的:本研究旨在提出技術績效指標(TPIs)作為建構職業籃球選手長期的技術績效評估方法。方法:以八種主要技術項目作為評估準則包括:得分、命中率、籃板、助攻、阻攻、抄截、失誤、與犯規來定義各個項目之技術績效指標(Technique Performance Index),經由專家意見與層級分析法(Analytic Hierarchy Process)評估後衛球員其在各個評估準則間之權重,並整合成為一完整績效評估的方法。結果:以台灣超級籃球聯賽(SBL)第三屆後衛球員攻守紀錄為實例,(一)進行AHP一致性比率檢定C.R.= 0.09 < 0.1,表示本次專家訪談具有高度一致的看法,權重的設定具可信度;(二)根據Pearson相關分析得到七支球隊後衛的績效指標與例行賽的勝率的相關係數高達0.65,表示二者具有高度正相關,足見後衛是主宰球賽勝負很大的關鍵;(三)各隊後衛在各單項指標與整體指標表現如表五所列,可以看出各項技術層面的差異。結論:在AHP檢定上、球隊績效指標與勝率的相關驗證上皆說明本研究所提出之後衛球員技術績效評估方法是具有高效度且合理的,透過此模式可提供教練與球員了解本身的優缺點,作為未來訓練計畫與人員調整的參考。 |
英文摘要 | Objective: The purpose of this study is to propose Technique Performance Indices (TPIs) for constructing a long-term performance evaluation method for a basketball guard player. Method: Eight technical criteria, including point per game (PPG), field goal made (FGM), rebound, assist, block, steal, turnover, and foul, were selected as TPIs. Through expert opinions and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), the weights of a guard player under each criterion were determined, and then form a performance evaluation method. Results: Based on the defensive and offensive records of Super Basketball League (SBL). (1) The consistency ratio (C.R.) derived from the AHP consistency test is 0.09 < 0.1, indicating that the consistency of expert opinions is high and the proposed weight setting for each criterion is reliable. (2) The correlation efficient between the TPIs and winning rate of seven basketball teams reaches 0.65, showing a highly positive relationship between the two. (3) The indices including the single item and integration are listed on Table 5, which could be used as comparing with the differences among the guard players of seven teams. Conclusion: The AHP test result and correlations between TPIs and winning rate all indicate that TPIs proposed are highly valid and reasonable. By the application of this method, we hope to help the coaches and players to identify their own weaknesses and advantages, and utilize it as a reference for future training and adjustment plans. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。