Play as practice? Comparative analysis of preparation period and match adjustments in a basketball team's performance.

In basketball, successful performance relies on the optimal use of top-down strategic guidance by coaches and bottom-up adjustments by players, requiring a preparation plan consistent with match demands. The aim of this study was to analyze the strategic-tactical tendencies between a basketball team's preparation and match performance phases for a U16 men's national team during a continental tournament. The team was composed by 12 players (aged 16 ± 0.4) with at least three years of participation in basketball competitions. Data from team strategy (the playbook), team practices, and match performance were integrated through a common set of variables in a decision support framework, the Team Learning Cycle (TLC). The influence of situational variables with respect to preparation and match performance consistency and efficiency was also investigated. The preparation phase significantly emphasized small-sided games focused on group-tactics-based attacks, combining offense and defense, usually in the set offense. During the matches, the set offense was also significantly prioritized. The frequency of group-tactics-based attacks increased relative to team plays from the group phase to the elimination phase (p < 0.05). Efficiency generally improved during close matches, suggesting successful team strategy learning and tactical autonomy from preparation to matches. Using consistency and efficiency together provided for an effective evaluation of a team's preparation-performance relationship. This evidence underscores the importance of sensitive monitoring methods for establishing accurate associations between preparation and performance. Coaches can use this systematic procedure to critically examine their use of preparation time relative to match performance. Additionally, basketball managers may find that TLC-related evidence supports evaluating coaches' multi-dimensional skills from a broader perspective than simply winning rates, offering a more objective and comprehensive assessment of coaching effectiveness.