Also, and this is the most important thing I need to focus on -- get my fitness and conditioning up. That's the most athletic thing I can do for my game. I play good defense, or good offense, but i can't do both for more than a minute or two. Let me get my squat goals out of the way and i'll be a full time aerobic guy.
well, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. but doing some tempo sprinting and basketball-specific conditioning (defensive slides, dribbling up and down the court with layups at each end, etc., i'm sure there are millions of drills) would do you wonders.
Full time aerobic guy? That will kill your game. The best thing you can do for you game is become a knock down quick-release shooter and a semi-competent dribbler. A 6'4'' guy who is a dead-eye shooter from outside the line is really hard to guard if he even a tiny bit of an ability to go past his man.
Listen's to LBSS's advice as far as conditioning and keep it basketball specific. Tempo sprints are great for body composition and recovery from speed work; but tempo sprinting trains you to be an efficient at moderate velocity sprint work... something you NEVER do on a basketball court. If you have the time you should get your basketball conditioning done with basketball specific conditioning... if you are pressed and need to lose fat tempo sprints are great because you can get a lot of work done in 20 minutes.
i was kind of kidding about the beep test but not really: i think it's as good a measure of sport fitness as anything other than game performance.
Really? I don't understand why the beep test is relied on at all. The beep test is still totally aerobic. Sure it's progressive aerobic cardiovascular endurance rather than a sustained aerobic cardiovascular endurance (like mileage) which is WAY better but still far from optimal. Basketball, football, etc. are still primarily anaerobic!! Additionally the beep test also is poorly designed because it measures the absolutely useless skill of timing running speeds so they are running just slow enough to just make it during the initial beeps and conserve energy for the faster beeps.
I think the beep test is popular because it actually predicts basketball fitness quite well because the intermittent beeps allow speed reserve to play a large role in the test. A fast athlete like a Russell Westbrook will be able to rely on his speed reserve to use very little energy when the beep interval is long or moderate just like he can conserve a lot of energy running at sub-max speeds on the court ( when others are closer to max effort ). This is however an "accident" of the test. Speed == Endurance when the difference is speed is large; rather than the beep test you could just have all the basketball players run a 50m sprint (even better would three lengths of the court with stopping and starting) and you would get similar results. However, you are still just testing speed rather than disentangling fitness or endurance or testing that specific quality.
This is the same concept behind short to long sprint training. If you run a 22s 200m and a 49s (split 23, 27) 400m and increase your top speed so that you can run 20.x and 48s (split 23,25) in the 400m did you get more fit or did you get faster? I would argue that you got faster but actually got less endurance/fitness. Having 20.x speed allowed you to run 23s on speed reserve making it really easy to come back at 25s (which you couldn't do before)... but given your new 200m speed of 20.x your 48s time in the 400m is quite pedestrian.
The beep test is a poor test because if we disentangle speed from the test we will find it's really quite useless. For example if we take all NBA athletes and test their max speed in a three court lengths sprint (with stopping/starting) and then bin the athletes by ability; THEN see who performs best within the speed cohort you would be testing only which athletes have the most progressive aerobic cardiovascular endurance... which is a poor measure of basketball specific fitness.
A better test has to consider the physiology better. Even the above example (three court lengths) is really cheating because it is not a measure of "pure speed" aside from endurance. Since running speed involves elastic reactive components and has to be progressively built up it's not really possible to test raw sprint power ie. it takes 3-5 seconds to get up to top speed and 3-5 seconds is long enough that the body will need to use the phosphagen system to regenerate some ATP - thus you are testing the ability of the muscle to fuel itself (endurance/fitness) rather than just the capability of the muscle contraction to produce speed. A closer approximation to the muscle capability would be a flying run, approach jump, broad jump or multi bounds.
Assuming equal "speed capability", trainable basketball specific fitness would be better tested by a measure which measured the ability of the athlete to regenerate ATP during short and long bouts of periods of zero to no effort which are a very important part of basketball. Basketball players have to move between all gears including really easy to really hard which requires that every energy system be well trained. The reason I don't think you see a test better than the beep test is because pretty much every athlete at a high level gets whipped into what is pretty close to maximal shape for them just by the amount of playing games and practice that they do. They are so fit that a lot of players sit out to avoid wear and tear and injury almost moreso than to regain energy.