This study assessed the influence of exercise prescription on the objectively measured exercise dose in basketball. Intensity (RPE) and volume (sRPE) were prescribed by a professional coach on a drill-by-drill basis during pre-season training for nine elite basketball players. Training drills were classified by prescribed intensity (easy-moderate, moderate-hard, hard–very hard, and very hard-maximal) and type (warm-up, skill-development, offensive- and defensive-technical/tactical, or match-simulation). Exercise intensity was objectively quantified using accelerometry-derived average net force (AvFNet) and time spent in accelerometry-derived relative intensity zones. The volume of exercise (exercise dose) was objectively quantified using accumulated impulse (AvFNet × duration). Relationships between prescribed volume and exercise dose were explored by correlations between sRPE and drill-by-drill accumulation of sRPE (dRPE) with impulse. Very hard-maximal drill intensity was greater than hard-very hard (p = 0.011), but not moderate-hard (p = 0.945). Very hard-maximal drills included the most time performing Supra-maximal intensity (>100% V ˙ O2R) efforts (p < 0.001), suggesting that intensity prescription was based upon the amount of high-intensity exercise. Correlations between impulse with sRPE and dRPE were moderate (r = 0.401, p = 0.197) and very-large (r = 0.807, p = 0.002), respectively, demonstrating that the coach misinterpreted the accumulative effect of drill volume over an entire training session. Overall, a mismatch existed between exercise prescription and exercise dose. Objective monitoring might assist coaches to improve precision of exercise prescription.