Possession is an important, and overlooked, aspect of most sports. Maintaining possession in soccer is fundamental. American football coaches extol the virtues of quarterbacks who don't turn the ball over.

Basketball is no different - possessions, and what a team does with them, are important. Think about it: the only guaranteed way for a team to receive possession of the ball is if the other team makes a basket or commits an unforced turnover. A basketball team cannot expect other teams to consistently turn over the ball of their own accord, and a team is not going to win many games if they only receive possession because of opponents' made shots.

Since basketball is a possession game, the other ways teams can gain additional possessions are extremely important. Rebounds are one way. Steals are another. Blocks can lead to possessions, but are not guaranteed to (and so are somewhat less valuable than rebounds and steals).

It may seem like rebounds and steals are things that 'just happen' in NBA games, but they're not - some players consistently average more rebounds, steals, blocks and turnovers than others, regardless of what team they're on or who their teammates are. "And that," in the words of Champ Kind, "is a scientific fact."

A team CANNOT score points unless they have opportunities to shoot the ball. Therefore, a fantastic (ie: efficient) shooter who does very little else to gain possessions (like Jason Kopono) is completely reliant on his teammates to gain more possessions so that he can shoot. And if a team can employ a similarly efficient shooter, but one who also is also productive in terms of gaining possessions, that team will benefit.

Overvaluing shooters and scorers in basketball is the equivalent of overvaluing a quarterback in football. Fans tend to blame QBs for losses and credit them for wins. Yes, QBs touch the ball on every single offensive play (which is still only half the plays in a game), so they certainly do contribute a lot to a team's fortunes. But no QB has ever won or lost a game on his own.

In basketball, no shooter - like Kobe Bryant - has ever won a game on his own, either. Kobe takes an extremely high volume of shots at a respectable shooting percentage. He does many other things relatively well for a shooting guard, such as getting rebounds and assists, but he's not too special - on a per-minute basis - with regards to other possession factors, such as steals, block and turnovers.

My point is, many people consider Kobe the best player on the planet, hands down. As a matter of fact I heard two announcers mention it during the recent Lakers-Cavs game. What they mean, I think, is that Kobe is the most amazing shooter. He seems to have an uncanny knack in making difficult shots, he appears fearless on the offensive end, and he has tremendous 'hot streaks'.

These are all subjective factors. In other words, they are the antithesis of what this blog is all about. People appreciate what Kobe does as an art form. At times his physical grace is quite beautiful and frankly, rather amazing. However, the fact remains - while Kobe is an excellent all-around player, and a fairly efficient scorer, he is in no way the best player in the league if by 'best' you mean 'contributes the most to helping his team win'.

It's no secret that Kobe was reliant upon a certain player during the Laker's recent championship successes. Shaq was a possession force - he rebounded extremely well, blocked many, many shots and turned the ball over infrequently. His ability to gain possessions gave Kobe the opportunity to take many additional shots. But Shaq could shoot too (from close range), and since he was a center he shot at a much, much higher percentage than did Kobe.

I think I need to stop this post now. I'm starting to ramble. My point - really - is that possession factors are undervalued in the NBA, while scoring is overvalued. Think about it - if team A has more possessions than team B, and team A shoots a higher percentage than team B, is it even possible for team B to win the game?