Hesi Sports Consulting//home_of_hesi_scout

Unclaimed

event_player · FIBA U18 Asia Cup 2026

Boxin Zhao

Center · CHN · b. 2010

//measurables

215 cm

HEIGHT

//15_second_scouting_read

data-led profile

Two-way event impact

Rebounding and Scoring efficiency are the clearest relative production signals in this event.

automated_event_signals

7.3 RPGRebounding · 91st event percentile

56.3% TSScoring efficiency · 75th event percentile

88.8
HESI v2.1: #22
of 188: 60%
sample weight

Performance

1 rated event

Published event intelligence

Film

No public film

Movement and decisions remain unverified

Scouting

No final report

No human evaluation on file

Competition

1 event

Event context and history available

profile_index

//performance_intelligence

Event-scoped HESI impact, role, sample strength, team context, and the questions that still need film verification.

//athlete_dossier · event_intelligence

HESI v2.1 performance dossier

Event-scoped production and two-way impact. This is performance data—not a scout evaluation or universal OVR.

Open event intelligence

FIBA U18 Asia Cup2026

Rank #22 of 188 · Provisional

HESI v2.1

HESI

88.8

Event performance

89th event percentile

82.5

Prospect index

89th event percentile

ORtg

115.6

Points / 100 poss.

80th event percentile

DRtg

79.6

Lower is better

95th event percentile

NRtg

+36.0

Two-way margin

89th event percentile

Offensive evidence

ORtg 115.6 · 80th event percentile

Defensive evidence

DRtg 79.6 · Stop% 79.7% · Team DRtg 88.8

Sample context

6 games · 92 minutes · 60% weight

//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade

Two-way event impactevent-relative description

Rebounding and Scoring efficiency are the clearest relative production signals in this event.

Rebounding

7.3 RPG91st event percentile

Scoring efficiency

56.3% TS75th event percentile

Questions for film

01
How stable is this profile over a larger game and minute sample?
02
Does the film show repeatable advantage creation or mostly connective passing?
03
Can the scoring load hold as defensive attention and role responsibility increase?

Explore full efficiency + production profile

//impact_fingerprint

Where the profile separates

HESI performance

88.8

89th event percentile

Prospect index

82.5

89th event percentile

Offensive efficiency

115.6

80th event percentile

Defensive efficiency

79.6

95th event percentile

Two-way margin

+36.0

89th event percentile

Stop percentage

79.7%

98th event percentile

//role_and_production

How the production is shaped

Scoring load

5.3 PPG

45th event percentile

Creation

0.3 APG

21st event percentile

Rebounding

7.3 RPG

91st event percentile

Defensive activity

2.5 stocks

58th event percentile

Scoring efficiency

56.3% TS

75th event percentile

How to read HESI, PI and Dean Oliver ratings

//reading_guide

How to read the dossier

HESI

Stabilized event performance

A 0–100 event-relative rank of stabilized Net Rating. Smaller samples are pulled toward neutral before players are ordered.

Prospect index

80% HESI performance, 12% competition context and 8% age context. It remains an event-scoped prospect index—not a universal ranking.

ORtg · DRtg · NRtg

Dean Oliver impact

Estimated points created and allowed per 100 possessions, plus their net difference. Lower DRtg is better.

Percentiles compare this athlete only with the published, trust-gated player pool from this event. Missing evidence stays blank and is never converted to zero.

event_signals

Automated Signals

The strongest patterns in this event sample, adjusted to the competition when event percentiles are available.

P98
Rim Protection
2.3 BPG · 98th event percentile
P97
Defensive Impact
79.6 DRtg · 80% Stop% · 97th event percentile
P91
Rebounder
7.3 RPG · 91st event percentile
P89
Event Impact
88.8 HESI performance · 89th event percentile
P88
Two-Way Impact
+36.0 Net Rating · 88th event percentile

//automated_interpretation · dean_oliver + event_stats

What the numbers suggest

HESI performance sits at the 89th event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 115.6 ORtg and 79.6 DRtg, producing a +36.0 Net Rating. The clearest relative strengths are defensive stops, defensive efficiency, and rebounding. The lowest relative area is creation.

Relative strengths

Defensive stops
79.7% Stop%
98th event percentile
The estimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player’s contribution is relatively strong.
Defensive efficiency
79.6 DRtg
95th event percentile
The favorable defensive percentile reflects a lower player DRtg relative to this event pool.
Rebounding
7.3 RPG
91st event percentile
Rebounding production is a clear relative contribution within this event.

Relative weaknesses

Creation
0.3 APG
21st event percentile
Assist production is a lower relative area; the model cannot determine unrecorded creation or role constraints.

//complete_statistical_profile

Every verified signal in this event

Percentile labels compare the player with the same published event pool. Context-only values are shown without inventing a rank.

Offense and scoring

Efficiency, scoring load, shooting shape and creation.

ORtg

115.6

80th event percentile

Estimated points produced per 100 possessions.

Points

5.3 PPG

45th event percentile

Scoring volume per game.

True shooting

56.3%

75th event percentile

Scoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.

Effective FG

50.0%

69th event percentile

Field-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.

Field goals

50.0%

83rd event percentile

Overall field-goal percentage.

Free throws

80.0%

75th event percentile

Free-throw conversion in this event.

Floor%

55.4%

85th event percentile

Estimated share of possessions producing at least one point.

Assists

0.3 APG

21st event percentile

Recorded passing production per game.

Defense and disruption

Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.

DRtg

79.6

95th event percentile

Estimated points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.

Team DRtg

88.8

context

Team defensive baseline used by the Dean Oliver estimate.

Defensive lift

+9.2

97th event percentile

Player DRtg is lower than the team baseline.

Stop%

79.7%

98th event percentile

Estimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.

Recorded activity

2.5 STL+BLK

58th event percentile

Steals plus blocks per game; it does not capture positioning or containment.

Estimated stops

30.0

context

Dean Oliver estimated defensive stops across the event sample.

Two-way and all-around impact

Net impact, stabilized performance and supporting production.

Net Rating

+36.0

89th event percentile

Raw ORtg minus DRtg.

Stabilized NRtg

+18.6

89th event percentile

Net Rating pulled toward the event median according to sample size.

HESI performance

88.8

89th event percentile

Event-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.

Prospect index

82.5

89th event percentile

HESI performance with competition and age context.

PIE

5.5%

77th event percentile

Estimated share of positive game events while on the floor.

Rebounds

7.3 RPG

91st event percentile

Total rebounding production per game.

Sample and confidence

How much evidence supports the estimates shown above.

Games

context

Published games included in this event line.

Minutes

91.7

context

15.3 minutes per game.

Sample weight

60.5%

context

How strongly the model trusts raw Net Rating versus the event median.

Confidence

Provisional

context

Model confidence based on available games and minutes.

Event rank

#22

context

Among 188 published players.

Team possessions

491.9

context

Estimated team possessions supporting the defensive context.

model_limits

The available game and minute sample is still limited, so these relative findings may move.
This is an automated event-relative interpretation, not a scout evaluation or universal player grade.
Box scores cannot measure assignment difficulty, positioning, communication, decision quality, or off-ball value.

//competition_evidence

Where the production happened, how strong the event pool was, and every published competition supporting the profile.

competition_context

Competition

Primary competition is the highest-stature event. Best ranking evidence is the strongest event-relative finish — they may come from different events.

//primary_competition · highest_stature

FIBA U18 Asia Cup

Continental · 2026

5.3

PPG

7.3

RPG

0.3

APG

#22

RANK

competition_history

All competitions

Every published competition this player appeared in, strongest first, with its complete verified stat line.

FIBA U18 Asia Cup

Continental · 2026

#22/188view →

//quick_read

The line at a glance

5.3

PPG

7.3

RPG

0.3

APG

1.0

TOV/G

0.0

3PM/G

56%

TS%

//event_fingerprint

Performance against this field

Scoring

5.3

P45

Playmaking

0.3

P21

Rebounding

7.3

P91

True shooting

56%

P75

Two-way impact

+36.0

P89

Stops

80%

P98

//shooting_profile

Makes, attempts and efficiency

Field goals

50%

12 made / 24 attempts

3PT

Three-pointers

—

0 made / 0 attempts

Free throws

80%

8 made / 10 attempts

Shot selection

0% of attempts from three

●2PA 24●3PA 0

//complete_box_score

Production by basketball action

scoring

PTS

5.3 / game

12–24

FGM–FGA

0–0

3PM–3PA

8–10

FTM–FTA

creation

AST

0.3 / game

TOV

1.0 / game

0.33×

AST:TOV

rebounding

REB

7.3 / game

OREB

DREB

7.3

REB/G

defense

STL

0.2 / game

BLK

2.3 / game

STL+BLK

2.5 / game

//hesi_and_dean_oliver

Efficiency and two-way impact

88.8

HESI

82.5

115.6

ORtg

79.6

DRtg

+36.0

NRtg

+18.6

Stable NRtg

80%

Stop%

55%

Floor%

50%

eFG%

PIE

88.8

Team DRtg

+9.2

Def. lift

around_this_rank

Around this rank

Event-scoped ranking within FIBA U18 Asia Cup 2026 — 188 ranked players.

rank_above · #21William HamiltonF · AUS

//current_rank

#22

of 188 ranked

rank_below · #23John AryangF · AUS

more_from_this_event

Key stats

FIBA U18 Asia Cup · 2026 — scoped to this competition pool.

5.3

PPG

7.3

RPG

0.3

APG

0.2

SPG

2.3

BPG

—

3P%

56%

TS%

event_stats