ORtg
75.9
77th event percentileEstimated points produced per 100 possessions.
back_to_rankings
Unclaimed
event_player · FIBA U18 AfroBasket 2026
Menyar Ben Rabeh
Forward · TUN · b. 2008
//measurables
185 cm
HEIGHT
//15_second_scouting_read
data-led profileScoring efficiency-led profile
Scoring efficiency and Scoring load are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
automated_event_signals
//event_signalRim Protection1.0 BPG · 91st event percentileComputed automatically from event data. Tap any signal to see the evidence behind it.
42.0% TSScoring efficiency · 77th event percentile
6.2 PPGScoring load · 73rd event percentile
- 63.8
- HESI v2.1
- #53
- of 142
- 72%
- 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
2 events
Event context and history available
01
//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.
FIBA U18 AfroBasket2026
Rank #53 of 142 · Established
HESI
63.8
Event performance
64th event percentile
PI
62.6
Prospect index
63rd event percentile
ORtg
75.9
Points / 100 poss.
77th event percentile
DRtg
69.3
Lower is better
33rd event percentile
NRtg
+6.5
Two-way margin
60th event percentile
Offensive evidence
ORtg 75.9 · 77th event percentile
Defensive evidence
DRtg 69.3 · Stop% 52.4% · Team DRtg 62.1
Sample context
6 games · 153 minutes · 72% weight
//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade
Scoring efficiency-led profileevent-relative description
Scoring efficiency and Scoring load are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
Scoring efficiency
42.0% TS77th event percentile
Scoring load
6.2 PPG73rd event percentile
Questions for film
- 01
Does the film show repeatable advantage creation or mostly connective passing?
- 02
Do the steals and blocks come from disciplined reads, physical tools, or higher-risk activity?
Explore full efficiency + production profile
//impact_fingerprint
Where the profile separates
HESI performance
63.8
64th event percentile
Prospect index
62.6
63rd event percentile
Offensive efficiency
75.9
77th event percentile
Defensive efficiency
69.3
33rd event percentile
Two-way margin
+6.5
60th event percentile
Stop percentage
52.4%
17th event percentile
//role_and_production
How the production is shaped
Scoring load
6.2 PPG
73rd event percentile
Creation
0.7 APG
37th event percentile
Rebounding
4.2 RPG
61st event percentile
Defensive activity
1.2 stocks
49th event percentile
Scoring efficiency
42.0% TS
77th 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.
PI
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.
- P91
Rim Protection
1.0 BPG · 91st event percentile
//automated_interpretation · dean_oliver + event_stats
What the numbers suggest
HESI performance sits at the 64th event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 75.9 ORtg and 69.3 DRtg, producing a +6.5 Net Rating. The clearest relative strengths are offensive efficiency, scoring efficiency, and scoring load. The lowest relative areas are defensive stops, defensive efficiency, and creation.
Relative strengths
- 77th event percentile
Offensive efficiency
75.9 ORtg
The Dean Oliver estimate places offensive production per 100 possessions among the stronger results in this event.
- 77th event percentile
Scoring efficiency
42.0% TS
True shooting efficiency compares favorably with the published event pool.
- 73rd event percentile
Scoring load
6.2 PPG
Scoring volume stands out relative to players in the same published event pool.
Relative weaknesses
- 17th event percentile
Defensive stops
52.4% Stop%
The estimated defensive-stop share is a lower relative area in the available sample.
- 33rd event percentile
Defensive efficiency
69.3 DRtg
The player DRtg is less favorable relative to this event pool; matchup and team context still require film.
- 37th event percentile
Creation
0.7 APG
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.
Points
6.2 PPG
73rd event percentileScoring volume per game.
True shooting
42.0%
77th event percentileScoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.
Effective FG
41.5%
87th event percentileField-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.
Field goals
39.0%
91st event percentileOverall field-goal percentage.
Three-point shooting
16.7%
context2.0 attempts per game
Free throws
42.9%
33rd event percentileFree-throw conversion in this event.
Floor%
36.5%
74th event percentileEstimated share of possessions producing at least one point.
Assists
0.7 APG
37th event percentileRecorded passing production per game.
Defense and disruption
Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.
DRtg
69.3
33rd event percentileEstimated points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.
Team DRtg
62.1
contextTeam defensive baseline used by the Dean Oliver estimate.
Defensive lift
-7.2
16th event percentilePlayer DRtg is higher than the team baseline.
Stop%
52.4%
17th event percentileEstimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.
Recorded activity
1.2 STL+BLK
49th event percentileSteals plus blocks per game; it does not capture positioning or containment.
Estimated stops
33.8
contextDean Oliver estimated defensive stops across the event sample.
Two-way and all-around impact
Net impact, stabilized performance and supporting production.
Net Rating
+6.5
60th event percentileRaw ORtg minus DRtg.
Stabilized NRtg
+2.3
64th event percentileNet Rating pulled toward the event median according to sample size.
HESI performance
63.8
64th event percentileEvent-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.
Prospect index
62.6
63rd event percentileHESI performance with competition and age context.
PIE
0.0%
22nd event percentileEstimated share of positive game events while on the floor.
Rebounds
4.2 RPG
61st event percentileTotal rebounding production per game.
Sample and confidence
How much evidence supports the estimates shown above.
Games
6
contextPublished games included in this event line.
Minutes
153.2
context25.5 minutes per game.
Sample weight
71.9%
contextHow strongly the model trusts raw Net Rating versus the event median.
Confidence
Established
contextModel confidence based on available games and minutes.
Event rank
#53
contextAmong 142 published players.
Team possessions
505.3
contextEstimated team possessions supporting the defensive context.
model_limits
- 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.
02
//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 AfroBasket
Continental · 2026
6
GP
6.2
PPG
4.2
RPG
0.7
APG
#53
RANK
//best_ranking_evidence · strongest_finish
FIBA U18 Women’s AfroBasket 2026 Qualifiers — Women — Zone 1
Regional · 2026
#5
RANK
31
FIELD
87%
PERCENTILE
6.8
PPG
competition_history
All competitions
Every published competition this player appeared in, strongest first, with its complete verified stat line.
FIBA U18 AfroBasket
Continental · 2026
#53/142view →
//quick_read
The line at a glance
6.2
PPG
4.2
RPG
0.7
APG
1.7
TOV/G
0.3
3PM/G
42%
TS%
//event_fingerprint
Performance against this field
Scoring
6.2
P73
Playmaking
0.7
P37
Rebounding
4.2
P61
True shooting
42%
P77
Two-way impact
+6.5
P60
Stops
52%
P17
//shooting_profile
Makes, attempts and efficiency
FG
Field goals
39%
16 made / 41 attempts
3PT
Three-pointers
17%
2 made / 12 attempts
FT
Free throws
43%
3 made / 7 attempts
Shot selection
29% of attempts from three
●2PA 29●3PA 12
//complete_box_score
Production by basketball action
scoring
37
PTS
6.2 / game
16–41
FGM–FGA
2–12
3PM–3PA
3–7
FTM–FTA
creation
4
AST
0.7 / game
10
TOV
1.7 / game
0.40×
AST:TOV
7
FD
rebounding
25
REB
4.2 / game
8
OREB
17
DREB
4.2
REB/G
defense
1
STL
0.2 / game
6
BLK
1.0 / game
27
PF
7
STL+BLK
1.2 / game
//hesi_and_dean_oliver
Efficiency and two-way impact
63.8
HESI
62.6
PI
75.9
ORtg
69.3
DRtg
+6.5
NRtg
+2.3
Stable NRtg
52%
Stop%
37%
Floor%
42%
eFG%
0%
PIE
62.1
Team DRtg
-7.2
Def. lift
FIBA U18 Women’s AfroBasket 2026 Qualifiers — Women — Zone 1
Regional · 2026
#5/31view →
//quick_read
The line at a glance
6.8
PPG
7.8
RPG
2.3
APG
1.5
TOV/G
0.0
3PM/G
50%
TS%
//event_fingerprint
Performance against this field
Scoring
6.8
P58
Playmaking
2.3
P73
Rebounding
7.8
P87
True shooting
50%
P82
//shooting_profile
Makes, attempts and efficiency
FG
Field goals
48%
12 made / 25 attempts
3PT
Three-pointers
0%
0 made / 1 attempts
FT
Free throws
60%
3 made / 5 attempts
Shot selection
4% of attempts from three
●2PA 24●3PA 1
//complete_box_score
Production by basketball action
scoring
27
PTS
6.8 / game
12–25
FGM–FGA
0–1
3PM–3PA
3–5
FTM–FTA
creation
9
AST
2.3 / game
6
TOV
1.5 / game
1.50×
AST:TOV
—
FD
rebounding
31
REB
7.8 / game
11
OREB
20
DREB
7.8
REB/G
defense
3
STL
0.8 / game
3
BLK
0.8 / game
15
PF
6
STL+BLK
1.5 / game
//hesi_and_dean_oliver
Efficiency and two-way impact
48%
eFG%
8%
PIE
around_this_rank
Around this rank
Event-scoped ranking within FIBA U18 AfroBasket 2026 — 142 ranked players.
rank_above · #52Mary Hazel SsengendoUgandarank_below · #54Marie SamnickF · Cameroon
//current_rank
#53
of 142 ranked
more_from_this_event
More from this event
Other ranked players from FIBA U18 AfroBasket 2026.
#1
Point Guard · Mali
19.7 PPG 4.5 RPG 3.2 APG
//event_signalScorer19.7 PPGComputed automatically from event data. Tap any signal to see the evidence behind it.//event_signalDisruptor4.0 steals + blocks per gameComputed automatically from event data. Tap any signal to see the evidence behind it.#51
#52
Uganda
9.0 PPG 8.5 RPG 2.0 APG
//event_signalActivity8.5 RPG + 2.3 defensive plays/GComputed automatically from event data. Tap any signal to see the evidence behind it.#54
03
//statistical_record
Complete event-specific production lines for auditing the read without flattening different competitions together.
key_stats
Key stats
FIBA U18 Women’s AfroBasket 2026 Qualifiers — Women — Zone 1 · 2026 — scoped to this competition pool.
4
GP
6.8
PPG
7.8
RPG
2.3
APG
0.8
SPG
0.8
BPG
—
3P%
50%
TS%
event_stats
Event production
Each line is scoped to one competition pool — not comparable across events.
FIBA U18 AfroBasket2026
6 GP · event rank #53
//quick_read
The line at a glance
6.2
PPG
4.2
RPG
0.7
APG
1.7
TOV/G
0.3
3PM/G
42%
TS%
//event_fingerprint
Performance against this field
Scoring
6.2
P73
Playmaking
0.7
P37
Rebounding
4.2
P61
True shooting
42%
P77
Two-way impact
+6.5
P60
Stops
52%
P17
//shooting_profile
Makes, attempts and efficiency
FG
Field goals
39%
16 made / 41 attempts
3PT
Three-pointers
17%
2 made / 12 attempts
FT
Free throws
43%
3 made / 7 attempts
Shot selection
29% of attempts from three
●2PA 29●3PA 12
//complete_box_score
Production by basketball action
scoring
37
PTS
6.2 / game
16–41
FGM–FGA
2–12
3PM–3PA
3–7
FTM–FTA
creation
4
AST
0.7 / game
10
TOV
1.7 / game
0.40×
AST:TOV
7
FD
rebounding
25
REB
4.2 / game
8
OREB
17
DREB
4.2
REB/G
defense
1
STL
0.2 / game
6
BLK
1.0 / game
27
PF
7
STL+BLK
1.2 / game
//hesi_and_dean_oliver
Efficiency and two-way impact
63.8
HESI
62.6
PI
75.9
ORtg
69.3
DRtg
+6.5
NRtg
+2.3
Stable NRtg
52%
Stop%
37%
Floor%
42%
eFG%
0%
PIE
62.1
Team DRtg
-7.2
Def. lift
FIBA U18 Women’s AfroBasket 2026 Qualifiers — Women — Zone 12026
4 GP · event rank #5
//quick_read
The line at a glance
6.8
PPG
7.8
RPG
2.3
APG
1.5
TOV/G
0.0
3PM/G
50%
TS%
//event_fingerprint
Performance against this field
Scoring
6.8
P58
Playmaking
2.3
P73
Rebounding
7.8
P87
True shooting
50%
P82
//shooting_profile
Makes, attempts and efficiency
FG
Field goals
48%
12 made / 25 attempts
3PT
Three-pointers
0%
0 made / 1 attempts
FT
Free throws
60%
3 made / 5 attempts
Shot selection
4% of attempts from three
●2PA 24●3PA 1
//complete_box_score
Production by basketball action
scoring
27
PTS
6.8 / game
12–25
FGM–FGA
0–1
3PM–3PA
3–5
FTM–FTA
creation
9
AST
2.3 / game
6
TOV
1.5 / game
1.50×
AST:TOV
—
FD
rebounding
31
REB
7.8 / game
11
OREB
20
DREB
7.8
REB/G
defense
3
STL
0.8 / game
3
BLK
0.8 / game
15
PF
6
STL+BLK
1.5 / game
//hesi_and_dean_oliver
Efficiency and two-way impact
48%
eFG%
8%
PIE
04
//player_context
Biography, achievements, public identity, and profile ownership provide context without entering the performance rating.
player_context
The person behind the numbers
Background supplied by the athlete or verified profile source. Performance ratings remain separate from biography and achievements.
claim_this_profile
Is this you?
This profile was auto-generated from public tournament data. Claim it to connect your highlight reel, get scouted, and own your story on HESI.
data_source · fiba — statistics retain their original event attribution.