Hesi Sports Consulting//home_of_hesi_scout

Unclaimed

event_player

Jason Ake

CIV · b. 2008

Latest event year on file: 2026FIBA U18 AfroBasket

//15_second_scouting_read

data-led profile

Creation-led production

Creation and Defensive activity are the clearest relative production signals in this event.

5.7 APGCreation · 99th event percentile

1.7 stocksDefensive activity · 63rd event percentile

56.2
HESI v2.1: #62
of 138: 70%
sample weight

Performance

1 rated event

Published event intelligence

Film

1 public video

Available for visual validation

Scouting

Final report on file

Human evaluation is clearly labeled

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 AfroBasket2026

Rank #62 of 138 · Established

HESI v2.1

HESI

56.2

Event performance

56th event percentile

56.5

Prospect index

55th event percentile

ORtg

69.2

Points / 100 poss.

40th event percentile

DRtg

70.3

Lower is better

73rd event percentile

NRtg

-1.1

Two-way margin

56th event percentile

Offensive evidence

ORtg 69.2 · 40th event percentile

Defensive evidence

DRtg 70.3 · Stop% 64.9% · Team DRtg 68.8

Sample context

6 games · 139 minutes · 70% weight

//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade

Creation-led productionevent-relative description

Creation and Defensive activity are the clearest relative production signals in this event.

Creation

5.7 APG99th event percentile

Defensive activity

1.7 stocks63rd event percentile

Questions for film

01
Which shot types and advantages are driving the efficiency profile?
02
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

56.2

56th event percentile

Prospect index

56.5

55th event percentile

Offensive efficiency

69.2

40th event percentile

Defensive efficiency

70.3

73rd event percentile

Two-way margin

-1.1

56th event percentile

Stop percentage

64.9%

63rd event percentile

//role_and_production

How the production is shaped

Scoring load

3.8 PPG

41st event percentile

Creation

5.7 APG

99th event percentile

Rebounding

3.7 RPG

52nd event percentile

Defensive activity

1.7 stocks

63rd event percentile

Scoring efficiency

29.0% TS

26th 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.

Automated signals and full statistical interpretation

event_signals

Automated Signals

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

P99
Creator
5.7 APG · 99th event percentile

//automated_interpretation · dean_oliver + event_stats

What the numbers suggest

HESI performance sits at the 56th event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 69.2 ORtg and 70.3 DRtg, producing a -1.1 Net Rating. The clearest relative strengths are creation and defensive efficiency. The lowest relative area is scoring efficiency.

Relative strengths

Creation
5.7 APG
99th event percentile
Assist production suggests a meaningful event-relative creation role; film must still separate advantage creation from connective passing.
Defensive efficiency
70.3 DRtg
73rd event percentile
The favorable defensive percentile reflects a lower player DRtg relative to this event pool.

Relative weaknesses

Scoring efficiency
29.0% TS
26th event percentile
True shooting efficiency is a lower relative area in the current event sample.

//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

69.2

40th event percentile

Estimated points produced per 100 possessions.

Points

3.8 PPG

41st event percentile

Scoring volume per game.

True shooting

29.0%

26th event percentile

Scoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.

Effective FG

27.0%

29th event percentile

Field-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.

Field goals

21.6%

25th event percentile

Overall field-goal percentage.

Three-point shooting

21.1%

context

3.2 attempts per game

Free throws

50.0%

45th event percentile

Free-throw conversion in this event.

Floor%

30.4%

35th event percentile

Estimated share of possessions producing at least one point.

Assists

5.7 APG

99th event percentile

Recorded passing production per game.

Defense and disruption

Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.

DRtg

70.3

73rd event percentile

Estimated points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.

Team DRtg

68.8

context

Team defensive baseline used by the Dean Oliver estimate.

Defensive lift

-1.5

49th event percentile

Player DRtg is higher than the team baseline.

Stop%

64.9%

63rd event percentile

Estimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.

Recorded activity

1.7 STL+BLK

63rd event percentile

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

Estimated stops

37.9

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

-1.1

56th event percentile

Raw ORtg minus DRtg.

Stabilized NRtg

-2.3

56th event percentile

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

HESI performance

56.2

56th event percentile

Event-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.

Prospect index

56.5

55th event percentile

HESI performance with competition and age context.

PIE

3.2%

52nd event percentile

Estimated share of positive game events while on the floor.

Rebounds

3.7 RPG

52nd 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

139.2

context

23.2 minutes per game.

Sample weight

69.9%

context

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

Confidence

Established

context

Model confidence based on available games and minutes.

Event rank

#62

context

Among 138 published players.

Team possessions

502.8

context

Estimated 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.

//film_room

Athlete submissions, event footage, and approved scout evidence, with provenance kept visible.

film_room

Tape & footage

Highlights and full games — sourced from the athlete and event coverage.

Featured clip

Clip

Starts muted. Turn sound on in the player.

Clip

vs vs Chad U18 · 2026-09-24 · scout: Fahd Wael

YouTube · approved scout evidence

Open source

//human_evaluation

Manual scout observations stay distinct from statistical signals, with viewing basis and access level shown honestly.

//scouting_report · evidence_basis

Scouting report on file

Fahd Wael

Report date: 2026-09-24

verified_human_evaluation

Basketball verdict

Independent scout evaluation · role and translation first

// projected_role

lead_guard · combo_guard · on-ball creator · secondary creator / connector

lead_guard · combo_guard · on-ball creator · secondary creator / connector. No separator is established yet Primary pressure points: Gap help.

Now · Lead GuardNow · Combo GuardProjects · Lead GuardProjects · Combo Guard

Translatable strengths

Not confirmed in this report.

Exploitable weaknesses

· Gap help

Offensive translation

Projects to retain a primary role as a on-ball creator. Projects to retain a primary role as a secondary creator / connector.

Defensive assignments

primary point-of-attack / screen navigator (grade 3; assignment confirmed; workload should hold). primary gap / nail helper (grade 2; assignment confirmed; workload should hold).

Best offensive fit

Offensive scheme fit remains unresolved.

Best defensive fit

Defensive scheme fit requires another assignment-confirmed viewing.

Limiting environments

No limiting environment should be stated until role evidence is representative.

Development priorities

Gap help

evidence_and_projection

Why the verdict holds

evidence_strength

strong

Limited representative evidence attached

pathway_hypothesis

Insufficient evidence

Insufficient evidence for a basketball pathway conclusion.

Evidence gates incomplete

hesi_reconciliation

Scout view × current production

Agreement and conflict stay visible; they are not averaged into one score.

Current event production

inconclusive

56.2 performance rating · rank 62 · 6 games

Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.

Estimated offensive efficiency

inconclusive

ORtg 69.2 · descriptive event context, not a role projection

Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.

Floor percentage context

inconclusive

30.4% · possession outcome context

Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.

Stop percentage context

inconclusive

64.9% · box-score estimate with team and role context

Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.

next_evaluation_assignment

Complete at least eight applicable trait observations

//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

3.8

PPG

3.7

RPG

5.7

APG

#62

RANK

competition_history

All competitions

Published competitions, strongest first. Open the statistical record for the complete event line.

FIBA U18 AfroBasket

Continental · 2026

#62/138Event board →

3.8

PPG

3.7

RPG

5.7

APG

Full statistics →

event_context

Event context

FIBA U18 AfroBasket 2026 · 138 ranked players

rank_above · #61Seifalla AhmedEgypt

//current_rank

#62

of 138 ranked

rank_below · #63Adem RafrafiTunisia

#1
Nathan Djako
Shooting Guard · Côte d'Ivoire
17.5 PPG 4.5 RPG 1.3 APG
#60
Victor Emeka Nwafor
Nigeria
8.2 PPG 5.8 RPG 0.6 APG

//statistical_record

Complete event-specific production lines for auditing the read without flattening different competitions together.

key_stats

Key stats

FIBA U18 AfroBasket · 2026 — scoped to this competition pool.

3.8

PPG

3.7

RPG

5.7

APG

1.5

SPG

0.2

BPG

21%

3P%

29%

TS%

event_stats

Event production

Each line is scoped to one competition pool — not comparable across events.

FIBA U18 AfroBasket2026

6 GP · event rank #62

//quick_read

The line at a glance

3.8

PPG

3.7

RPG

5.7

APG

3.3

TOV/G

0.7

3PM/G

29%

TS%

//event_fingerprint

Performance against this field

Scoring

3.8

P41

Playmaking

5.7

P99

Rebounding

3.7

P52

True shooting

29%

P26

Two-way impact

-1.1

P56

Stops

65%

P63

//shooting_profile

Makes, attempts and efficiency

Field goals

22%

8 made / 37 attempts

3PT

Three-pointers

21%

4 made / 19 attempts

Free throws

50%

3 made / 6 attempts

Shot selection

51% of attempts from three

●2PA 18●3PA 19

//complete_box_score

Production by basketball action

scoring

PTS

3.8 / game

8–37

FGM–FGA

4–19

3PM–3PA

3–6

FTM–FTA

creation

AST

5.7 / game

TOV

3.3 / game

1.70×

AST:TOV

rebounding

REB

3.7 / game

OREB

DREB

3.7

REB/G

defense

STL

1.5 / game

BLK

0.2 / game

STL+BLK

1.7 / game

//hesi_and_dean_oliver

Efficiency and two-way impact

56.2

HESI

56.5

69.2

ORtg

70.3

DRtg

-1.1

NRtg

-2.3

Stable NRtg

65%

Stop%

30%

Floor%

27%

eFG%

PIE

68.8

Team DRtg

-1.5

Def. lift

//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.

CLAIM_THIS_PROFILE

data_source · fiba — statistics retain their original event attribution.