ORtg
74.1
46th event percentileEstimated points produced per 100 possessions.
back_to_rankings
Unclaimed
event_player
Siincere Fashione Hudson
Point Guard · CIV · b. 2008
Latest event year on file: 2026FIBA U18 AfroBasket
//measurables
184 cm
HEIGHT
//15_second_scouting_read
data-led profileCreation-led production
Creation and Rebounding are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
3.8 APGCreation · 95th event percentile
5.3 RPGRebounding · 74th event percentile
- 74.5
- HESI v2.1
- #37
- of 138
- 67%
- sample weight
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 #37 of 138 · Established
HESI
74.5
Event performance
74th event percentile
PI
71.1
Prospect index
74th event percentile
ORtg
74.1
Points / 100 poss.
46th event percentile
DRtg
61.9
Lower is better
90th event percentile
NRtg
+12.2
Two-way margin
71st event percentile
Offensive evidence
ORtg 74.1 · 46th event percentile
Defensive evidence
DRtg 61.9 · Stop% 84.3% · Team DRtg 68.8
Sample context
6 games · 124 minutes · 67% weight
//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade
Creation-led productionevent-relative description
Creation and Rebounding are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
Creation
3.8 APG95th event percentile
Rebounding
5.3 RPG74th 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
74.5
74th event percentile
Prospect index
71.1
74th event percentile
Offensive efficiency
74.1
46th event percentile
Defensive efficiency
61.9
90th event percentile
Two-way margin
+12.2
71st event percentile
Stop percentage
84.3%
95th event percentile
//role_and_production
How the production is shaped
Scoring load
5.2 PPG
51st event percentile
Creation
3.8 APG
95th event percentile
Rebounding
5.3 RPG
74th event percentile
Defensive activity
2.5 stocks
59th event percentile
Scoring efficiency
27.7% TS
22nd 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.
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.
- P95
Creator
3.8 APG · 95th event percentile
- P92
Defensive Impact
61.9 DRtg · 84% Stop% · 92nd event percentile
//automated_interpretation · dean_oliver + event_stats
What the numbers suggest
HESI performance sits at the 74th event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 74.1 ORtg and 61.9 DRtg, producing a +12.2 Net Rating. The clearest relative strengths are defensive stops, creation, and defensive efficiency. The lowest relative area is scoring efficiency.
Relative strengths
- 95th event percentile
Defensive stops
84.3% Stop%
The estimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player’s contribution is relatively strong.
- 95th event percentile
Creation
3.8 APG
Assist production suggests a meaningful event-relative creation role; film must still separate advantage creation from connective passing.
- 90th event percentile
Defensive efficiency
61.9 DRtg
The favorable defensive percentile reflects a lower player DRtg relative to this event pool.
Relative weaknesses
- 22nd event percentile
Scoring efficiency
27.7% TS
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.
Points
5.2 PPG
51st event percentileScoring volume per game.
True shooting
27.7%
22nd event percentileScoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.
Effective FG
25.0%
26th event percentileField-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.
Field goals
25.0%
32nd event percentileOverall field-goal percentage.
Three-point shooting
0.0%
context2.7 attempts per game
Free throws
38.9%
26th event percentileFree-throw conversion in this event.
Floor%
37.5%
63rd event percentileEstimated share of possessions producing at least one point.
Assists
3.8 APG
95th event percentileRecorded passing production per game.
Defense and disruption
Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.
DRtg
61.9
90th event percentileEstimated points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.
Team DRtg
68.8
contextTeam defensive baseline used by the Dean Oliver estimate.
Defensive lift
+7.0
93rd event percentilePlayer DRtg is lower than the team baseline.
Stop%
84.3%
95th event percentileEstimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.
Recorded activity
2.5 STL+BLK
59th event percentileSteals plus blocks per game; it does not capture positioning or containment.
Estimated stops
43.9
contextDean Oliver estimated defensive stops across the event sample.
Two-way and all-around impact
Net impact, stabilized performance and supporting production.
Net Rating
+12.2
71st event percentileRaw ORtg minus DRtg.
Stabilized NRtg
+6.5
74th event percentileNet Rating pulled toward the event median according to sample size.
HESI performance
74.5
74th event percentileEvent-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.
Prospect index
71.1
74th event percentileHESI performance with competition and age context.
PIE
6.3%
77th event percentileEstimated share of positive game events while on the floor.
Rebounds
5.3 RPG
74th 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
124.3
context20.7 minutes per game.
Sample weight
67.4%
contextHow strongly the model trusts raw Net Rating versus the event median.
Confidence
Established
contextModel confidence based on available games and minutes.
Event rank
#37
contextAmong 138 published players.
Team possessions
502.8
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
//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
ClipStarts muted. Turn sound on in the player.
Clip
vs vs egypt U18 · 2026-09-24 · scout: Fahd Wael
YouTube · approved scout evidence
Open source03
//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: Screen navigation, Gap help.
Now · Lead GuardNow · Combo GuardProjects · Lead GuardProjects · Combo Guard
Translatable strengths
Not confirmed in this report.
Exploitable weaknesses
- · Screen navigation
- · 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 2.5; 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
Screen navigation · 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
inconclusive74.5 performance rating · rank 37 · 6 games
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Estimated offensive efficiency
inconclusiveORtg 74.1 · descriptive event context, not a role projection
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Floor percentage context
inconclusive37.5% · possession outcome context
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Stop percentage context
inconclusive84.3% · 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
04
//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
5.2
PPG
5.3
RPG
3.8
APG
#37
RANK
competition_history
All competitions
Published competitions, strongest first. Open the statistical record for the complete event line.
FIBA U18 AfroBasket
Continental · 2026
#37/138Event board →
6
GP
5.2
PPG
5.3
RPG
3.8
APG
event_context
Event context
FIBA U18 AfroBasket 2026 · 138 ranked players
rank_above · #36Joachim Barthelemy BassonG · Cameroonrank_below · #38Olakunle AriboNigeria
//current_rank
#37
of 138 ranked
#1
Shooting Guard · Côte d'Ivoire
17.5 PPG 4.5 RPG 1.3 APG
//event_signalTop 3#1 event rankComputed automatically from event data. Tap any signal to see the evidence behind it.#35
05
//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.
6
GP
5.2
PPG
5.3
RPG
3.8
APG
2.5
SPG
0.0
BPG
0%
3P%
28%
TS%
event_stats
Event production
Each line is scoped to one competition pool — not comparable across events.
FIBA U18 AfroBasket2026
6 GP · event rank #37
//quick_read
The line at a glance
5.2
PPG
5.3
RPG
3.8
APG
1.8
TOV/G
0.0
3PM/G
28%
TS%
//event_fingerprint
Performance against this field
Scoring
5.2
P51
Playmaking
3.8
P95
Rebounding
5.3
P74
True shooting
28%
P22
Two-way impact
+12.2
P71
Stops
84%
P95
//shooting_profile
Makes, attempts and efficiency
FG
Field goals
25%
12 made / 48 attempts
3PT
Three-pointers
0%
0 made / 16 attempts
FT
Free throws
39%
7 made / 18 attempts
Shot selection
33% of attempts from three
●2PA 32●3PA 16
//complete_box_score
Production by basketball action
scoring
31
PTS
5.2 / game
12–48
FGM–FGA
0–16
3PM–3PA
7–18
FTM–FTA
creation
23
AST
3.8 / game
11
TOV
1.8 / game
2.09×
AST:TOV
13
FD
rebounding
32
REB
5.3 / game
9
OREB
23
DREB
5.3
REB/G
defense
15
STL
2.5 / game
0
BLK
0.0 / game
8
PF
15
STL+BLK
2.5 / game
//hesi_and_dean_oliver
Efficiency and two-way impact
74.5
HESI
71.1
PI
74.1
ORtg
61.9
DRtg
+12.2
NRtg
+6.5
Stable NRtg
84%
Stop%
37%
Floor%
25%
eFG%
6%
PIE
68.8
Team DRtg
+7.0
Def. lift
06
//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.