Hesi Sports Consulting//home_of_hesi_scout

Unclaimed

event_player · FIBA U17 Basketball World Cup 2026

Chihiro Ito

JPN · b. 2009

//measurables

174 cm

HEIGHT

//15_second_scouting_read

data-led profile

Defensive activity-led profile

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

0.7 stocksDefensive activity · 42nd event percentile

2.0 RPGRebounding · 28th event percentile

22.0
HESI v2.1: #151
of 192: 57%
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 U17 Basketball World Cup2026

Rank #151 of 192 · Provisional

HESI v2.1

HESI

22.0

Event performance

22nd event percentile

32.1

Prospect index

22nd event percentile

ORtg

57.8

Points / 100 poss.

21st event percentile

DRtg

80.5

Lower is better

59th event percentile

NRtg

-22.7

Two-way margin

24th event percentile

Offensive evidence

ORtg 57.8 · 21st event percentile

Defensive evidence

DRtg 80.5 · Stop% 59.8% · Team DRtg 79.1

Sample context

7 games · 80 minutes · 57% weight

//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade

Defensive activity-led profileevent-relative description

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

Defensive activity

0.7 stocks42nd event percentile

Rebounding

2.0 RPG28th 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
Which shot types and advantages are driving the efficiency profile?

Explore full efficiency + production profile

//impact_fingerprint

Where the profile separates

HESI performance

22.0

22nd event percentile

Prospect index

32.1

22nd event percentile

Offensive efficiency

57.8

21st event percentile

Defensive efficiency

80.5

59th event percentile

Two-way margin

-22.7

24th event percentile

Stop percentage

59.8%

58th event percentile

//role_and_production

How the production is shaped

Scoring load

1.0 PPG

9th event percentile

Creation

0.1 APG

4th event percentile

Rebounding

2.0 RPG

28th event percentile

Defensive activity

0.7 stocks

42nd event percentile

Scoring efficiency

19.4% TS

8th 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.

//automated_interpretation · dean_oliver + event_stats

What the numbers suggest

HESI performance sits at the 22nd event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 57.8 ORtg and 80.5 DRtg, producing a -22.7 Net Rating. The lowest relative areas are creation, scoring efficiency, and scoring load.

Relative strengths

No available metric currently clears the 65th event percentile.

Relative weaknesses

Creation
0.1 APG
4th event percentile
Assist production is a lower relative area; the model cannot determine unrecorded creation or role constraints.
Scoring efficiency
19.4% TS
8th event percentile
True shooting efficiency is a lower relative area in the current event sample.
Scoring load
1.0 PPG
9th event percentile
Scoring volume is a lower relative part of this event profile.

//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

57.8

21st event percentile

Estimated points produced per 100 possessions.

Points

1.0 PPG

9th event percentile

Scoring volume per game.

True shooting

19.4%

8th event percentile

Scoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.

Effective FG

19.4%

13th event percentile

Field-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.

Field goals

16.7%

10th event percentile

Overall field-goal percentage.

Three-point shooting

8.3%

context

1.7 attempts per game

Floor%

25.1%

18th event percentile

Estimated share of possessions producing at least one point.

Assists

0.1 APG

4th event percentile

Recorded passing production per game.

Defense and disruption

Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.

DRtg

80.5

59th event percentile

Estimated points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.

Team DRtg

79.1

context

Team defensive baseline used by the Dean Oliver estimate.

Defensive lift

-1.4

57th event percentile

Player DRtg is higher than the team baseline.

Stop%

59.8%

58th event percentile

Estimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.

Recorded activity

0.7 STL+BLK

42nd event percentile

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

Estimated stops

17.3

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

-22.7

24th event percentile

Raw ORtg minus DRtg.

Stabilized NRtg

-12.9

22nd event percentile

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

HESI performance

22.0

22nd event percentile

Event-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.

Prospect index

32.1

22nd event percentile

HESI performance with competition and age context.

PIE

-0.4%

11th event percentile

Estimated share of positive game events while on the floor.

Rebounds

2.0 RPG

28th 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

80.0

context

11.4 minutes per game.

Sample weight

57.1%

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

#151

context

Among 192 published players.

Team possessions

506.9

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 U17 Basketball World Cup

World Cup · 2026

1.0

PPG

2.0

RPG

0.1

APG

#151

RANK

competition_history

All competitions

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

FIBA U17 Basketball World Cup

World Cup · 2026

#151/192view →

//quick_read

The line at a glance

1.0

PPG

2.0

RPG

0.1

APG

0.1

TOV/G

0.1

3PM/G

19%

TS%

//event_fingerprint

Performance against this field

Scoring

1.0

Playmaking

0.1

Rebounding

2.0

P28

True shooting

19%

Two-way impact

-22.7

P24

Stops

60%

P58

//shooting_profile

Makes, attempts and efficiency

Field goals

17%

3 made / 18 attempts

3PT

Three-pointers

1 made / 12 attempts

Free throws

—

0 made / 0 attempts

Shot selection

67% of attempts from three

●2PA 6●3PA 12

//complete_box_score

Production by basketball action

scoring

PTS

1.0 / game

3–18

FGM–FGA

1–12

3PM–3PA

0–0

FTM–FTA

creation

AST

0.1 / game

TOV

0.1 / game

1.00×

AST:TOV

rebounding

REB

2.0 / game

OREB

DREB

2.0

REB/G

defense

STL

0.6 / game

BLK

0.1 / game

STL+BLK

0.7 / game

//hesi_and_dean_oliver

Efficiency and two-way impact

22.0

HESI

32.1

57.8

ORtg

80.5

DRtg

-22.7

NRtg

-12.9

Stable NRtg

60%

Stop%

25%

Floor%

19%

eFG%

-0%

PIE

79.1

Team DRtg

-1.4

Def. lift

around_this_rank

Around this rank

Event-scoped ranking within FIBA U17 Basketball World Cup 2026 — 192 ranked players.

rank_above · #150Melanija Reicela LagunovicaLAT

//current_rank

#151

of 192 ranked

rank_below · #152Nele ProwaznikGER

more_from_this_event

Key stats

FIBA U17 Basketball World Cup · 2026 — scoped to this competition pool.

1.0

PPG

2.0

RPG

0.1

APG

0.6

SPG

0.1

BPG

3P%

19%

TS%

event_stats