Hesi Sports Consulting//home_of_hesi_scout

Unclaimed

event_player · FIBA U17 Basketball World Cup 2026

Linda Thimm

GER · b. 2009

//measurables

170 cm

HEIGHT

//15_second_scouting_read

data-led profile

Creation-led profile

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

1.3 APGCreation · 51st event percentile

29.2% TSScoring efficiency · 20th event percentile

20.4
HESI v2.1: #155
of 192: 39%
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 #155 of 192 · Limited sample

HESI v2.1

HESI

20.4

Event performance

21st event percentile

30.8

Prospect index

20th event percentile

ORtg

32.8

Points / 100 poss.

4th event percentile

DRtg

74.0

Lower is better

79th event percentile

NRtg

-41.1

Two-way margin

12th event percentile

Offensive evidence

ORtg 32.8 · 4th event percentile

Defensive evidence

DRtg 74.0 · Stop% 54.8% · Team DRtg 69.5

Sample context

4 games · 39 minutes · 39% weight

//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade

Creation-led profileevent-relative description

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

Creation

1.3 APG51st event percentile

Scoring efficiency

29.2% TS20th event percentile

Questions for film

01
How stable is this profile over a larger game and minute sample?
02
Will the rebounding translate against larger and more physical competition?
03
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

20.4

21st event percentile

Prospect index

30.8

20th event percentile

Offensive efficiency

32.8

4th event percentile

Defensive efficiency

74.0

79th event percentile

Two-way margin

-41.1

12th event percentile

Stop percentage

54.8%

44th event percentile

//role_and_production

How the production is shaped

Scoring load

1.8 PPG

18th event percentile

Creation

1.3 APG

51st event percentile

Rebounding

1.5 RPG

14th event percentile

Defensive activity

0.3 stocks

18th event percentile

Scoring efficiency

29.2% TS

20th 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 21st event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 32.8 ORtg and 74.0 DRtg, producing a -41.1 Net Rating. The clearest relative strength is defensive efficiency. The lowest relative areas are offensive efficiency, two-way margin, and rebounding.

Relative strengths

Defensive efficiency
74.0 DRtg
79th event percentile
The favorable defensive percentile reflects a lower player DRtg relative to this event pool.

Relative weaknesses

Offensive efficiency
32.8 ORtg
4th event percentile
The Dean Oliver estimate places offensive production per 100 possessions below much of this event pool.
Two-way margin
-41.1 NRtg
12th event percentile
The current gap between estimated offensive and defensive efficiency trails much of this event pool.
Rebounding
1.5 RPG
14th event percentile
Rebounding production sits below much of the event pool and is an area to examine against role and size.

//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

32.8

4th event percentile

Estimated points produced per 100 possessions.

Points

1.8 PPG

18th event percentile

Scoring volume per game.

True shooting

29.2%

20th event percentile

Scoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.

Effective FG

29.2%

27th event percentile

Field-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.

Field goals

25.0%

26th event percentile

Overall field-goal percentage.

Three-point shooting

16.7%

context

1.5 attempts per game

Floor%

14.0%

3rd event percentile

Estimated share of possessions producing at least one point.

Assists

1.3 APG

51st event percentile

Recorded passing production per game.

Defense and disruption

Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.

DRtg

74.0

79th event percentile

Estimated points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.

Team DRtg

69.5

context

Team defensive baseline used by the Dean Oliver estimate.

Defensive lift

-4.5

30th event percentile

Player DRtg is higher than the team baseline.

Stop%

54.8%

44th event percentile

Estimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.

Recorded activity

0.3 STL+BLK

18th event percentile

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

Estimated stops

8.8

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

-41.1

12th event percentile

Raw ORtg minus DRtg.

Stabilized NRtg

-16.0

21st event percentile

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

HESI performance

20.4

21st event percentile

Event-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.

Prospect index

30.8

20th event percentile

HESI performance with competition and age context.

PIE

-2.6%

11th event percentile

Estimated share of positive game events while on the floor.

Rebounds

1.5 RPG

14th 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

38.9

context

9.7 minutes per game.

Sample weight

39.3%

context

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

Confidence

Limited sample

context

Model confidence based on available games and minutes.

Event rank

#155

context

Among 192 published players.

Team possessions

575.9

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

1.8

PPG

1.5

RPG

1.3

APG

#155

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

#155/192view →

//quick_read

The line at a glance

1.8

PPG

1.5

RPG

1.3

APG

4.0

TOV/G

0.3

3PM/G

29%

TS%

//event_fingerprint

Performance against this field

Scoring

1.8

P18

Playmaking

1.3

P51

Rebounding

1.5

P14

True shooting

29%

P20

Two-way impact

-41.1

P12

Stops

55%

P44

//shooting_profile

Makes, attempts and efficiency

Field goals

25%

3 made / 12 attempts

3PT

Three-pointers

17%

1 made / 6 attempts

Free throws

—

0 made / 0 attempts

Shot selection

50% of attempts from three

●2PA 6●3PA 6

//complete_box_score

Production by basketball action

scoring

PTS

1.8 / game

3–12

FGM–FGA

1–6

3PM–3PA

0–0

FTM–FTA

creation

AST

1.3 / game

TOV

4.0 / game

0.31×

AST:TOV

rebounding

REB

1.5 / game

OREB

DREB

1.5

REB/G

defense

STL

0.3 / game

BLK

0.0 / game

STL+BLK

0.3 / game

//hesi_and_dean_oliver

Efficiency and two-way impact

20.4

HESI

30.8

32.8

ORtg

74.0

DRtg

-41.1

NRtg

-16.0

Stable NRtg

55%

Stop%

14%

Floor%

29%

eFG%

-3%

PIE

69.5

Team DRtg

-4.5

Def. lift

around_this_rank

Around this rank

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

rank_above · #154Sara MurilloCOL

//current_rank

#155

of 192 ranked

rank_below · #156Yania ValverdeMEX

more_from_this_event

Key stats

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

1.8

PPG

1.5

RPG

1.3

APG

0.3

SPG

0.0

BPG

17%

3P%

29%

TS%

event_stats