ORtg
86.7
90th event percentileEstimated points produced per 100 possessions.
back_to_rankings
Unclaimed
event_player
Assan Dakouo
MLI · b. 2009
Latest event year on file: 2026FIBA U18 AfroBasket
//15_second_scouting_read
data-led profileTwo-way event impact
Rebounding and Scoring efficiency are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
8.2 RPGRebounding · 90th event percentile
35.9% TSScoring efficiency · 57th event percentile
- 93.6
- HESI v2.1
- #8
- of 142
- 62%
- 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
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 #8 of 142 · Provisional
HESI
93.6
Event performance
93rd event percentile
PI
87.6
Prospect index
95th event percentile
ORtg
86.7
Points / 100 poss.
90th event percentile
DRtg
43.9
Lower is better
92nd event percentile
NRtg
+42.8
Two-way margin
94th event percentile
Offensive evidence
ORtg 86.7 · 90th event percentile
Defensive evidence
DRtg 43.9 · Stop% 78.1% · Team DRtg 44.0
Sample context
6 games · 96 minutes · 62% weight
//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade
Two-way event impactevent-relative description
Rebounding and Scoring efficiency are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
Rebounding
8.2 RPG90th event percentile
Scoring efficiency
35.9% TS57th 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
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
93.6
93rd event percentile
Prospect index
87.6
95th event percentile
Offensive efficiency
86.7
90th event percentile
Defensive efficiency
43.9
92nd event percentile
Two-way margin
+42.8
94th event percentile
Stop percentage
78.1%
81st event percentile
//role_and_production
How the production is shaped
Scoring load
3.7 PPG
49th event percentile
Creation
0.7 APG
37th event percentile
Rebounding
8.2 RPG
90th event percentile
Defensive activity
1.3 stocks
48th event percentile
Scoring efficiency
35.9% TS
57th 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.
- P94
Event Impact
93.6 HESI performance · 94th event percentile
- P90
Rebounder
8.2 RPG · 90th event percentile
- P90
Offensive Impact
86.7 ORtg · 90th event percentile
- P90
Two-Way Impact
+42.8 Net Rating · 90th event percentile
- P87
Defensive Impact
43.9 DRtg · 78% Stop% · 87th event percentile
//automated_interpretation · dean_oliver + event_stats
What the numbers suggest
HESI performance sits at the 93rd event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 86.7 ORtg and 43.9 DRtg, producing a +42.8 Net Rating. The clearest relative strengths are two-way margin, defensive efficiency, and offensive efficiency. The lowest relative area is creation.
Relative strengths
- 94th event percentile
Two-way margin
+42.8 NRtg
The gap between estimated offensive and defensive efficiency is a clear positive separator in this event.
- 92nd event percentile
Defensive efficiency
43.9 DRtg
The favorable defensive percentile reflects a lower player DRtg relative to this event pool.
- 90th event percentile
Offensive efficiency
86.7 ORtg
The Dean Oliver estimate places offensive production per 100 possessions among the stronger results in this event.
Relative weaknesses
- 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
3.7 PPG
49th event percentileScoring volume per game.
True shooting
35.9%
57th event percentileScoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.
Effective FG
33.3%
60th event percentileField-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.
Field goals
33.3%
72nd event percentileOverall field-goal percentage.
Free throws
40.0%
29th event percentileFree-throw conversion in this event.
Floor%
45.5%
94th 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
43.9
92nd event percentileEstimated points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.
Team DRtg
44.0
contextTeam defensive baseline used by the Dean Oliver estimate.
Defensive lift
+0.1
64th event percentilePlayer DRtg is lower than the team baseline.
Stop%
78.1%
81st event percentileEstimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.
Recorded activity
1.3 STL+BLK
48th event percentileSteals plus blocks per game; it does not capture positioning or containment.
Estimated stops
35.9
contextDean Oliver estimated defensive stops across the event sample.
Two-way and all-around impact
Net impact, stabilized performance and supporting production.
Net Rating
+42.8
94th event percentileRaw ORtg minus DRtg.
Stabilized NRtg
+23.1
93rd event percentileNet Rating pulled toward the event median according to sample size.
HESI performance
93.6
93rd event percentileEvent-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.
Prospect index
87.6
95th event percentileHESI performance with competition and age context.
PIE
6.1%
82nd event percentileEstimated share of positive game events while on the floor.
Rebounds
8.2 RPG
90th 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
96.2
context16.0 minutes per game.
Sample weight
61.6%
contextHow strongly the model trusts raw Net Rating versus the event median.
Confidence
Provisional
contextModel confidence based on available games and minutes.
Event rank
#8
contextAmong 142 published players.
Team possessions
572.6
contextEstimated 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.
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
3.7
PPG
8.2
RPG
0.7
APG
#8
RANK
competition_history
All competitions
Published competitions, strongest first. Open the statistical record for the complete event line.
FIBA U18 AfroBasket
Continental · 2026
#8/142Event board →
6
GP
3.7
PPG
8.2
RPG
0.7
APG
event_context
Event context
FIBA U18 AfroBasket 2026 · 142 ranked players
rank_above · #7Françoise Hawa KABAPG · Côte d'Ivoirerank_below · #9Aminata SamakeC · Mali
//current_rank
#8
of 142 ranked
#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.#6
Center · Mali
10.0 PPG 15.3 RPG 2.3 APG
//event_signalRebounder15.3 RPGComputed automatically from event data. Tap any signal to see the evidence behind it.//event_signalDisruptor5.5 steals + blocks per gameComputed automatically from event data. Tap any signal to see the evidence behind it.
03
//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
3.7
PPG
8.2
RPG
0.7
APG
1.2
SPG
0.2
BPG
—
3P%
36%
TS%
event_stats
Event production
Each line is scoped to one competition pool — not comparable across events.
FIBA U18 AfroBasket2026
6 GP · event rank #8
//quick_read
The line at a glance
3.7
PPG
8.2
RPG
0.7
APG
1.0
TOV/G
0.0
3PM/G
36%
TS%
//event_fingerprint
Performance against this field
Scoring
3.7
P49
Playmaking
0.7
P37
Rebounding
8.2
P90
True shooting
36%
P57
Two-way impact
+42.8
P94
Stops
78%
P81
//shooting_profile
Makes, attempts and efficiency
FG
Field goals
33%
8 made / 24 attempts
3PT
Three-pointers
—
0 made / 0 attempts
FT
Free throws
40%
6 made / 15 attempts
Shot selection
0% of attempts from three
●2PA 24●3PA 0
//complete_box_score
Production by basketball action
scoring
22
PTS
3.7 / game
8–24
FGM–FGA
0–0
3PM–3PA
6–15
FTM–FTA
creation
4
AST
0.7 / game
6
TOV
1.0 / game
0.67×
AST:TOV
9
FD
rebounding
49
REB
8.2 / game
23
OREB
26
DREB
8.2
REB/G
defense
7
STL
1.2 / game
1
BLK
0.2 / game
17
PF
8
STL+BLK
1.3 / game
//hesi_and_dean_oliver
Efficiency and two-way impact
93.6
HESI
87.6
PI
86.7
ORtg
43.9
DRtg
+42.8
NRtg
+23.1
Stable NRtg
78%
Stop%
45%
Floor%
33%
eFG%
6%
PIE
44.0
Team DRtg
+0.1
Def. lift
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.