ORtg
96.2
87th event percentileEstimated points produced per 100 possessions.
back_to_rankings
Unclaimed
event_player
Bryan Lionel N'goli
Small Forward · CIV · b. 2008
Latest event year on file: 2026FIBA U18 AfroBasket
//measurables
196 cm
HEIGHT
//15_second_scouting_read
data-led profileScoring efficiency-led profile
Scoring efficiency and Scoring load are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
44.3% TSScoring efficiency · 71st event percentile
7.0 PPGScoring load · 70th event percentile
- 81.8
- HESI v2.1
- #27
- of 138
- 58%
- 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 #27 of 138 · Provisional
HESI
81.8
Event performance
82nd event percentile
PI
76.9
Prospect index
81st event percentile
ORtg
96.2
Points / 100 poss.
87th event percentile
DRtg
73.7
Lower is better
60th event percentile
NRtg
+22.5
Two-way margin
86th event percentile
Offensive evidence
ORtg 96.2 · 87th event percentile
Defensive evidence
DRtg 73.7 · Stop% 57.0% · Team DRtg 68.8
Sample context
5 games · 83 minutes · 58% weight
//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade
Scoring efficiency-led profileevent-relative description
Scoring efficiency and Scoring load are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
Scoring efficiency
44.3% TS71st event percentile
Scoring load
7.0 PPG70th event percentile
Questions for film
- 01
How stable is this profile over a larger game and minute sample?
- 02
Do the steals and blocks come from disciplined reads, physical tools, or higher-risk activity?
- 03
Will the rebounding translate against larger and more physical competition?
Explore full efficiency + production profile
//impact_fingerprint
Where the profile separates
HESI performance
81.8
82nd event percentile
Prospect index
76.9
81st event percentile
Offensive efficiency
96.2
87th event percentile
Defensive efficiency
73.7
60th event percentile
Two-way margin
+22.5
86th event percentile
Stop percentage
57.0%
41st event percentile
//role_and_production
How the production is shaped
Scoring load
7.0 PPG
70th event percentile
Creation
1.2 APG
61st event percentile
Rebounding
3.6 RPG
50th event percentile
Defensive activity
1.0 stocks
40th event percentile
Scoring efficiency
44.3% TS
71st 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.
- P87
Offensive Impact
96.2 ORtg · 87th event percentile
//automated_interpretation · dean_oliver + event_stats
What the numbers suggest
HESI performance sits at the 82nd event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 96.2 ORtg and 73.7 DRtg, producing a +22.5 Net Rating. The clearest relative strengths are offensive efficiency, two-way margin, and scoring efficiency.
Relative strengths
- 87th event percentile
Offensive efficiency
96.2 ORtg
The Dean Oliver estimate places offensive production per 100 possessions among the stronger results in this event.
- 86th event percentile
Two-way margin
+22.5 NRtg
The gap between estimated offensive and defensive efficiency is a clear positive separator in this event.
- 71st event percentile
Scoring efficiency
44.3% TS
True shooting efficiency compares favorably with the published event pool.
Relative weaknesses
No available metric falls at or below the 40th event percentile. Film may still reveal skill-level weaknesses.
//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
7.0 PPG
70th event percentileScoring volume per game.
True shooting
44.3%
71st event percentileScoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.
Effective FG
40.3%
68th event percentileField-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.
Field goals
36.1%
69th event percentileOverall field-goal percentage.
Three-point shooting
33.3%
context1.8 attempts per game
Free throws
75.0%
84th event percentileFree-throw conversion in this event.
Floor%
44.1%
85th event percentileEstimated share of possessions producing at least one point.
Assists
1.2 APG
61st event percentileRecorded passing production per game.
Defense and disruption
Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.
DRtg
73.7
60th 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
-4.9
27th event percentilePlayer DRtg is higher than the team baseline.
Stop%
57.0%
41st event percentileEstimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.
Recorded activity
1.0 STL+BLK
40th event percentileSteals plus blocks per game; it does not capture positioning or containment.
Estimated stops
19.9
contextDean Oliver estimated defensive stops across the event sample.
Two-way and all-around impact
Net impact, stabilized performance and supporting production.
Net Rating
+22.5
86th event percentileRaw ORtg minus DRtg.
Stabilized NRtg
+10.8
82nd event percentileNet Rating pulled toward the event median according to sample size.
HESI performance
81.8
82nd event percentileEvent-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.
Prospect index
76.9
81st event percentileHESI performance with competition and age context.
PIE
3.9%
56th event percentileEstimated share of positive game events while on the floor.
Rebounds
3.6 RPG
50th event percentileTotal rebounding production per game.
Sample and confidence
How much evidence supports the estimates shown above.
Games
5
contextPublished games included in this event line.
Minutes
83.4
context16.7 minutes per game.
Sample weight
58.2%
contextHow strongly the model trusts raw Net Rating versus the event median.
Confidence
Provisional
contextModel confidence based on available games and minutes.
Event rank
#27
contextAmong 138 published players.
Team possessions
502.8
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
//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
forward · secondary creator / connector · spacing / shooting option · closeout attacker
forward · secondary creator / connector · spacing / shooting option · closeout attacker. No separator is established yet Primary pressure points: Offensive rebounding, Rim protection, Screening.
Now · ForwardProjects · Forward
Translatable strengths
Not confirmed in this report.
Exploitable weaknesses
- · Offensive rebounding
- · Rim protection
- · Screening
Offensive translation
Projects to retain a primary role as a secondary creator / connector. Projects to retain a primary role as a spacing / shooting option. Projects to retain a primary role as a closeout attacker. Projects to retain a primary role as a screen-and-roll finisher.
Defensive assignments
primary gap / nail helper (grade 2.5; assignment confirmed; workload should hold). primary low-man / back-line rotator (grade 3; assignment confirmed; workload should hold). primary switch defender (grade 3; assignment confirmed; workload should hold). primary post matchup defender (grade 3; 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
Offensive rebounding · Rim protection
evidence_and_projection
Why the verdict holds
evidence_strength
strong
Limited representative evidence attached
pathway_hypothesis
LM D1
Low-major NCAA Division I hypothesis · experimental uncalibrated
Experimental · not outcome-calibrated
hesi_reconciliation
Scout view × current production
Agreement and conflict stay visible; they are not averaged into one score.
Current event production
inconclusive81.8 performance rating · rank 27 · 5 games
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Estimated offensive efficiency
inconclusiveORtg 96.2 · descriptive event context, not a role projection
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Floor percentage context
inconclusive44.1% · possession outcome context
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Stop percentage context
inconclusive57.0% · box-score estimate with team and role context
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
next_evaluation_assignment
Limited representative evidence attached
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
5
GP
7.0
PPG
3.6
RPG
1.2
APG
#27
RANK
competition_history
All competitions
Published competitions, strongest first. Open the statistical record for the complete event line.
FIBA U18 AfroBasket
Continental · 2026
#27/138Event board →
5
GP
7.0
PPG
3.6
RPG
1.2
APG
event_context
Event context
FIBA U18 AfroBasket 2026 · 138 ranked players
rank_above · #26Minty Jean-Philippe Dylan OkaCôte d'Ivoirerank_below · #28Deh-Dimitri AzemaC · Côte d'Ivoire
//current_rank
#27
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.#25
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.
5
GP
7.0
PPG
3.6
RPG
1.2
APG
1.0
SPG
0.0
BPG
33%
3P%
44%
TS%
event_stats
Event production
Each line is scoped to one competition pool — not comparable across events.
FIBA U18 AfroBasket2026
5 GP · event rank #27
//quick_read
The line at a glance
7.0
PPG
3.6
RPG
1.2
APG
1.4
TOV/G
0.6
3PM/G
44%
TS%
//event_fingerprint
Performance against this field
Scoring
7.0
P70
Playmaking
1.2
P61
Rebounding
3.6
P50
True shooting
44%
P71
Two-way impact
+22.5
P86
Stops
57%
P41
//shooting_profile
Makes, attempts and efficiency
FG
Field goals
36%
13 made / 36 attempts
3PT
Three-pointers
33%
3 made / 9 attempts
FT
Free throws
75%
6 made / 8 attempts
Shot selection
25% of attempts from three
●2PA 27●3PA 9
//complete_box_score
Production by basketball action
scoring
35
PTS
7.0 / game
13–36
FGM–FGA
3–9
3PM–3PA
6–8
FTM–FTA
creation
6
AST
1.2 / game
7
TOV
1.4 / game
0.86×
AST:TOV
6
FD
rebounding
18
REB
3.6 / game
12
OREB
6
DREB
3.6
REB/G
defense
5
STL
1.0 / game
0
BLK
0.0 / game
7
PF
5
STL+BLK
1.0 / game
//hesi_and_dean_oliver
Efficiency and two-way impact
81.8
HESI
76.9
PI
96.2
ORtg
73.7
DRtg
+22.5
NRtg
+10.8
Stable NRtg
57%
Stop%
44%
Floor%
40%
eFG%
4%
PIE
68.8
Team DRtg
-4.9
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.