ORtg
81.6
66th event percentileEstimated points produced per 100 possessions.
back_to_rankings
Unclaimed
event_player
Mamadou Niama Sissoko
Combo Guard · MLI · b. 2008
Latest event year on file: 2026FIBA U18 AfroBasket
//15_second_scouting_read
data-led profileDefensive impact profile
Scoring efficiency and Creation are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
41.1% TSScoring efficiency · 64th event percentile
1.2 APGCreation · 58th event percentile
- 77.4
- HESI v2.1
- #33
- of 138
- 65%
- 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 #33 of 138 · Established
HESI
77.4
Event performance
77th event percentile
PI
73.4
Prospect index
76th event percentile
ORtg
81.6
Points / 100 poss.
66th event percentile
DRtg
65.9
Lower is better
80th event percentile
NRtg
+15.8
Two-way margin
76th event percentile
Offensive evidence
ORtg 81.6 · 66th event percentile
Defensive evidence
DRtg 65.9 · Stop% 62.5% · Team DRtg 62.7
Sample context
6 games · 110 minutes · 65% weight
//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade
Defensive impact profileevent-relative description
Scoring efficiency and Creation are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
Scoring efficiency
41.1% TS64th event percentile
Creation
1.2 APG58th 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
77.4
77th event percentile
Prospect index
73.4
76th event percentile
Offensive efficiency
81.6
66th event percentile
Defensive efficiency
65.9
80th event percentile
Two-way margin
+15.8
76th event percentile
Stop percentage
62.5%
57th event percentile
//role_and_production
How the production is shaped
Scoring load
5.7 PPG
56th event percentile
Creation
1.2 APG
58th event percentile
Rebounding
2.5 RPG
33rd event percentile
Defensive activity
1.7 stocks
52nd event percentile
Scoring efficiency
41.1% TS
64th 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.
//automated_interpretation · dean_oliver + event_stats
What the numbers suggest
HESI performance sits at the 77th event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 81.6 ORtg and 65.9 DRtg, producing a +15.8 Net Rating. The clearest relative strengths are defensive efficiency, two-way margin, and offensive efficiency. The lowest relative area is rebounding.
Relative strengths
- 80th event percentile
Defensive efficiency
65.9 DRtg
The favorable defensive percentile reflects a lower player DRtg relative to this event pool.
- 76th event percentile
Two-way margin
+15.8 NRtg
The gap between estimated offensive and defensive efficiency is a clear positive separator in this event.
- 66th event percentile
Offensive efficiency
81.6 ORtg
The Dean Oliver estimate places offensive production per 100 possessions among the stronger results in this event.
Relative weaknesses
- 33rd event percentile
Rebounding
2.5 RPG
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.
Points
5.7 PPG
56th event percentileScoring volume per game.
True shooting
41.1%
64th event percentileScoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.
Effective FG
33.8%
52nd event percentileField-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.
Field goals
32.4%
62nd event percentileOverall field-goal percentage.
Three-point shooting
12.5%
context1.3 attempts per game
Free throws
90.0%
95th event percentileFree-throw conversion in this event.
Floor%
38.1%
65th event percentileEstimated share of possessions producing at least one point.
Assists
1.2 APG
58th event percentileRecorded passing production per game.
Defense and disruption
Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.
DRtg
65.9
80th event percentileEstimated points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.
Team DRtg
62.7
contextTeam defensive baseline used by the Dean Oliver estimate.
Defensive lift
-3.2
37th event percentilePlayer DRtg is higher than the team baseline.
Stop%
62.5%
57th event percentileEstimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.
Recorded activity
1.7 STL+BLK
52nd event percentileSteals plus blocks per game; it does not capture positioning or containment.
Estimated stops
28.2
contextDean Oliver estimated defensive stops across the event sample.
Two-way and all-around impact
Net impact, stabilized performance and supporting production.
Net Rating
+15.8
76th event percentileRaw ORtg minus DRtg.
Stabilized NRtg
+8.3
77th event percentileNet Rating pulled toward the event median according to sample size.
HESI performance
77.4
77th event percentileEvent-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.
Prospect index
73.4
76th event percentileHESI performance with competition and age context.
PIE
5.4%
66th event percentileEstimated share of positive game events while on the floor.
Rebounds
2.5 RPG
33rd 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
109.8
context18.3 minutes per game.
Sample weight
64.7%
contextHow strongly the model trusts raw Net Rating versus the event median.
Confidence
Established
contextModel confidence based on available games and minutes.
Event rank
#33
contextAmong 138 published players.
Team possessions
493.1
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 Madagascar U18 · 2026-09-25 · 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: 2026-09-25
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: Finishing, Ball-screen creation, Advantage extension.
Now · Lead GuardNow · Combo GuardProjects · Lead GuardProjects · Combo Guard
Translatable strengths
Not confirmed in this report.
Exploitable weaknesses
- · Finishing
- · Ball-screen creation
- · Advantage extension
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; 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
Finishing · Ball-screen creation
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
inconclusive77.4 performance rating · rank 33 · 6 games
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Estimated offensive efficiency
inconclusiveORtg 81.6 · descriptive event context, not a role projection
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Floor percentage context
inconclusive38.1% · possession outcome context
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Stop percentage context
inconclusive62.5% · 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
5.7
PPG
2.5
RPG
1.2
APG
#33
RANK
competition_history
All competitions
Published competitions, strongest first. Open the statistical record for the complete event line.
FIBA U18 AfroBasket
Continental · 2026
#33/138Event board →
6
GP
5.7
PPG
2.5
RPG
1.2
APG
event_context
Event context
FIBA U18 AfroBasket 2026 · 138 ranked players
rank_above · #32Mahamadou SyllaMalirank_below · #34Zeineldin Ahmed Aly Mohamed Aly AbdeldaimEgypt
//current_rank
#33
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.#31
Nigeria
7.0 PPG 8.4 RPG 1.2 APG
//event_signalActivity8.4 RPG + 2.0 defensive plays/GComputed automatically from event data. Tap any signal to see the evidence behind it.
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
5.7
PPG
2.5
RPG
1.2
APG
1.7
SPG
0.0
BPG
13%
3P%
41%
TS%
event_stats
Event production
Each line is scoped to one competition pool — not comparable across events.
FIBA U18 AfroBasket2026
6 GP · event rank #33
//quick_read
The line at a glance
5.7
PPG
2.5
RPG
1.2
APG
1.8
TOV/G
0.2
3PM/G
41%
TS%
//event_fingerprint
Performance against this field
Scoring
5.7
P56
Playmaking
1.2
P58
Rebounding
2.5
P33
True shooting
41%
P64
Two-way impact
+15.8
P76
Stops
63%
P57
//shooting_profile
Makes, attempts and efficiency
FG
Field goals
32%
12 made / 37 attempts
3PT
Three-pointers
13%
1 made / 8 attempts
FT
Free throws
90%
9 made / 10 attempts
Shot selection
22% of attempts from three
●2PA 29●3PA 8
//complete_box_score
Production by basketball action
scoring
34
PTS
5.7 / game
12–37
FGM–FGA
1–8
3PM–3PA
9–10
FTM–FTA
creation
7
AST
1.2 / game
11
TOV
1.8 / game
0.64×
AST:TOV
12
FD
rebounding
15
REB
2.5 / game
4
OREB
11
DREB
2.5
REB/G
defense
10
STL
1.7 / game
0
BLK
0.0 / game
5
PF
10
STL+BLK
1.7 / game
//hesi_and_dean_oliver
Efficiency and two-way impact
77.4
HESI
73.4
PI
81.6
ORtg
65.9
DRtg
+15.8
NRtg
+8.3
Stable NRtg
63%
Stop%
38%
Floor%
34%
eFG%
5%
PIE
62.7
Team DRtg
-3.2
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.