back_to_rankings
Mariya Diawara portrait
Unclaimed
event_player · FIBA U18 AfroBasket 2026

Mariya Diawara

MLI · b. 2009

//15_second_scouting_read

data-led profile

Two-way event impact

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

40.5% TSScoring efficiency · 73rd event percentile

3.7 PPGScoring load · 49th event percentile

70.9
HESI v2.1
#41
of 142
45%
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.

Open event intelligence

FIBA U18 AfroBasket2026

Rank #41 of 142 · Limited sample

HESI v2.1

HESI

70.9

Event performance

71st event percentile

PI

69.4

Prospect index

71st event percentile

ORtg

74.9

Points / 100 poss.

75th event percentile

DRtg

54.6

Lower is better

80th event percentile

NRtg

+20.3

Two-way margin

77th event percentile

Offensive evidence

ORtg 74.9 · 75th event percentile

Defensive evidence

DRtg 54.6 · Stop% 51.0% · Team DRtg 44.0

Sample context

6 games · 50 minutes · 45% weight

//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade

Two-way event impactevent-relative description

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

Scoring efficiency

40.5% TS73rd event percentile

Scoring load

3.7 PPG49th event percentile

Questions for film

  1. 01

    How stable is this profile over a larger game and minute sample?

  2. 02

    Will the rebounding translate against larger and more physical competition?

  3. 03

    Does the film show repeatable advantage creation or mostly connective passing?

Explore full efficiency + production profile

//impact_fingerprint

Where the profile separates

HESI performance

70.9

71st event percentile

Prospect index

69.4

71st event percentile

Offensive efficiency

74.9

75th event percentile

Defensive efficiency

54.6

80th event percentile

Two-way margin

+20.3

77th event percentile

Stop percentage

51.0%

15th event percentile

//role_and_production

How the production is shaped

Scoring load

3.7 PPG

49th event percentile

Creation

0.2 APG

13th event percentile

Rebounding

0.8 RPG

12th event percentile

Defensive activity

0.8 stocks

30th event percentile

Scoring efficiency

40.5% TS

73rd 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.

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 71st event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 74.9 ORtg and 54.6 DRtg, producing a +20.3 Net Rating. The clearest relative strengths are defensive efficiency, two-way margin, and offensive efficiency. The lowest relative areas are rebounding, creation, and defensive stops.

Relative strengths

  1. Defensive efficiency

    54.6 DRtg

    80th event percentile

    The favorable defensive percentile reflects a lower player DRtg relative to this event pool.

  2. Two-way margin

    +20.3 NRtg

    77th event percentile

    The gap between estimated offensive and defensive efficiency is a clear positive separator in this event.

  3. Offensive efficiency

    74.9 ORtg

    75th event percentile

    The Dean Oliver estimate places offensive production per 100 possessions among the stronger results in this event.

Relative weaknesses

  1. Rebounding

    0.8 RPG

    12th event percentile

    Rebounding production sits below much of the event pool and is an area to examine against role and size.

  2. Creation

    0.2 APG

    13th event percentile

    Assist production is a lower relative area; the model cannot determine unrecorded creation or role constraints.

  3. Defensive stops

    51.0% Stop%

    15th event percentile

    The estimated defensive-stop share is a lower relative area in the available sample.

//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

74.9

75th event percentile

Estimated points produced per 100 possessions.

Points

3.7 PPG

49th event percentile

Scoring volume per game.

True shooting

40.5%

73rd event percentile

Scoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.

Effective FG

33.3%

60th event percentile

Field-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.

Field goals

33.3%

72nd event percentile

Overall field-goal percentage.

Three-point shooting

0.0%

context

0.8 attempts per game

Free throws

57.1%

70th event percentile

Free-throw conversion in this event.

Floor%

39.4%

83rd event percentile

Estimated share of possessions producing at least one point.

Assists

0.2 APG

13th event percentile

Recorded passing production per game.

Defense and disruption

Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.

DRtg

54.6

80th event percentile

Estimated points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.

Team DRtg

44.0

context

Team defensive baseline used by the Dean Oliver estimate.

Defensive lift

-10.6

6th event percentile

Player DRtg is higher than the team baseline.

Stop%

51.0%

15th event percentile

Estimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.

Recorded activity

0.8 STL+BLK

30th event percentile

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

Estimated stops

12.1

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

+20.3

77th event percentile

Raw ORtg minus DRtg.

Stabilized NRtg

+4.5

71st event percentile

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

HESI performance

70.9

71st event percentile

Event-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.

Prospect index

69.4

71st event percentile

HESI performance with competition and age context.

PIE

0.4%

47th event percentile

Estimated share of positive game events while on the floor.

Rebounds

0.8 RPG

12th event percentile

Total rebounding production per game.

Sample and confidence

How much evidence supports the estimates shown above.

Games

6

context

Published games included in this event line.

Minutes

49.6

context

8.3 minutes per game.

Sample weight

45.3%

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

#41

context

Among 142 published players.

Team possessions

572.6

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.

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

0.8

RPG

0.2

APG

#41

RANK

competition_history

All competitions

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

FIBA U18 AfroBasket

Continental · 2026

#41/142view →

//quick_read

The line at a glance

3.7

PPG

0.8

RPG

0.2

APG

1.3

TOV/G

0.0

3PM/G

41%

TS%

//event_fingerprint

Performance against this field

Scoring

3.7

P49

Playmaking

0.2

P13

Rebounding

0.8

P12

True shooting

41%

P73

Two-way impact

+20.3

P77

Stops

51%

P15

//shooting_profile

Makes, attempts and efficiency

FG

Field goals

33%

7 made / 21 attempts

3PT

Three-pointers

0%

0 made / 5 attempts

FT

Free throws

57%

8 made / 14 attempts

Shot selection

24% of attempts from three

2PA 163PA 5

//complete_box_score

Production by basketball action

scoring

22

PTS

3.7 / game

7–21

FGM–FGA

0–5

3PM–3PA

8–14

FTM–FTA

creation

1

AST

0.2 / game

8

TOV

1.3 / game

0.13×

AST:TOV

8

FD

rebounding

5

REB

0.8 / game

3

OREB

2

DREB

0.8

REB/G

defense

5

STL

0.8 / game

0

BLK

0.0 / game

2

PF

5

STL+BLK

0.8 / game

//hesi_and_dean_oliver

Efficiency and two-way impact

70.9

HESI

69.4

PI

74.9

ORtg

54.6

DRtg

+20.3

NRtg

+4.5

Stable NRtg

51%

Stop%

39%

Floor%

33%

eFG%

0%

PIE

44.0

Team DRtg

-10.6

Def. lift

sample_context

6 games50 minutes8.3 min/game45% sample weightrank #41 of 142
around_this_rank

Around this rank

Event-scoped ranking within FIBA U18 AfroBasket 2026 — 142 ranked players.

more_from_this_event

More from this event

Other ranked players from FIBA U18 AfroBasket 2026.

  • Couda Keita portrait#1

    Couda Keita

    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.
  • Grace Ntoné portrait#39

    Grace Ntoné

    Forward · Cameroon

    5.5 PPG 0.8 RPG 1.2 APG

  • Melissa Margareth TALIBA portrait#40

    Melissa Margareth TALIBA

    Uganda

    12.0 PPG 10.2 RPG 1.3 APG

    //event_signalRebounder10.2 RPGComputed automatically from event data. Tap any signal to see the evidence behind it.//event_signalActivity10.2 RPG + 2.2 defensive plays/GComputed automatically from event data. Tap any signal to see the evidence behind it.
  • Malak CHEHIDI portrait#42

    Malak CHEHIDI

    Guard · Tunisia

    10.0 PPG 6.5 RPG 2.8 APG

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

0.8

RPG

0.2

APG

0.8

SPG

0.0

BPG

0%

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 #41

//quick_read

The line at a glance

3.7

PPG

0.8

RPG

0.2

APG

1.3

TOV/G

0.0

3PM/G

41%

TS%

//event_fingerprint

Performance against this field

Scoring

3.7

P49

Playmaking

0.2

P13

Rebounding

0.8

P12

True shooting

41%

P73

Two-way impact

+20.3

P77

Stops

51%

P15

//shooting_profile

Makes, attempts and efficiency

FG

Field goals

33%

7 made / 21 attempts

3PT

Three-pointers

0%

0 made / 5 attempts

FT

Free throws

57%

8 made / 14 attempts

Shot selection

24% of attempts from three

2PA 163PA 5

//complete_box_score

Production by basketball action

scoring

22

PTS

3.7 / game

7–21

FGM–FGA

0–5

3PM–3PA

8–14

FTM–FTA

creation

1

AST

0.2 / game

8

TOV

1.3 / game

0.13×

AST:TOV

8

FD

rebounding

5

REB

0.8 / game

3

OREB

2

DREB

0.8

REB/G

defense

5

STL

0.8 / game

0

BLK

0.0 / game

2

PF

5

STL+BLK

0.8 / game

//hesi_and_dean_oliver

Efficiency and two-way impact

70.9

HESI

69.4

PI

74.9

ORtg

54.6

DRtg

+20.3

NRtg

+4.5

Stable NRtg

51%

Stop%

39%

Floor%

33%

eFG%

0%

PIE

44.0

Team DRtg

-10.6

Def. lift

sample_context

6 games50 minutes8.3 min/game45% sample weightrank #41 of 142

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.