ORtg
130.3
92nd event percentileEstimated points produced per 100 possessions.
back_to_rankings
Unclaimed
event_player
Aubrey Chunga
Combo Guard · NZL · b. 2008
Latest event year on file: 2026FIBA U18 Asia Cup
//measurables
196 cm
HEIGHT
//15_second_scouting_read
data-led profileTwo-way event impact
Rebounding and Defensive activity are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
7.8 RPGRebounding · 93rd event percentile
3.5 stocksDefensive activity · 91st event percentile
- 98.4
- HESI v2.1
- #4
- of 188
- 73%
- 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 Asia Cup2026
Rank #4 of 188 · Established
HESI
98.4
Event performance
98th event percentile
PI
90.2
Prospect index
98th event percentile
ORtg
130.3
Points / 100 poss.
92nd event percentile
DRtg
78.1
Lower is better
96th event percentile
NRtg
+52.1
Two-way margin
96th event percentile
Offensive evidence
ORtg 130.3 · 92nd event percentile
Defensive evidence
DRtg 78.1 · Stop% 76.1% · Team DRtg 84.8
Sample context
6 games · 164 minutes · 73% weight
//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade
Two-way event impactevent-relative description
Rebounding and Defensive activity are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
Rebounding
7.8 RPG93rd event percentile
Defensive activity
3.5 stocks91st event percentile
Questions for film
- 01
Can the scoring load hold as defensive attention and role responsibility increase?
- 02
Does the film show repeatable advantage creation or mostly connective passing?
Explore full efficiency + production profile
//impact_fingerprint
Where the profile separates
HESI performance
98.4
98th event percentile
Prospect index
90.2
98th event percentile
Offensive efficiency
130.3
92nd event percentile
Defensive efficiency
78.1
96th event percentile
Two-way margin
+52.1
96th event percentile
Stop percentage
76.1%
97th event percentile
//role_and_production
How the production is shaped
Scoring load
10.5 PPG
80th event percentile
Creation
2.3 APG
81st event percentile
Rebounding
7.8 RPG
93rd event percentile
Defensive activity
3.5 stocks
91st event percentile
Scoring efficiency
61.2% TS
86th 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.
- P97
Event Impact
98.4 HESI performance · 97th event percentile
- P96
Defensive Impact
78.1 DRtg · 76% Stop% · 96th event percentile
- P95
Rim Protection
1.8 BPG · 95th event percentile
- P95
Two-Way Impact
+52.1 Net Rating · 95th event percentile
- P93
Rebounder
7.8 RPG · 93rd event percentile
- P92
Offensive Impact
130.3 ORtg · 92nd event percentile
//automated_interpretation · dean_oliver + event_stats
What the numbers suggest
HESI performance sits at the 98th event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 130.3 ORtg and 78.1 DRtg, producing a +52.1 Net Rating. The clearest relative strengths are defensive stops, defensive efficiency, and two-way margin.
Relative strengths
- 97th event percentile
Defensive stops
76.1% Stop%
The estimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player’s contribution is relatively strong.
- 96th event percentile
Defensive efficiency
78.1 DRtg
The favorable defensive percentile reflects a lower player DRtg relative to this event pool.
- 96th event percentile
Two-way margin
+52.1 NRtg
The gap between estimated offensive and defensive efficiency is a clear positive separator in this event.
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
10.5 PPG
80th event percentileScoring volume per game.
True shooting
61.2%
86th event percentileScoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.
Effective FG
62.5%
90th event percentileField-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.
Field goals
54.5%
87th event percentileOverall field-goal percentage.
Three-point shooting
36.8%
context3.2 attempts per game
Free throws
47.1%
22nd event percentileFree-throw conversion in this event.
Floor%
60.4%
93rd event percentileEstimated share of possessions producing at least one point.
Assists
2.3 APG
81st event percentileRecorded passing production per game.
Defense and disruption
Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.
DRtg
78.1
96th event percentileEstimated points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.
Team DRtg
84.8
contextTeam defensive baseline used by the Dean Oliver estimate.
Defensive lift
+6.7
92nd event percentilePlayer DRtg is lower than the team baseline.
Stop%
76.1%
97th event percentileEstimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.
Recorded activity
3.5 STL+BLK
91st event percentileSteals plus blocks per game; it does not capture positioning or containment.
Estimated stops
48.5
contextDean Oliver estimated defensive stops across the event sample.
Two-way and all-around impact
Net impact, stabilized performance and supporting production.
Net Rating
+52.1
96th event percentileRaw ORtg minus DRtg.
Stabilized NRtg
+36.0
98th event percentileNet Rating pulled toward the event median according to sample size.
HESI performance
98.4
98th event percentileEvent-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.
Prospect index
90.2
98th event percentileHESI performance with competition and age context.
PIE
13.2%
97th event percentileEstimated share of positive game events while on the floor.
Rebounds
7.8 RPG
93rd 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
163.8
context27.3 minutes per game.
Sample weight
73.2%
contextHow strongly the model trusts raw Net Rating versus the event median.
Confidence
Established
contextModel confidence based on available games and minutes.
Event rank
#4
contextAmong 188 published players.
Team possessions
466.8
contextEstimated team possessions supporting the defensive context.
model_limits
- 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 Japan · 2026-09-23 · scout: Ahmed Tareq
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
Ahmed Tareq
Report date: 2026-09-23
verified_human_evaluation
Basketball verdict
Independent scout evaluation · role and translation first
// projected_role
combo_guard · expanded on-ball creator · expanded secondary creator / connector · spacing / shooting option
combo_guard · expanded on-ball creator · expanded secondary creator / connector · spacing / shooting option. Best current separators: Finishing, Secondary creation, Shooting utility, Point-of-attack defense.
Now · Combo GuardNow · Off GuardProjects · Combo Guard
Translatable strengths
- · Finishing
- · Secondary creation
- · Shooting utility
- · Point-of-attack defense
Exploitable weaknesses
Not confirmed in this report.
Offensive translation
Can take on more on-ball creator responsibility at the target level. Can take on more secondary creator / connector responsibility at the target level. Projects to retain a primary role as a spacing / shooting option.
Defensive assignments
primary point-of-attack / screen navigator (grade 5; assignment confirmed; workload should hold). primary gap / nail helper (grade 5; assignment confirmed; workload should hold).
Best offensive fit
Possible fit: Can organize a spaced ball-screen offense as an initiator. Representative film is still required.
Best defensive fit
Can take point-of-attack assignments in a coverage with clearly defined screen rules.
Limiting environments
A static offense asking her to create every late-clock advantage without a second handler. A low-spacing environment that removes driving and connective passing windows.
Development priorities
No priority confirmed yet.
evidence_and_projection
Why the verdict holds
evidence_strength
strong
Limited representative evidence attached
pathway_hypothesis
HM D1
High-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
inconclusive98.4 performance rating · rank 4 · 6 games
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Estimated offensive efficiency
inconclusiveORtg 130.3 · descriptive event context, not a role projection
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Floor percentage context
inconclusive60.4% · possession outcome context
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Stop percentage context
inconclusive76.1% · 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 Asia Cup
Continental · 2026
6
GP
10.5
PPG
7.8
RPG
2.3
APG
#4
RANK
competition_history
All competitions
Published competitions, strongest first. Open the statistical record for the complete event line.
FIBA U18 Asia Cup
Continental · 2026
#4/188Event board →
6
GP
10.5
PPG
7.8
RPG
2.3
APG
event_context
Event context
FIBA U18 Asia Cup 2026 · 188 ranked players
#1
Center · AUS
15.7 PPG 10.7 RPG 1.2 APG
//event_signalRebounder10.7 RPGComputed automatically from event data. Tap any signal to see the evidence behind it.//event_signalRim Protection2.8 BPGComputed automatically from event data. Tap any signal to see the evidence behind it.#2
Forward · NZL
8.3 PPG 6.8 RPG 1.8 APG
//event_signalTop 3#2 event rankComputed 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 Asia Cup · 2026 — scoped to this competition pool.
6
GP
10.5
PPG
7.8
RPG
2.3
APG
1.7
SPG
1.8
BPG
37%
3P%
61%
TS%
event_stats
Event production
Each line is scoped to one competition pool — not comparable across events.
FIBA U18 Asia Cup2026
6 GP · event rank #4
//quick_read
The line at a glance
10.5
PPG
7.8
RPG
2.3
APG
0.8
TOV/G
1.2
3PM/G
61%
TS%
//event_fingerprint
Performance against this field
Scoring
10.5
P80
Playmaking
2.3
P81
Rebounding
7.8
P93
True shooting
61%
P86
Two-way impact
+52.1
P96
Stops
76%
P97
//shooting_profile
Makes, attempts and efficiency
FG
Field goals
55%
24 made / 44 attempts
3PT
Three-pointers
37%
7 made / 19 attempts
FT
Free throws
47%
8 made / 17 attempts
Shot selection
43% of attempts from three
●2PA 25●3PA 19
//complete_box_score
Production by basketball action
scoring
63
PTS
10.5 / game
24–44
FGM–FGA
7–19
3PM–3PA
8–17
FTM–FTA
creation
14
AST
2.3 / game
5
TOV
0.8 / game
2.80×
AST:TOV
12
FD
rebounding
47
REB
7.8 / game
11
OREB
36
DREB
7.8
REB/G
defense
10
STL
1.7 / game
11
BLK
1.8 / game
7
PF
21
STL+BLK
3.5 / game
//hesi_and_dean_oliver
Efficiency and two-way impact
98.4
HESI
90.2
PI
130.3
ORtg
78.1
DRtg
+52.1
NRtg
+36.0
Stable NRtg
76%
Stop%
60%
Floor%
63%
eFG%
13%
PIE
84.8
Team DRtg
+6.7
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.