ORtg
88.2
77th event percentileEstimated points produced per 100 possessions.
back_to_rankings
Unclaimed
event_player
Médard Dabiré
Center · CIV · b. 2008
Latest event year on file: 2026FIBA U18 AfroBasket
//measurables
203 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.
50.5% TSScoring efficiency · 85th event percentile
5.2 PPGScoring load · 51st event percentile
- 70.8
- HESI v2.1
- #42
- 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 #42 of 138 · Provisional
HESI
70.8
Event performance
71st event percentile
PI
68.1
Prospect index
70th event percentile
ORtg
88.2
Points / 100 poss.
77th event percentile
DRtg
75.1
Lower is better
55th event percentile
NRtg
+13.1
Two-way margin
73rd event percentile
Offensive evidence
ORtg 88.2 · 77th event percentile
Defensive evidence
DRtg 75.1 · Stop% 53.7% · Team DRtg 68.8
Sample context
6 games · 82 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
50.5% TS85th event percentile
Scoring load
5.2 PPG51st 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
Does the film show repeatable advantage creation or mostly connective passing?
Explore full efficiency + production profile
//impact_fingerprint
Where the profile separates
HESI performance
70.8
71st event percentile
Prospect index
68.1
70th event percentile
Offensive efficiency
88.2
77th event percentile
Defensive efficiency
75.1
55th event percentile
Two-way margin
+13.1
73rd event percentile
Stop percentage
53.7%
29th event percentile
//role_and_production
How the production is shaped
Scoring load
5.2 PPG
51st event percentile
Creation
0.3 APG
22nd event percentile
Rebounding
3.5 RPG
47th event percentile
Defensive activity
0.2 stocks
18th event percentile
Scoring efficiency
50.5% TS
85th 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 71st event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 88.2 ORtg and 75.1 DRtg, producing a +13.1 Net Rating. The clearest relative strengths are scoring efficiency, offensive efficiency, and two-way margin. The lowest relative areas are defensive activity, creation, and defensive stops.
Relative strengths
- 85th event percentile
Scoring efficiency
50.5% TS
True shooting efficiency compares favorably with the published event pool.
- 77th event percentile
Offensive efficiency
88.2 ORtg
The Dean Oliver estimate places offensive production per 100 possessions among the stronger results in this event.
- 73rd event percentile
Two-way margin
+13.1 NRtg
The gap between estimated offensive and defensive efficiency is a clear positive separator in this event.
Relative weaknesses
- 18th event percentile
Defensive activity
0.2 steals + blocks/G
Recorded steals and blocks are a lower relative area; this does not measure positioning, containment, or communication.
- 22nd event percentile
Creation
0.3 APG
Assist production is a lower relative area; the model cannot determine unrecorded creation or role constraints.
- 29th event percentile
Defensive stops
53.7% Stop%
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.
Points
5.2 PPG
51st event percentileScoring volume per game.
True shooting
50.5%
85th event percentileScoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.
Effective FG
44.0%
75th event percentileField-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.
Field goals
40.0%
78th event percentileOverall field-goal percentage.
Three-point shooting
40.0%
context0.8 attempts per game
Free throws
69.2%
76th event percentileFree-throw conversion in this event.
Floor%
41.9%
80th event percentileEstimated share of possessions producing at least one point.
Assists
0.3 APG
22nd event percentileRecorded passing production per game.
Defense and disruption
Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.
DRtg
75.1
55th 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
-6.3
16th event percentilePlayer DRtg is higher than the team baseline.
Stop%
53.7%
29th event percentileEstimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.
Recorded activity
0.2 STL+BLK
18th event percentileSteals plus blocks per game; it does not capture positioning or containment.
Estimated stops
18.5
contextDean Oliver estimated defensive stops across the event sample.
Two-way and all-around impact
Net impact, stabilized performance and supporting production.
Net Rating
+13.1
73rd event percentileRaw ORtg minus DRtg.
Stabilized NRtg
+5.3
71st event percentileNet Rating pulled toward the event median according to sample size.
HESI performance
70.8
71st event percentileEvent-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.
Prospect index
68.1
70th event percentileHESI performance with competition and age context.
PIE
3.4%
52nd event percentileEstimated share of positive game events while on the floor.
Rebounds
3.5 RPG
47th 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
82.3
context13.7 minutes per game.
Sample weight
57.8%
contextHow strongly the model trusts raw Net Rating versus the event median.
Confidence
Provisional
contextModel confidence based on available games and minutes.
Event rank
#42
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 Chad 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 · big · screen-and-roll finisher · short-roll connector · post / mismatch option
forward · big · screen-and-roll finisher · short-roll connector · post / mismatch option. No separator is established yet Primary pressure points: Offensive rebounding, Rim protection, Screening.
Now · ForwardNow · BigProjects · ForwardProjects · Big
Translatable strengths
Not confirmed in this report.
Exploitable weaknesses
- · Offensive rebounding
- · Rim protection
- · Screening
Offensive translation
Projects to retain a primary role as a screen-and-roll finisher. Projects to retain a primary role as a short-roll connector. Projects to retain a primary role as a post / mismatch option. Can take on more offensive rebounder responsibility at the target level.
Defensive assignments
primary low-man / back-line rotator (grade 2; 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). primary rim protector (grade 1; assignment confirmed; workload can expand).
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
NCAA D2
NCAA Division II 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
inconclusive70.8 performance rating · rank 42 · 6 games
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Estimated offensive efficiency
inconclusiveORtg 88.2 · descriptive event context, not a role projection
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Floor percentage context
inconclusive41.9% · possession outcome context
Next: Add a representative full-game observation in the same skill area.
Stop percentage context
inconclusive53.7% · 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
6
GP
5.2
PPG
3.5
RPG
0.3
APG
#42
RANK
competition_history
All competitions
Published competitions, strongest first. Open the statistical record for the complete event line.
FIBA U18 AfroBasket
Continental · 2026
#42/138Event board →
6
GP
5.2
PPG
3.5
RPG
0.3
APG
event_context
Event context
FIBA U18 AfroBasket 2026 · 138 ranked players
rank_above · #41Mehdi BerradaMoroccorank_below · #43Daryl BAYAF · Cameroon
//current_rank
#42
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.#40
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
5.2
PPG
3.5
RPG
0.3
APG
0.2
SPG
0.0
BPG
40%
3P%
51%
TS%
event_stats
Event production
Each line is scoped to one competition pool — not comparable across events.
FIBA U18 AfroBasket2026
6 GP · event rank #42
//quick_read
The line at a glance
5.2
PPG
3.5
RPG
0.3
APG
1.7
TOV/G
0.3
3PM/G
51%
TS%
//event_fingerprint
Performance against this field
Scoring
5.2
P51
Playmaking
0.3
P22
Rebounding
3.5
P47
True shooting
51%
P85
Two-way impact
+13.1
P73
Stops
54%
P29
//shooting_profile
Makes, attempts and efficiency
FG
Field goals
40%
10 made / 25 attempts
3PT
Three-pointers
40%
2 made / 5 attempts
FT
Free throws
69%
9 made / 13 attempts
Shot selection
20% of attempts from three
●2PA 20●3PA 5
//complete_box_score
Production by basketball action
scoring
31
PTS
5.2 / game
10–25
FGM–FGA
2–5
3PM–3PA
9–13
FTM–FTA
creation
2
AST
0.3 / game
10
TOV
1.7 / game
0.20×
AST:TOV
8
FD
rebounding
21
REB
3.5 / game
9
OREB
12
DREB
3.5
REB/G
defense
1
STL
0.2 / game
0
BLK
0.0 / game
5
PF
1
STL+BLK
0.2 / game
//hesi_and_dean_oliver
Efficiency and two-way impact
70.8
HESI
68.1
PI
88.2
ORtg
75.1
DRtg
+13.1
NRtg
+5.3
Stable NRtg
54%
Stop%
42%
Floor%
44%
eFG%
3%
PIE
68.8
Team DRtg
-6.3
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.