Hesi Sports Consulting//home_of_hesi_scout

Unclaimed

event_player · FIBA U17 Basketball World Cup 2026

Marina Josipovic

SLO · b. 2009

//measurables

187 cm

HEIGHT

//15_second_scouting_read

data-led profile

Scoring load-led profile

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

4.3 PPGScoring load · 48th event percentile

41.6% TSScoring efficiency · 48th event percentile

49.7
HESI v2.1: #97
of 192: 55%
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

profile_index

//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 U17 Basketball World Cup2026

Rank #97 of 192 · Provisional

HESI v2.1

HESI

49.7

Event performance

50th event percentile

54.3

Prospect index

50th event percentile

ORtg

96.6

Points / 100 poss.

75th event percentile

DRtg

96.5

Lower is better

11th event percentile

NRtg

+0.1

Two-way margin

50th event percentile

Offensive evidence

ORtg 96.6 · 75th event percentile

Defensive evidence

DRtg 96.5 · Stop% 40.2% · Team DRtg 88.0

Sample context

7 games · 75 minutes · 55% weight

//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade

Scoring load-led profileevent-relative description

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

Scoring load

4.3 PPG48th event percentile

Scoring efficiency

41.6% TS48th event percentile

Questions for film

01
How stable is this profile over a larger game and minute sample?
02
Does the film show repeatable advantage creation or mostly connective passing?
03
Will the rebounding translate against larger and more physical competition?

Explore full efficiency + production profile

//impact_fingerprint

Where the profile separates

HESI performance

49.7

50th event percentile

Prospect index

54.3

50th event percentile

Offensive efficiency

96.6

75th event percentile

Defensive efficiency

96.5

11th event percentile

Two-way margin

+0.1

50th event percentile

Stop percentage

40.2%

4th event percentile

//role_and_production

How the production is shaped

Scoring load

4.3 PPG

48th event percentile

Creation

0.6 APG

24th event percentile

Rebounding

2.0 RPG

28th event percentile

Defensive activity

0.4 stocks

32nd event percentile

Scoring efficiency

41.6% TS

48th 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.

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 50th event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 96.6 ORtg and 96.5 DRtg, producing a +0.1 Net Rating. The clearest relative strength is offensive efficiency. The lowest relative areas are defensive stops, defensive efficiency, and creation.

Relative strengths

Offensive efficiency
96.6 ORtg
75th event percentile
The Dean Oliver estimate places offensive production per 100 possessions among the stronger results in this event.

Relative weaknesses

Defensive stops
40.2% Stop%
4th event percentile
The estimated defensive-stop share is a lower relative area in the available sample.
Defensive efficiency
96.5 DRtg
11th event percentile
The player DRtg is less favorable relative to this event pool; matchup and team context still require film.
Creation
0.6 APG
24th event percentile
Assist production is a lower relative area; the model cannot determine unrecorded creation or role constraints.

//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

96.6

75th event percentile

Estimated points produced per 100 possessions.

Points

4.3 PPG

48th event percentile

Scoring volume per game.

True shooting

41.6%

48th event percentile

Scoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.

Effective FG

31.0%

31st event percentile

Field-goal efficiency with extra credit for made threes.

Field goals

27.6%

32nd event percentile

Overall field-goal percentage.

Three-point shooting

33.3%

context

0.9 attempts per game

Free throws

75.0%

76th event percentile

Free-throw conversion in this event.

Floor%

45.3%

77th event percentile

Estimated share of possessions producing at least one point.

Assists

0.6 APG

24th event percentile

Recorded passing production per game.

Defense and disruption

Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.

DRtg

96.5

11th event percentile

Estimated points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.

Team DRtg

88.0

context

Team defensive baseline used by the Dean Oliver estimate.

Defensive lift

-8.5

4th event percentile

Player DRtg is higher than the team baseline.

Stop%

40.2%

4th event percentile

Estimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.

Recorded activity

0.4 STL+BLK

32nd event percentile

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

Estimated stops

11.0

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

+0.1

50th event percentile

Raw ORtg minus DRtg.

Stabilized NRtg

+0.1

50th event percentile

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

HESI performance

49.7

50th event percentile

Event-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.

Prospect index

54.3

50th event percentile

HESI performance with competition and age context.

PIE

0.9%

26th event percentile

Estimated share of positive game events while on the floor.

Rebounds

2.0 RPG

28th event percentile

Total rebounding production per game.

Sample and confidence

How much evidence supports the estimates shown above.

Games

context

Published games included in this event line.

Minutes

74.5

context

10.6 minutes per game.

Sample weight

55.4%

context

How strongly the model trusts raw Net Rating versus the event median.

Confidence

Provisional

context

Model confidence based on available games and minutes.

Event rank

#97

context

Among 192 published players.

Team possessions

512.3

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.

//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 U17 Basketball World Cup

World Cup · 2026

4.3

PPG

2.0

RPG

0.6

APG

#97

RANK

competition_history

All competitions

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

FIBA U17 Basketball World Cup

World Cup · 2026

#97/192view →

//quick_read

The line at a glance

4.3

PPG

2.0

RPG

0.6

APG

0.7

TOV/G

0.3

3PM/G

42%

TS%

//event_fingerprint

Performance against this field

Scoring

4.3

P48

Playmaking

0.6

P24

Rebounding

2.0

P28

True shooting

42%

P48

Two-way impact

+0.1

P50

Stops

40%

//shooting_profile

Makes, attempts and efficiency

Field goals

28%

8 made / 29 attempts

3PT

Three-pointers

33%

2 made / 6 attempts

Free throws

75%

12 made / 16 attempts

Shot selection

21% of attempts from three

●2PA 23●3PA 6

//complete_box_score

Production by basketball action

scoring

PTS

4.3 / game

8–29

FGM–FGA

2–6

3PM–3PA

12–16

FTM–FTA

creation

AST

0.6 / game

TOV

0.7 / game

0.80×

AST:TOV

rebounding

REB

2.0 / game

OREB

DREB

2.0

REB/G

defense

STL

0.1 / game

BLK

0.3 / game

STL+BLK

0.4 / game

//hesi_and_dean_oliver

Efficiency and two-way impact

49.7

HESI

54.3

96.6

ORtg

96.5

DRtg

+0.1

NRtg

+0.1

Stable NRtg

40%

Stop%

45%

Floor%

31%

eFG%

PIE

88.0

Team DRtg

-8.5

Def. lift

around_this_rank

Around this rank

Event-scoped ranking within FIBA U17 Basketball World Cup 2026 — 192 ranked players.

rank_above · #96Sarlote SkrebeleLAT

//current_rank

#97

of 192 ranked

rank_below · #98Mariam ElshenawyEgypt

more_from_this_event

Key stats

FIBA U17 Basketball World Cup · 2026 — scoped to this competition pool.

4.3

PPG

2.0

RPG

0.6

APG

0.1

SPG

0.3

BPG

33%

3P%

42%

TS%

event_stats