ORtg
139.3
96th event percentileEstimated points produced per 100 possessions.
back_to_rankings
Unclaimed
event_player · FIBA U18 Asia Cup 2026
Hussain Fuad Moosa Sharaf Ghuloom
Forward · BRN · b. 2009
//measurables
183 cm
HEIGHT
//15_second_scouting_read
data-led profileScoring efficiency-led profile
Scoring efficiency and Defensive activity are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
56.8% TSScoring efficiency · 77th event percentile
0.5 stocksDefensive activity · 43rd event percentile
- 65.8
- HESI v2.1
- #65
- of 188
- 16%
- 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.
FIBA U18 Asia Cup2026
Rank #65 of 188 · Limited sample
HESI
65.8
Event performance
66th event percentile
PI
64.1
Prospect index
66th event percentile
ORtg
139.3
Points / 100 poss.
96th event percentile
DRtg
104.0
Lower is better
41st event percentile
NRtg
+35.3
Two-way margin
89th event percentile
Offensive evidence
ORtg 139.3 · 96th event percentile
Defensive evidence
DRtg 104.0 · Stop% 44.4% · Team DRtg 98.4
Sample context
2 games · 11 minutes · 16% weight
//statistical_read · not_a_scout_grade
Scoring efficiency-led profileevent-relative description
Scoring efficiency and Defensive activity are the clearest relative production signals in this event.
Scoring efficiency
56.8% TS77th event percentile
Defensive activity
0.5 stocks43rd 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
Can the scoring load hold as defensive attention and role responsibility increase?
Explore full efficiency + production profile
//impact_fingerprint
Where the profile separates
HESI performance
65.8
66th event percentile
Prospect index
64.1
66th event percentile
Offensive efficiency
139.3
96th event percentile
Defensive efficiency
104.0
41st event percentile
Two-way margin
+35.3
89th event percentile
Stop percentage
44.4%
33rd event percentile
//role_and_production
How the production is shaped
Scoring load
0.5 PPG
9th event percentile
Creation
0.0 APG
7th event percentile
Rebounding
1.0 RPG
20th event percentile
Defensive activity
0.5 stocks
43rd event percentile
Scoring efficiency
56.8% TS
77th 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 66th event percentile. The Dean Oliver profile estimates 139.3 ORtg and 104.0 DRtg, producing a +35.3 Net Rating. The clearest relative strengths are offensive efficiency, two-way margin, and scoring efficiency. The lowest relative areas are creation, scoring load, and rebounding.
Relative strengths
- 96th event percentile
Offensive efficiency
139.3 ORtg
The Dean Oliver estimate places offensive production per 100 possessions among the stronger results in this event.
- 89th event percentile
Two-way margin
+35.3 NRtg
The gap between estimated offensive and defensive efficiency is a clear positive separator in this event.
- 77th event percentile
Scoring efficiency
56.8% TS
True shooting efficiency compares favorably with the published event pool.
Relative weaknesses
- 7th event percentile
Creation
0.0 APG
Assist production is a lower relative area; the model cannot determine unrecorded creation or role constraints.
- 9th event percentile
Scoring load
0.5 PPG
Scoring volume is a lower relative part of this event profile.
- 20th event percentile
Rebounding
1.0 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
0.5 PPG
9th event percentileScoring volume per game.
True shooting
56.8%
77th event percentileScoring efficiency including twos, threes and free throws.
Free throws
50.0%
29th event percentileFree-throw conversion in this event.
Floor%
78.6%
99th event percentileEstimated share of possessions producing at least one point.
Assists
0.0 APG
7th event percentileRecorded passing production per game.
Defense and disruption
Estimated defensive efficiency, stops and recorded activity.
DRtg
104.0
41st event percentileEstimated points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.
Team DRtg
98.4
contextTeam defensive baseline used by the Dean Oliver estimate.
Defensive lift
-5.6
24th event percentilePlayer DRtg is higher than the team baseline.
Stop%
44.4%
33rd event percentileEstimated share of defensive possessions ended through the player.
Recorded activity
0.5 STL+BLK
43rd event percentileSteals plus blocks per game; it does not capture positioning or containment.
Estimated stops
2.1
contextDean Oliver estimated defensive stops across the event sample.
Two-way and all-around impact
Net impact, stabilized performance and supporting production.
Net Rating
+35.3
89th event percentileRaw ORtg minus DRtg.
Stabilized NRtg
-1.2
66th event percentileNet Rating pulled toward the event median according to sample size.
HESI performance
65.8
66th event percentileEvent-relative rank of stabilized two-way performance.
Prospect index
64.1
66th event percentileHESI performance with competition and age context.
PIE
0.0%
14th event percentileEstimated share of positive game events while on the floor.
Rebounds
1.0 RPG
20th event percentileTotal rebounding production per game.
Sample and confidence
How much evidence supports the estimates shown above.
Games
2
contextPublished games included in this event line.
Minutes
11.2
context5.6 minutes per game.
Sample weight
15.7%
contextHow strongly the model trusts raw Net Rating versus the event median.
Confidence
Limited sample
contextModel confidence based on available games and minutes.
Event rank
#65
contextAmong 188 published players.
Team possessions
336.4
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
//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
2
GP
0.5
PPG
1.0
RPG
0.0
APG
#65
RANK
competition_history
All competitions
Every published competition this player appeared in, strongest first, with its complete verified stat line.
FIBA U18 Asia Cup
Continental · 2026
#65/188view →
//quick_read
The line at a glance
0.5
PPG
1.0
RPG
0.0
APG
0.0
TOV/G
0.0
3PM/G
57%
TS%
//event_fingerprint
Performance against this field
Scoring
0.5
P9
Playmaking
0.0
P7
Rebounding
1.0
P20
True shooting
57%
P77
Two-way impact
+35.3
P89
Stops
44%
P33
//shooting_profile
Makes, attempts and efficiency
FG
Field goals
—
0 made / 0 attempts
3PT
Three-pointers
—
0 made / 0 attempts
FT
Free throws
50%
1 made / 2 attempts
//complete_box_score
Production by basketball action
scoring
1
PTS
0.5 / game
0–0
FGM–FGA
0–0
3PM–3PA
1–2
FTM–FTA
creation
0
AST
0.0 / game
0
TOV
0.0 / game
—
AST:TOV
1
FD
rebounding
2
REB
1.0 / game
1
OREB
1
DREB
1.0
REB/G
defense
0
STL
0.0 / game
1
BLK
0.5 / game
2
PF
1
STL+BLK
0.5 / game
//hesi_and_dean_oliver
Efficiency and two-way impact
65.8
HESI
64.1
PI
139.3
ORtg
104.0
DRtg
+35.3
NRtg
-1.2
Stable NRtg
44%
Stop%
79%
Floor%
0%
PIE
98.4
Team DRtg
-5.6
Def. lift
around_this_rank
Around this rank
Event-scoped ranking within FIBA U18 Asia Cup 2026 — 188 ranked players.
rank_above · #64YEHIA KASSASPF · SYRrank_below · #66Mani Manouchehri GigasariSF · IRI
//current_rank
#65
of 188 ranked
more_from_this_event
More from this event
Other ranked players from FIBA U18 Asia Cup 2026.
#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.#63
#64
#66
03
//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.
2
GP
0.5
PPG
1.0
RPG
0.0
APG
0.0
SPG
0.5
BPG
—
3P%
57%
TS%
event_stats
Event production
Each line is scoped to one competition pool — not comparable across events.
FIBA U18 Asia Cup2026
2 GP · event rank #65
//quick_read
The line at a glance
0.5
PPG
1.0
RPG
0.0
APG
0.0
TOV/G
0.0
3PM/G
57%
TS%
//event_fingerprint
Performance against this field
Scoring
0.5
P9
Playmaking
0.0
P7
Rebounding
1.0
P20
True shooting
57%
P77
Two-way impact
+35.3
P89
Stops
44%
P33
//shooting_profile
Makes, attempts and efficiency
FG
Field goals
—
0 made / 0 attempts
3PT
Three-pointers
—
0 made / 0 attempts
FT
Free throws
50%
1 made / 2 attempts
//complete_box_score
Production by basketball action
scoring
1
PTS
0.5 / game
0–0
FGM–FGA
0–0
3PM–3PA
1–2
FTM–FTA
creation
0
AST
0.0 / game
0
TOV
0.0 / game
—
AST:TOV
1
FD
rebounding
2
REB
1.0 / game
1
OREB
1
DREB
1.0
REB/G
defense
0
STL
0.0 / game
1
BLK
0.5 / game
2
PF
1
STL+BLK
0.5 / game
//hesi_and_dean_oliver
Efficiency and two-way impact
65.8
HESI
64.1
PI
139.3
ORtg
104.0
DRtg
+35.3
NRtg
-1.2
Stable NRtg
44%
Stop%
79%
Floor%
0%
PIE
98.4
Team DRtg
-5.6
Def. lift
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.