Regular Season
GP
8
W-L
2-6
PPG
7.9
APG
2.9
RPG
1.1
SPG
3.25
BPG
0.125
AST/TO
23
FG%
68.3%
3PT%
53.8%
Five Star League Season 2
SkeamgamingV
PF • Five Star Prospects
No. 13 PF
ProfileFive Star League Season 2
Position
PF Splits — Five Star League Season 2
Playoffs
GP
2
W-L
0-2
PPG
10
APG
0.5
RPG
1.5
SPG
1
BPG
0.5
AST/TO
—
FG%
80%
3PT%
100%
| Split | GP | W-L | PPG | APG | RPG | SPG | BPG | AST/TO | FG% | 3PT% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regular Season | 8 | 2-6 | 7.9 | 2.9 | 1.1 | 3.25 | 0.125 | 23 | 68.3% | 53.8% |
| Playoffs | 2 | 0-2 | 10 | 0.5 | 1.5 | 1 | 0.5 | — | 80% | 100% |
- Regular Season: Audited regular-season position split; official team records are stored separately.
- Playoffs: Verified completed playoff box scores only; shortened and missing-stat games remain context-only. Published aggregate includes 0.5 turnovers per game.
Season 2 PF ranking analysis
Regular season: 8 PF games, 2-6, 7.9 PPG, 1.1 RPG, 2.9 APG, 3.2 SPG, 0.1 BPG, 0.1 TO, 68.3% FG, 53.8% 3PT
Playoffs: 2 complete PF games, 0-2, 10.0 PPG, 1.5 RPG, 0.5 APG, 1.0 SPG, 0.5 BPG, 0.5 TO, 80.0% FG, 100% 3PT
Team context: No. 14 opponent PPG; bottom five opponent FG%
Skeam’s individual profile is unusual: 3.2 steals, nearly three assists and almost no turnovers, with strong shooting. He was again efficient against Krypt in the playoffs.
The backend fundamentals around those numbers were weak. Five Star Prospects ranked 14th in opponent PPG and bottom five in opponent FG%, while Skeam averaged only 1.1 rebounds and almost no blocks. The 2-8 combined PF record also matters.
Why not higher: High steals did not translate into strong team defense, rebounding or winning.
Why not lower: His efficiency, ball security and turnover creation provide legitimate value beyond the team results.