Nick Daicos holds top spot on our leaderboard after Round 5, but the challengers are closing. Our best bet sits outside the top eight and is paying double figures, making this one of the more interesting markets in recent seasons.
| Rank | Name | Team | Votes | Odds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nick Daicos | Coll | 9.61 | $3.75 |
| 2 | Zak Butters | PA | 8.90 | $17 |
| 3 | Marcus Bontempelli | WB | 8.36 | $2.75 |
| 4 | Jai Newcombe | Haw | 8.25 | $67 |
| 5 | Bailey Smith | Gee | 7.60 | $15 |
| 6 | Luke Davies-Uniacke | NM | 7.35 | $101 |
| 7 | Clayton Oliver | GWS | 7.01 | $151 |
| 8 | Max Gawn | Mel | 6.50 | $71 |
Best Bet
Heeney sits just outside our top eight, currently ranked 10th with 6.3 votes, and his historical polling numbers aren’t elite given much of his career has been spent forward.
Despite that, this price is too good to ignore. He has been Sydney’s best player to start the season and is one of the form players in the competition.
With Errol Gulden sidelined, Heeney’s midfield responsibility increases, giving him a strong chance to replicate his 2024 polling output. With a favourable draw ahead, Sydney should bank wins, creating opportunities to poll.
Lay
We laid Bontempelli at $2.50 last week and are happy to go again at $2.75.
The market is tighter than the odds suggest, and the Bulldogs face a tough stretch against Geelong, Sydney and Fremantle.
Bontempelli is unlikely to poll last round, and if the Bulldogs struggle across this run, his price will drift. Expect him to be closer to $5 by Round 8.
Value Bet
Newcombe continues to fly under the radar despite sitting fourth on our leaderboard.
He is a proven poller, with at least 17 votes in each of the past three seasons, and his numbers have lifted again in 2026.
Averaging a career-high 26.2 disposals, combined with consistent contested work, he profiles perfectly for Brownlow voting.
With Hawthorn expected to win games, Newcombe will continue to put himself in the frame at a very appealing price.
The Voting System - Why We Use a Weighted Average Approach
We use a weighted average system for Brownlow voting to improve accuracy and fairness in assessing player performances. The traditional 3-2-1 method limits vote allocations to whole numbers, often forcing a clear distinction between players whose performances may have been nearly identical.
By contrast, our weighted system allows for decimal-based scoring (e.g. 2.5, 1.5, 0.5), providing a more nuanced reflection of each player’s impact on the game.
This approach maintains the same total vote count per game (six votes) but offers greater flexibility in how those votes are distributed. As a result, it reduces arbitrary decision-making and captures subtle performance differences more effectively.
Ultimately, this leads to more precise predictions and a leaderboard that better reflects how games are perceived by fans, analysts and the broader football community.
