Nick Daicos missed for the Pies, while Marcus Bontempelli produced another big game as they remain top two on our Brownlow leaderboard. But there’s a $101 shot currently sitting third who demands serious attention after Round 4.
| Rank | Name | Team | Votes | Odds |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nick Daicos | Coll | 8.54 | $4.00 |
| 2 | Marcus Bontempelli | WB | 8.36 | $2.50 |
| 3 | Luke Davies-Uniacke | NM | 6.71 | $101 |
| 4 | Max Gawn | Mel | 6.50 | $81 |
| 5 | Zak Butters | PA | 6.43 | $18 |
| 6 | Christian Petracca | GC | 6.06 | $34 |
| 7 | Clayton Oliver | GWS | 5.84 | $151 |
| 8 | Will Ashcroft | BL | 5.72 | $21 |
Best Bet
Remains on top of our leaderboard after Round 4 despite being a late withdrawal on the weekend. As a result, Daicos has drifted to $4, but is expected to return this week against Fremantle.
The Dockers don’t have a natural tagger for Daicos. Corey Wagner may spend some time on him, but if Daicos is fit he could produce a huge game, having recorded 43 disposals and a goal the last time these sides met.
Lay
That is a very short price for Bont, and there’s a strong chance we’ll get better value at some stage this season.
The Bulldogs are 4-0, but they face a tough stretch against Hawthorn, Geelong, Sydney and Fremantle. More importantly, there are plenty of teammates capable of taking votes off him.
He can absolutely win it, but $2.50 feels under the odds at this stage.
Value Bet
There’s every chance LDU was best on in North Melbourne’s comeback win over Carlton, yet his price has drifted from $67 to $101.
Our data has Davies-Uniacke as one of the best pollers of the past six years, polling 40% above expectation since 2019.
North Melbourne now face Brisbane, Richmond and GWS. If they win a couple of those and LDU maintains this level, he’ll remain right up the top of our leaderboard.
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.
