Mega Thread Nick Daicos - Can he be the GTWEB? Part 2

[Fadge]

He’s a 6 time EFC Crichton medalist.

He’s an Essendon immortal.

An Essendon immortal with no podium finishes in any of the major awsrds, and not a single finals win, who has been itching to get out of the joint for the last 3 years, in the prime of his career, and will try again at the end of 2026.

Let the bloke go to give him a chance of winning a final elsewhere FFS.

 

[Worm4]

An Essendon immortal with no podium finishes in any of the major awsrds, and not a single finals win, who has been itching to get out of the joint for the last 3 years, in the prime of his career, and will try again at the end of 2026.

Let the bloke go to give him a chance of winning a final elsewhere FFS.

Be careful, that itch you refer to could be about to hit your golden boy

 

[sr36]

You Nicky lovers have an extremely warped idea on what exactly is a “ contested possession “..

Nah mate you are. Ball in dispute whoever gets it. Pretty ****ing simple.

You're all style over substance. "He won that disputed ball in the wrong way." You should judge gymnastics, as you only seem to care about how a player does something and not what they do.

 

[Fadge]

Be careful, that itch you refer to could be about to hit your golden boy

Surprise, surprise, surprise.

Opposition clubs are willing to throw money at the best player in the competition.

Who would have thought?

 

[Dtennent94]

He’s a 6 time EFC Crichton medalist.

He’s an Essendon immortal.

Nicky is just a skinny squib running around looking for stat padding cheapies.

Not sure your BnF even scrapes in as a minor award.

 

[HeathySure]

If Murdoch says it’s true ..then it must be.

View attachment 2554511

why do you care? you reckon he is no good

 

[Cdog71]

They’re great players Bont, Heeney and Daicos and examples of extraordinary individuals
Heeney IMO is probably the most gifted athlete/sportsman of the three and in the game I think, who applied himself to Aussie rules, Daicos probably had the most constant high Preformance support around him from a young age but still you have to commit and learn and had the grit to build his running ability and skills through COVID lockdowns and Bont is in my view the most naturally gifted footballer, 6”4, left sided and a great leader.

All generational players but Bont is the most complete Aussie Rules player of the three I’d say

 

[ShereKhan]

It's not maths where two negatives make a positive, old boy.

The algorithm is fundamentally flawed, nothing more needs to be said.

The 'best seasons' we've seen from players: Dusty in 2017, Danger in 2016, Fyfe in his Brownlow years, GAJ in his prime years, Bont the last 3 x years etc... have seen them #1 in Player Ratings, with averages near or even above 20.

The data is not perfect, but when it spits out scores of 20 or thereabouts for the uber elite players and ranks them #1 across a season, then it seems to be doing something right.

The ratings do seem to reward contest wins and defensive actions....what Naicos does is undoubtedly eye catching...running the lines, getting into space, great spin moves to find an opening etc... he's absurdly good at it.

But what nobody watching the games sees or notices are pressure acts, tackles, defensive actions, hardball gets etc... they aren't pretty and often don't show up on a traditional 'stats' sheet that most supporters look at (disposals, goals, marks and supercoach points)....but they are clearly important elements of helping win games of footy, and they are elements of the game Naicos is not very strong in...but Bont, Serong, Rowell, Richards and others excel in.

I think there's every chance Naicos will end up top-5 in Player Ratings in 2026 so it won't be an issue for him. But it is funny you laud Brownlow votes and dismiss Player Ratings, when one is based on emotion and very low level analysis and the other is based on actual data that is proven to drive outcomes.

 

[ShereKhan]

How do you propose that we both accurately assess how well Bont and Daicos played in games in which neither of them got coaches votes in in 2023 or 2024, other than rewatching games or using statistics, if my suggestion is that Bontempelli was the better player in those games because his output was statistically superior?

You can disagree with the fact I'm presenting it as statistics, but the onus is on you to prove an alternative here. You can't just say "my memory reminds me that Daicos was good" because I very much doubt you remember how good Bont was in a random Dogs game in 2024, even assuming that you actually watched all Dogs games in 2024 anyway.

Across 2023-2026 Bont is vastly superior in the offensive elements of the game, and he's also vastly superior in all the defensive actions and contest elements of the game. It's why he rates a lot higher in a system that involves no emotion and doesn't factor in those who play a more uncontested and eye catching role.

And then there's the eye test.....you watch them play and Bont can do it all ...contested marks, high marks, clearance, goals, both sides of body, run and carry, elite kick.......Naicos can't.

So this thread should be called "Can Naicos be the second best player in the game in 2026?"

 

[Fadge]

The 'best seasons' we've seen from players: Dusty in 2017, Danger in 2016, Fyfe in his Brownlow years, GAJ in his prime years, Bont the last 3 x years etc... have seen them #1 in Player Ratings, with averages near or even above 20.

The data is not perfect, but when it spits out scores of 20 or thereabouts for the uber elite players and ranks them #1 across a season, then it seems to be doing something right.

The ratings do seem to reward contest wins and defensive actions....what Naicos does is undoubtedly eye catching...running the lines, getting into space, great spin moves to find an opening etc... he's absurdly good at it.

But what nobody watching the games sees or notices are pressure acts, tackles, defensive actions, hardball gets etc... they aren't pretty and often don't show up on a traditional 'stats' sheet that most supporters look at (disposals, goals, marks and supercoach points)....but they are clearly important elements of helping win games of footy, and they are elements of the game Naicos is not very strong in...but Bont, Serong, Rowell, Richards and others excel in.

I think there's every chance Naicos will end up top-5 in Player Ratings in 2026 so it won't be an issue for him. But it is funny you laud Brownlow votes and dismiss Player Ratings, when one is based on emotion and very low level analysis and the other is based on actual data that is proven to drive outcomes.

Sorry, but if any algorithm tells me Errol Gulden was outside the top 40 players based on his average game rating in 2025, when his inclusion once he returned made Sydney an infinitely better side than they were whilst he was injured, the algorithm simply doesn't work.

The algorithm clearly doesn't appropriately reward the Gulden and Daicos types for their hard running, line breaking and creative ball use.

Jordan Dawson at number 28 in 2025, when he was clearly amongst the 5 most influential players in the competition (which was agreed by the players, who had him at 2).

Meanwhile, we have Tristan Xerri at number 3.

We see it time and time again.

 

[Corn Cobbers]

Sorry, but if any algorithm tells me Errol Gulden was outside the top 40 players based on his average game rating in 2025, when his inclusion once he returned made Sydney an infinitely better side than they were whilst he was injured, the algorithm simply doesn't work.

The algorithm clearly doesn't appropriately reward the Gulden and Daicos types for their hard running, line breaking and creative ball use.

Jordan Dawson at number 28 in 2025, when he was clearly amongst the 5 most influential players in the competition (which was agreed by the players, who had him at 2).

Meanwhile, we have Tristan Xerri at number 3.

We see it time and time again.

There is simply no algorithm that can correctly measure the greatness of Daicos

Luckily the umpires, players and coaches have eyes

 

[Mr Meow]

Sorry, but if any algorithm tells me Errol Gulden was outside the top 40 players based on his average game rating in 2025, when his inclusion once he returned made Sydney an infinitely better side than they were whilst he was injured, the algorithm simply doesn't work.

The algorithm clearly doesn't appropriately reward the Gulden and Daicos types for their hard running, line breaking and creative ball use.

Jordan Dawson at number 28 in 2025, when he was clearly amongst the 5 most influential players in the competition (which was agreed by the players, who had him at 2).

Meanwhile, we have Tristan Xerri at number 3.

We see it time and time again.

You keep selling Daicos' creative ball use and line breaking as his point of difference compared to other midfielders, but how exactly are you measuring that?

Daicos wasn't in the top 5 midfielders of 2025 for metres gained. In 2024 he was 4th. In 2023 he was 7th. Others clearly break lines more.

Okay, so maybe that is offset by sheer skill and capacity to generate scores (goals, goal assists, SIs) via creative ball use?

Using averages:

-In 2025 Daicos wasn't a top 10 midfielder for goals, he was equal 5th (with 3 others) for goal assists and 3rd for SIs.

-In 2024 Daicos was equal 5th for goals, wasn't top 10 for goal assists and was equal 4th (with 2 other players) for SIs.

-In 2023 Daicos was equal 2nd for goals (with 3 others), wasn't top 30 for goal assists and was 10th (with a few others) for SIs. His time at half back was spent as an outside midfielder, so position isn't an excuse.

Daicos has not been number 1 for line breaking and has never been top for any scoring metric, or even dominant when combining goal/goal assist/SI rankings.

 

[Fadge]

You keep selling Daicos' creative ball use and line breaking as his point of difference compared to other midfielders, but how exactly are you measuring that?

Daicos wasn't in the top 5 midfielders of 2025 for metres gained. In 2024 he was 4th. In 2023 he was 7th. Others clearly break lines more.

Okay, so maybe that is offset by sheer skill and capacity to generate scores (goals, goal assists, SIs) via creative ball use?

Using averages:

-In 2025 Daicos wasn't a top 10 midfielder for goals, he was equal 5th (with 3 others) for goal assists and 3rd for SIs.

-In 2024 Daicos was equal 5th for goals, wasn't top 10 for goal assists and was equal 4th (with 2 other players) for SIs.

-In 2023 Daicos was equal 2nd for goals (with 3 others), wasn't top 30 for goal assists and was 10th (with a few others) for SIs. His time at half back was spent as an outside midfielder, so position isn't an excuse.

Daicos has not been number 1 for line breaking and has never been top for any scoring metric, or even dominant when combining goal/goal assist/SI rankings.

There is simply no algorithm that can correctly measure the greatness of Daicos

Luckily the umpires, players and coaches have eyes

Beautifully summed up by Corn Cobbers

 

[Mr Meow]

Beautifully summed up by Corn Cobbers

Beautiful in the sense that "I have...nothing to support my opinion" is good news for the person who successfully contested the statement. The dominant midfielders who break lines and have superior ball use to others, they simply rank higher collectively for the categories I covered.

In other words there is no actual basis for highlighting Daicos as dominant in terms of breaking lines or creative ball use.

 

[Cdog71]

So just checking if I’m keeping up.

Two games
74 possessions
13 have been contested
9 direct turnovers last game, 7 in the opener
3 tackles last two games

So gets the ball on his own 83% of the time and gives it back to the oppo 1 in every 4 kicks.

Is that right?

 

[threenewpadlocks]

There is simply no algorithm that can correctly measure the greatness of Daicos

Luckily the umpires, players and coaches have eyes

All we know is that the umpires and coaches vote on a game-by-game basis (without these players making any judgement about which games were higher quality than others with a similar vote), and that the umpires present to you an assumption that every single player from the 4th best on the park and beyond played a similarily good game, which is absurd.

In any case, we do know that the coaches - by your own measurement - thought Bont was better on a per-game average basis in 2025 than Daicos.

We do know that the players considered Bont to be better in 2023 and 2024, and we have no way of knowing how Bont's 5 games missed with injury influenced the players' voting here. We do know that Daicos didn't miss significant game time to injury in 2023 and 2024, though.

 

[Corn Cobbers]

We do know that Daicos didn't miss significant game time to injury in 2023 and 2024, though.

Not sure we all know that, Daicos missed a few games in 2023 that probably cost him all the awards

Did you know that Daicos averages a world record 1.24 Brownlow votes per game to Bont's rather measly 0.87 which really should be the end of the conversation

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Sorry, but if any algorithm tells me Errol Gulden was outside the top 40 players based on his average game rating in 2025, when his inclusion once he returned made Sydney an infinitely better side than they were whilst he was injured, the algorithm simply doesn't work.

The algorithm clearly doesn't appropriately reward the Gulden and Daicos types for their hard running, line breaking and creative ball use.

Jordan Dawson at number 28 in 2025, when he was clearly amongst the 5 most influential players in the competition (which was agreed by the players, who had him at 2).

Meanwhile, we have Tristan Xerri at number 3.

We see it time and time again.

At risk of you taking this statement in bad faith, it's a flaw in the ratings systems of the win/loss nature of contests, like ruck contest contests. It doesn't debit contest losses in the same way it credits contest wins. In some ways its abstract (ie, failing to punish the 4 players at a centre bounce collectively for the failure to prevent an opposition 1st possession at a stoppage, but dividing that up in value among the 4 players at the centre bounce is tough - e.g., the ruck has some responsibility in follow-up work after the tap, so less responsibility than the mids, but how much less? it's not zero), sometimes it's more literal (e.g. Xerri was rank 1 for 85.9 ruck contests per game, more than 10 total more than a league average 1st ruck). The rating system rates Xerri for his wins in total without taking points away from the fact that Xerri also lost more-than-league-average number of ruck contests (by virtue of the fact that opposition rucks also went to more contests against Xerri than other 1st rucks in other games).

Similarly, it doesn't actually measure the value ascription of stoppage -> first possession -> clearance very well. It's poor at assigning player value to those that stand around the stoppage that eventually leads to clearances through the two step process (ie, win 1st possession is also equally preventing opposition 1st possession, your opponent's 1st possession to clearance is a failure of you to prevent it, not debited).

A poor rating system this way is to be expected, because the alternate is a mathematical system would that assigns value to players standing around the stoppage not actually touching the ball in some sort of stoppage win +/- system like you do for NBA. In other words, and specifically for stoppages, player ratings points is somewhat more like measuring an NBA player in scoring raw points per game - generally the good players score more, but it's imprecise (put ball in bucket/win ball at stoppage) without actually looking at holistic contribution to having a winning score per possession in NBA/playing a role so your team wins the clearance. Not as extreme, but you get the idea.

It then overrates those that actually get first possession at stoppages without converting it to actual clearances. Because it assumes you do the work by getting the 1st possession and then the failure of getting it to a clearance is entirely the value of the opponent's pressure act or tackle that prevented such a clearance.

E.g. Xerri, who in 2025 had about 4.5 grab-it-out-of-the rucks per game, failed in this area, but wasn't debited for it. Of the 113 players in the AFL who played at least 10 games in 2025 and got 2.5 clearances per game, Xerri was ranked 106th for 1st possession to clearance rate, at 67.9%. Ergo, lots of players (such as opposition rucks) who laid tackles on Xerri after he grabbed it out of the ruck get points, but there's no points taken away from Xerri for his failure to break the tackle after winning the hard ball, they just assume that his hard ball won would be a clearance at a league average rate.

Ironically, this actually means that Daicos is overrated in such a system when compared to Bontempell. Bontempelli was rank 2 of those 113 players, at 87.1% 1st possession to clearance, sandwiched between JHF and Kosi Pickett (two players who are also underrated by rating points per game for similar reasons). Daicos was rank 30 of 113 players - still good, and still slightly underrated, but not so much compared to Bont.

This doesn't even mention holistic role that players do in overall stoppages (ie, their presence to prevent opposition winning contests). Dogs were a rank 1 stoppage team, Pies were rank 10, scores from stoppages, and both Bont and Daicos were present at the stoppage for a majority of their team's stoppages. Dogs were +26 in points from stoppage differential without Bont for the first 5 games of the year and +306 in 18 games with him thereafter. Bont clearly had a major role in team ability to score from stoppages (such as preventing opposition score from stoppages via his presence) that isn't measured in the player ratings points.

Of course, there are contests around the ground, post-stoppage, but it's far less of an issue for this ratings system. Because it measures intercepts, spoils, one-percenters, tackles and pressure acts, these are an excellent approximation for how effective you are at contest wins around the ground. The fact that Collingwood win games because of their defence but Daicos often has no part in it (ie, he doesn't help his team defence by laying very many tackles in post-clearance situations, or simply winning many post-clearance groudnballs) is just another point that Daicos isn't very good.

This is all why I'm confident in saying Bontempelli is the league's best player. Maybe you have fair points about Bont racking up scores in big margin victory over bad teams that the Dogs have in recent years, or that Daicos sacrificies his ability to generate positive stats for the role the coach is asking him to do. Those are somewhat fair points, but I still think that the difference in style/role is all very minor, and doesn't overcome the very large gap Bontempelli has over Daicos in these point rating systems - Daicos still attends the majority of his team's centre bounces and Pies games still have a lot of possession chains forward of centre that Daicos can kick goals or goal asissts from, but he simply doesn't.

Of course, this is all high-level stuff that's going to be taken in bad faith by you when you say "hurr durr bont bad Daicos good coaches votes brownlow votes AFLPA MVP counts but it does but it doesn't".

An overall, consider that Gulden only got 10 coaches votes last year from his 10 games, your own measuring stick. For all your claims that "Sydney was better", if Gulden was truly good, why did he only average 1 coaches vote per game - why did he fail to poll in any game whatsoever for the first 7 of those 10 games?

 

[Dtennent94]

So just checking if I’m keeping up.

Two games
74 possessions
13 have been contested
9 direct turnovers last game, 7 in the opener
3 tackles last two games

So gets the ball on his own 83% of the time and gives it back to the oppo 1 in every 4 kicks.

Is that right?

Look at the SI’s vs team scores to see his impact.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Not sure we all know that, Daicos missed a few games in 2023 that probably cost him all the awards

Did you know that Daicos averages a world record 1.24 Brownlow votes per game to Bont's rather measly 0.87 which really should be the end of the conversation

Daicos missed 3 of 26 games (11.5% of the season) in 2023. Bont missed 5 of 23 games (21.7% of the season) in 2025. Almost double the amount of games missed (and therefore potential value to winning lost).

 

[Cdog71]

Look at the SI’s vs team scores to see his impact.

What’s a reasonable amount of SI’s outve 74 possessions would you say?

 

[Fadge]

Beautiful in the sense that "I have...nothing to support my opinion" is good news for the person who successfully contested the statement. The dominant midfielders who break lines and have superior ball use to others, they simply rank higher collectively for the categories I covered.

In other words there is no actual basis for highlighting Daicos as dominant in terms of breaking lines or creative ball use.

How many times can we say the algorithm is broken?

2025 rankings:
17. Daicos
20. Smith
28. Dawson
42. Gulden

If you guys want to use as gospel an algorithm that draws these conclusions, go for your life.

But don't expect anyone with a reasonable level of critical thinking to subscribe.

 

[Fadge]

What’s a reasonable amount of SI’s outve 74 possessions would you say?

How much has the team scored?

 

[Fadge]

We do know that the players considered Bont to be better in 2023 and 2024, and we have no way of knowing how Bont's 5 games missed with injury influenced the players' voting here. We do know that Daicos didn't miss significant game time to injury in 2023 and 2024, though.

LOLOL

You might want to revisit Daicos and 2023...

 

[Mr Meow]

How many times can we say the algorithm is broken?

2025 rankings:
17. Daicos
20. Smith
28. Dawson
42. Gulden

If you guys want to use as gospel an algorithm that draws these conclusions, go for your life.

But don't expect anyone with a reasonable level of critical thinking to subscribe.

My post mentioned raw statistics, not Player Ratings. Rankings each season among midfielders for metres gained, score involvements, goals and goal assists. These are fairly reliable indicators for damaging/explosive attacking midfielders. Daicos hasn't reached dominance in any of these areas. You have to starty looking at things like uncontested possesions and handball receives, the areas he has consistently been better at than other midfielders.