2026 season
Premiership Window
Current-season contender profiles compared with the traits of recent premiers.
At a glance
State of the premiership race
Movement this run
Who shifted, and why
Contender ladder
Flag Window Score
An explainable score built from historical premier traits, current results, team style, and depth signals.
| Rank | Team | Band | Score | Movement | Run home | Snapshot reason |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Fremantle
FRE
|
In the Window | 96.0 | unchanged / -0.3 | Mixed run home | ladder path; watch profile |
| 2 |
Sydney
SYD
|
In the Window | 86.5 | unchanged / -3.3 | Friendly run home | ladder path; watch profile |
| 3 |
Hawthorn
HAW
|
Contender | 81.3 | up 3 / +19.2 | Friendly run home | ladder path; short on scoring |
| 4 |
Adelaide
ADE
|
Contender | 78.3 | unchanged / +4.9 | Hard run home | defence; short on scoring |
| 5 |
Brisbane Lions
BRL
|
Contender | 75.6 | down 2 / +1.9 | Mixed run home | percentage; short on defence |
| 6 |
Geelong
GEE
|
Fringe Contender | 62.0 | down 1 / -4.8 | Friendly run home | true form; short on ladder path |
| 7 |
Melbourne
MEL
|
Outside Looking In | 58.4 | unchanged / +2.7 | Mixed run home | defence blocker |
| 8 |
Collingwood
COL
|
Outside Looking In | 47.2 | unchanged / -0.7 | Mixed run home | true form blocker |
| 9 |
St Kilda
STK
|
Not in the Window | 40.0 | unchanged / -0.7 | Friendly run home | ladder path blocker |
| 10 |
GWS
GWS
|
Not in the Window | 37.0 | unchanged / +3.3 | Mixed run home | ladder path blocker |
| 11 |
Port Adelaide
PORT
|
Not in the Window | 28.2 | up 1 / -0.8 | Hard run home | ladder path blocker |
| 12 |
Western Bulldogs
WBD
|
Not in the Window | 27.0 | down 1 / -3.4 | Friendly run home | percentage blocker |
| 13 |
Carlton
CAR
|
Not in the Window | 19.3 | unchanged / -8.5 | Hard run home | ladder path blocker |
| 14 |
Gold Coast
GCS
|
Not in the Window | 13.2 | unchanged / -4.1 | Mixed run home | ladder path blocker |
| 15 |
North Melbourne
NTH
|
Not in the Window | 10.7 | unchanged / -2.2 | Hard run home | ladder path blocker |
| 16 |
West Coast
WCE
|
Not in the Window | 1.0 | up 2 / +1.0 | Hard run home | ladder path blocker |
| 17 |
Essendon
ESS
|
Not in the Window | 0.0 | down 1 / 0.0 | Mixed run home | ladder path blocker |
| 18 |
Richmond
RIC
|
Not in the Window | 0.0 | down 1 / 0.0 | Mixed run home | ladder path blocker |
Visual read
Offence/defence profile
The full ranked score sits above; this view shows whether a side has the balanced profile recent premiers usually carry.
Balanced premier shape
Right is stronger scoring. Higher is stronger defence. Larger logos have stronger overall Flag Window scores.
Their ladder position gives them a genuine finals path and the main watch is no single gap stands out yet.
Read team profile
Verdict
Fremantle sit in the window at 96.0/100, ranked #1. They have 9 recent-premier traits met and 0 still missing.
Why they can win
- The ladder position gives them the usual premier runway (1.0, ranked 1st).
- Their percentage points to a balanced contender profile (142.3, ranked 1st).
- They are putting enough space on games week to week (29.5, ranked 1st).
Why they might fall short
- There is no single glaring benchmark miss, but the overall profile still needs to harden.
What needs to happen next
- Needs to hold its strongest current premier traits while keeping existing strengths intact. The remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 3 current top-eight opponents, 0 current top-four opponents, 3 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 10.2.
- Reduce turnover burden from regular players.
Movement since last run
Score fell 0.3 points after weaker reliability against bottom ten and bottom-six quality.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2022 Geelong (87%).
Strong: Top-four quality, Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Top-tier scoring, Elite defence
Fixture path
Mixed run homeThe remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 3 current top-eight opponents, 0 current top-four opponents, 3 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 10.2.
Context / caveats
- 2 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
2 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Mason Cox, Isaiah Dudley
Their ladder position gives them a genuine finals path and the main watch is no single gap stands out yet.
Read team profile
Verdict
Sydney sit in the window at 86.5/100, ranked #2. They have 7 recent-premier traits met and 0 still missing.
Why they can win
- The ladder position gives them the usual premier runway (2.0, ranked 2nd).
- Their percentage points to a balanced contender profile (131.2, ranked 2nd).
- They are putting enough space on games week to week (25.5, ranked 2nd).
Why they might fall short
- There is no single glaring benchmark miss, but the overall profile still needs to harden.
What needs to happen next
- Needs to hold its strongest current premier traits while keeping existing strengths intact. The run home includes some current top-eight tests: 1 current top-eight opponents, 0 current top-four opponents, 2 game outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 12.0.
- Reduce turnover burden from regular players.
Movement since last run
Score fell 3.3 points after weaker away record and weak regular share.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2023 Collingwood (82%).
Strong: Top-four quality, Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Top-tier scoring, Strong true-form rating
Fixture path
Friendly run homeThe run home includes some current top-eight tests: 1 current top-eight opponents, 0 current top-four opponents, 2 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 12.0.
Context / caveats
- 2 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
2 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Will Edwards, Joel Amartey
Their ladder position gives them a genuine finals path, but scoring is still short of premier range keeps them short of the top band.
Read team profile
Verdict
Hawthorn sit contender at 81.3/100, ranked #3. They have 8 recent-premier traits met and 0 still missing.
Why they can win
- The ladder position gives them the usual premier runway (3.0, ranked 3rd).
- The true-form read backs up the ladder profile (4.0, ranked 1st).
- They are avoiding the poor losses contenders cannot afford (89%, ranked 2nd).
Why they might fall short
- There is no single glaring benchmark miss, but the profile is not complete yet.
What needs to happen next
- Needs to hold its strongest current premier traits while keeping existing strengths intact. The run home includes some current top-eight tests: 2 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 3 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 12.7.
- Lift offensive output against finals-grade opponents.
- Reduce turnover burden from regular players.
Movement since last run
Moved from Fringe Contender to Contender after improving true form and away record.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2017 Richmond (88%).
Strong: Top-four quality, Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Top-tier scoring, Strong true-form rating
Fixture path
Friendly run homeThe run home includes some current top-eight tests: 2 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 3 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 12.7.
Context / caveats
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
No regular players are currently flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
The defence is close to September standard, but scoring is still short of premier range keeps them short of the top band.
Read team profile
Verdict
Adelaide sit contender at 78.3/100, ranked #4. They have 7 recent-premier traits met and 0 still missing.
Why they can win
- Defensively they already look close to a September side (78.2, ranked 2nd).
- They are avoiding the poor losses contenders cannot afford (80%, ranked 5th).
Why they might fall short
- There is no single glaring benchmark miss, but the profile is not complete yet.
What needs to happen next
- Needs to hold its strongest current premier traits while keeping existing strengths intact. The remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 3 current top-eight opponents, 2 current top-four opponents, 3 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 9.5.
- Lift offensive output against finals-grade opponents.
- Reduce turnover burden from regular players.
Movement since last run
Moved from Fringe Contender to Contender after improving average margin and weak regular share.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2024 Brisbane Lions (89%).
Strong: Top-four quality, Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Elite defence, Strong true-form rating
Fixture path
Hard run homeThe remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 3 current top-eight opponents, 2 current top-four opponents, 3 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 9.5.
Context / caveats
- 2 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
2 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Toby Murray, Luke Pedlar
Percentage is already in the premier range, but too many points are being conceded keeps them short of the top band.
Read team profile
Verdict
Brisbane Lions sit contender at 75.6/100, ranked #5. They have 8 recent-premier traits met and 1 still missing.
Why they can win
- Their percentage points to a balanced contender profile (117.1, ranked 3rd).
- They are putting enough space on games week to week (15.6, ranked 3rd).
- The true-form read backs up the ladder profile (2.0, ranked 4th).
Why they might fall short
- The defensive profile is still leaking too much compared with recent premiers (91.6, ranked 13th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to tighten the defensive profile while keeping existing strengths intact. The run home includes some current top-eight tests: 2 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 3 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 11.3.
- Tighten the defensive profile.
- Reduce turnover burden from regular players.
Movement since last run
Moved from Fringe Contender to Contender after improving clangers per disposal and percentage.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2017 Richmond (77%).
Strong: Top-four quality, Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Top-tier scoring, Strong true-form rating
Missing: Elite defence
Fixture path
Mixed run homeThe run home includes some current top-eight tests: 2 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 3 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 11.3.
Context / caveats
- 2 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
2 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Darcy Gardiner, Ty Gallop
True form backs them up, but the ladder path is too hard from here leaves them in the chasing pack.
Read team profile
Verdict
Geelong sit fringe contender at 62.0/100, ranked #6. They have 5 recent-premier traits met and 3 still missing.
Why they can win
- The true-form read backs up the ladder profile (2.0, ranked 3rd).
- They have banked useful proof against strong sides (60%, ranked 3rd).
- The scoring profile is already in the recent-premier conversation (97.9, ranked 5th).
Why they might fall short
- The ladder position leaves too much work to do from here (9.0, ranked 9th).
- Dropped chances against lower-ranked sides remain a flag-profile problem (43%, ranked 15th).
- The travelling profile still leaves a question (12%, ranked 14th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path while keeping existing strengths intact. The run home includes some current top-eight tests: 2 current top-eight opponents, 0 current top-four opponents, no games outside the club's home state are loaded, average opponent rank 12.0.
- Bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path.
- Stop giving back games against lower-ranked sides.
Movement since last run
Dropped 1 place after weaker ladder position and bottom-six quality.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2025 Brisbane Lions (72%).
Strong: Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Top-tier scoring, Strong true-form rating, Record vs strong teams
Missing: Top-four quality, Beats lower-ranked sides, Travels well
Fixture path
Friendly run homeThe run home includes some current top-eight tests: 2 current top-eight opponents, 0 current top-four opponents, no games outside the club's home state are loaded, average opponent rank 12.0.
Context / caveats
- 2 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
2 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Mitchell Edwards, Oliver Henry
Too many points are being conceded is the blocker, even if true form backs them up.
Read team profile
Verdict
Melbourne sit outside looking in at 58.4/100, ranked #7. They have 3 recent-premier traits met and 3 still missing.
Why they can win
- The true-form read backs up the ladder profile (2.0, ranked 5th).
- The scoring profile is already in the recent-premier conversation (98.0, ranked 4th).
Why they might fall short
- The defensive profile is still leaking too much compared with recent premiers (89.9, ranked 10th).
- The travelling profile still leaves a question (44%, ranked 9th).
- The bottom-six output is still below the benchmark (46.7, ranked 16th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to tighten the defensive profile while keeping existing strengths intact. The run home includes some current top-eight tests: 2 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 2 game outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 9.8.
- Tighten the defensive profile.
- Build a more reliable away profile.
Movement since last run
Score rose 2.7 points after improving record against top eight and defence.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2019 Richmond (76%).
Strong: Top-tier scoring, Strong true-form rating, Record vs strong teams
Missing: Elite defence, Travels well, Bottom-six quality
Fixture path
Mixed run homeThe run home includes some current top-eight tests: 2 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 2 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 9.8.
Context / caveats
- 5 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
5 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Latrelle Pickett, Harry Petty, Brody Mihocek, Matthew Jefferson, Paddy Cross
True form is still short of the premier benchmark is the blocker, even if they are banking the games they should.
Read team profile
Verdict
Collingwood sit outside looking in at 47.2/100, ranked #8. They have 3 recent-premier traits met and 2 still missing.
Why they can win
- They are avoiding the poor losses contenders cannot afford (90%, ranked 1st).
- The bottom of the side is holding up well enough (54.5, ranked 3rd).
Why they might fall short
- The true-form read is not yet strong enough for a clear flag profile (-2.8, ranked 13th).
- The profile still needs more proof against top-eight opposition (7%, ranked 13th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to sustain stronger true-form output while keeping existing strengths intact. The remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 3 current top-eight opponents, 2 current top-four opponents, 2 game outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 8.2.
- Sustain stronger form across the next block of matches.
- Convert more games against current top-eight sides.
Movement since last run
Score fell 0.7 points after weaker true form and clangers per disposal.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2016 Western Bulldogs (79%).
Strong: Elite defence, Beats lower-ranked sides, Bottom-six quality
Missing: Strong true-form rating, Record vs strong teams
Fixture path
Mixed run homeThe remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 3 current top-eight opponents, 2 current top-four opponents, 2 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 8.2.
Context / caveats
- 1 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
1 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Jack Buller
Outside the window
Condensed read for the blocked teams
These teams stay on the page, but the repeated ladder-path blocker is kept visually quieter.
The ladder path is too hard from here is the blocker, even if they are banking the games they should.
Open profile
Verdict
St Kilda sit not in the window at 40.0/100, ranked #9. They have 1 recent-premier traits met and 4 still missing.
Why they can win
- They are avoiding the poor losses contenders cannot afford (89%, ranked 3rd).
Why they might fall short
- The ladder position leaves too much work to do from here (10.0, ranked 10th).
- The true-form read is not yet strong enough for a clear flag profile (-0.7, ranked 10th).
- The profile still needs more proof against top-eight opposition (0%, ranked 17th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path while keeping existing strengths intact. The run home includes some current top-eight tests: 1 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, no games outside the club's home state are loaded, average opponent rank 11.2.
- Bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path.
- Sustain stronger form across the next block of matches.
Movement since last run
Score fell 0.7 points after weaker true form.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2024 Brisbane Lions (70%).
Strong: Beats lower-ranked sides
Missing: Top-four quality, Strong true-form rating, Record vs strong teams, Travels well
Fixture path
Friendly run homeThe run home includes some current top-eight tests: 1 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, no games outside the club's home state are loaded, average opponent rank 11.2.
Context / caveats
- 3 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
3 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Liam Stocker, Anthony Caminiti, Liam Ryan
The ladder path is too hard from here is the blocker, even if the scoring profile is strong enough.
Open profile
Verdict
GWS sit not in the window at 37.0/100, ranked #10. They have 3 recent-premier traits met and 5 still missing.
Why they can win
- No major recent-premier scoring signal has separated yet.
Why they might fall short
- The ladder position leaves too much work to do from here (11.0, ranked 11th).
- They are not creating enough scoreboard separation yet (1.4, ranked 10th).
- The defensive profile is still leaking too much compared with recent premiers (90.2, ranked 12th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path while keeping existing strengths intact. The run home includes some current top-eight tests: 2 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 4 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 11.7.
- Bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path.
- Turn narrow results into repeatable margin dominance.
Movement since last run
Score rose 3.3 points after improving clangers per disposal and margin volatility.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2024 Brisbane Lions (61%).
Strong: Top-tier scoring, Record vs strong teams, Bottom-six quality
Missing: Top-four quality, Margin dominance, Elite defence, Beats lower-ranked sides, Travels well
Fixture path
Mixed run homeThe run home includes some current top-eight tests: 2 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 4 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 11.7.
Context / caveats
- 2 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
2 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Jesse Hogan, Callum Brown
The ladder path is too hard from here is the blocker, even if the defence is close to September standard.
Open profile
Verdict
Port Adelaide sit not in the window at 28.2/100, ranked #11. They have 1 recent-premier traits met and 7 still missing.
Why they can win
- Defensively they already look close to a September side (79.4, ranked 3rd).
Why they might fall short
- The ladder position leaves too much work to do from here (15.0, ranked 15th).
- The percentage has not yet reached the usual premier benchmark (101.3, ranked 11th).
- They are not creating enough scoreboard separation yet (1.0, ranked 11th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path while keeping existing strengths intact. The remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 4 current top-eight opponents, 3 current top-four opponents, 3 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 7.0.
- Bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path.
- Lift the combined scoring-and-defence profile.
Movement since last run
Moved up 1 place after improving true form and clangers per disposal.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2024 Brisbane Lions (57%).
Strong: Elite defence
Missing: Top-four quality, Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Top-tier scoring, Record vs strong teams
Fixture path
Hard run homeThe remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 4 current top-eight opponents, 3 current top-four opponents, 3 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 7.0.
Context / caveats
- 4 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
4 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Dante Visentini, Jacob Wehr, Jack Whitlock, Corey Durdin
Percentage still sits below the benchmark is the blocker, even if the scoring profile is strong enough.
Open profile
Verdict
Western Bulldogs sit not in the window at 27.0/100, ranked #12. They have 2 recent-premier traits met and 5 still missing.
Why they can win
- No major recent-premier scoring signal has separated yet.
Why they might fall short
- The percentage has not yet reached the usual premier benchmark (92.3, ranked 13th).
- They are not creating enough scoreboard separation yet (-6.9, ranked 13th).
- The true-form read is not yet strong enough for a clear flag profile (-3.0, ranked 14th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to improve the combined scoring-and-defence profile while keeping existing strengths intact. The run home includes some current top-eight tests: 2 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 2 game outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 10.5.
- Lift the combined scoring-and-defence profile.
- Turn narrow results into repeatable margin dominance.
Movement since last run
Dropped 1 place after weaker reliability against bottom ten and true form.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2016 Western Bulldogs (71%).
Strong: Record vs strong teams, Travels well
Missing: Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Elite defence, Strong true-form rating, Bottom-six quality
Fixture path
Friendly run homeThe run home includes some current top-eight tests: 2 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 2 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 10.5.
Context / caveats
- 4 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
4 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Michael Sellwood, Will Lewis, Arthur Jones, Jordan Croft
The ladder path is too hard from here is the blocker, even if the bottom six is holding up.
Open profile
Verdict
Carlton sit not in the window at 19.3/100, ranked #13. They have 1 recent-premier traits met and 6 still missing.
Why they can win
- The bottom of the side is holding up well enough (55.4, ranked 2nd).
Why they might fall short
- The ladder position leaves too much work to do from here (12.0, ranked 12th).
- The percentage has not yet reached the usual premier benchmark (91.9, ranked 14th).
- They are not creating enough scoreboard separation yet (-7.1, ranked 14th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path while keeping existing strengths intact. The remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 4 current top-eight opponents, 2 current top-four opponents, no games outside the club's home state are loaded, average opponent rank 7.3.
- Bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path.
- Lift the combined scoring-and-defence profile.
Movement since last run
Score fell 8.5 points after weaker true form and clangers per disposal.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2016 Western Bulldogs (54%).
Strong: Bottom-six quality
Missing: Top-four quality, Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Top-tier scoring, Strong true-form rating
Fixture path
Hard run homeThe remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 4 current top-eight opponents, 2 current top-four opponents, no games outside the club's home state are loaded, average opponent rank 7.3.
Context / caveats
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
No regular players are currently flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
The ladder path is too hard from here is the blocker, even if the scoring profile is strong enough.
Open profile
Verdict
Gold Coast sit not in the window at 13.2/100, ranked #14. They have 0 recent-premier traits met and 7 still missing.
Why they can win
- No major recent-premier scoring signal has separated yet.
Why they might fall short
- The ladder position leaves too much work to do from here (14.0, ranked 14th).
- The percentage has not yet reached the usual premier benchmark (95.6, ranked 12th).
- They are not creating enough scoreboard separation yet (-4.1, ranked 12th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path while keeping existing strengths intact. The remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 3 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 3 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 8.3.
- Bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path.
- Lift the combined scoring-and-defence profile.
Movement since last run
Score fell 4.1 points after weaker margin volatility and defence.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2016 Western Bulldogs (49%).
Missing: Top-four quality, Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Elite defence, Strong true-form rating
Fixture path
Mixed run homeThe remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 3 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 3 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 8.3.
Context / caveats
- 5 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
5 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Ben Long, Ethan Read, Jed Walter, Oscar Adams, Ben King
The ladder path is too hard from here is the blocker, even if the scoring profile is strong enough.
Open profile
Verdict
North Melbourne sit not in the window at 10.7/100, ranked #15. They have 0 recent-premier traits met and 9 still missing.
Why they can win
- No major recent-premier scoring signal has separated yet.
Why they might fall short
- The ladder position leaves too much work to do from here (13.0, ranked 13th).
- The percentage has not yet reached the usual premier benchmark (91.4, ranked 15th).
- They are not creating enough scoreboard separation yet (-7.9, ranked 15th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path while keeping existing strengths intact. The remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 4 current top-eight opponents, 2 current top-four opponents, 2 game outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 6.2.
- Bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path.
- Lift the combined scoring-and-defence profile.
Movement since last run
Score fell 2.2 points after weaker weak regular share and reliability against bottom ten.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2016 Western Bulldogs (50%).
Missing: Top-four quality, Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Elite defence, Strong true-form rating
Fixture path
Hard run homeThe remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 4 current top-eight opponents, 2 current top-four opponents, 2 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 6.2.
Context / caveats
- 2 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
2 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Jacob Konstanty, Charlie Comben
The ladder path is too hard from here is the blocker, even if the bottom six is holding up.
Open profile
Verdict
West Coast sit not in the window at 1.0/100, ranked #16. They have 1 recent-premier traits met and 9 still missing.
Why they can win
- The bottom of the side is holding up well enough (52.1, ranked 5th).
Why they might fall short
- The ladder position leaves too much work to do from here (16.0, ranked 16th).
- The percentage has not yet reached the usual premier benchmark (72.0, ranked 16th).
- They are not creating enough scoreboard separation yet (-28.1, ranked 16th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path while keeping existing strengths intact. The remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 4 current top-eight opponents, 3 current top-four opponents, 2 game outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 7.3.
- Bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path.
- Lift the combined scoring-and-defence profile.
Movement since last run
Moved up 2 places after improving bottom-six quality and true form.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2016 Western Bulldogs (28%).
Strong: Bottom-six quality
Missing: Top-four quality, Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Top-tier scoring, Elite defence
Fixture path
Hard run homeThe remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 4 current top-eight opponents, 3 current top-four opponents, 2 games outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 7.3.
Context / caveats
- 2 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
2 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Tom Cole, Cooper Duff-Tytler
The ladder path is too hard from here is the blocker, even if the scoring profile is strong enough.
Open profile
Verdict
Essendon sit not in the window at 0.0/100, ranked #17. They have 0 recent-premier traits met and 10 still missing.
Why they can win
- No major recent-premier scoring signal has separated yet.
Why they might fall short
- The ladder position leaves too much work to do from here (18.0, ranked 18th).
- The percentage has not yet reached the usual premier benchmark (66.6, ranked 17th).
- They are not creating enough scoreboard separation yet (-35.4, ranked 17th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path while keeping existing strengths intact. The remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 3 current top-eight opponents, 2 current top-four opponents, no games outside the club's home state are loaded, average opponent rank 7.5.
- Bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path.
- Lift the combined scoring-and-defence profile.
Movement since last run
Dropped 1 place after improving true form.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2016 Western Bulldogs (17%).
Missing: Top-four quality, Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Top-tier scoring, Elite defence
Fixture path
Mixed run homeThe remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 3 current top-eight opponents, 2 current top-four opponents, no games outside the club's home state are loaded, average opponent rank 7.5.
Context / caveats
- 5 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
5 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Lachlan Blakiston, Archer Day-Wicks, Isaac Kako, Archie May, Ben McKay
The ladder path is too hard from here is the blocker, even if the scoring profile is strong enough.
Open profile
Verdict
Richmond sit not in the window at 0.0/100, ranked #18. They have 0 recent-premier traits met and 10 still missing.
Why they can win
- No major recent-premier scoring signal has separated yet.
Why they might fall short
- The ladder position leaves too much work to do from here (17.0, ranked 17th).
- The percentage has not yet reached the usual premier benchmark (63.0, ranked 18th).
- They are not creating enough scoreboard separation yet (-38.8, ranked 18th).
What needs to happen next
- Needs to bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path while keeping existing strengths intact. The remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 3 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 1 game outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 8.3.
- Bank wins quickly enough to improve the finals path.
- Lift the combined scoring-and-defence profile.
Movement since last run
Dropped 1 place after improving margin volatility and defence.
Premiership trait checklist
Historical profile match
Closest recent-premier shape: 2016 Western Bulldogs (20%).
Missing: Top-four quality, Strong percentage, Margin dominance, Top-tier scoring, Elite defence
Fixture path
Mixed run homeThe remaining fixture is heavy with current finals-quality opponents: 3 current top-eight opponents, 1 current top-four opponents, 1 game outside the club's home state, average opponent rank 8.3.
Context / caveats
- 5 regular player(s) flagged as output-and-clanger risks.
- Clanger burden is high enough to watch under finals pressure.
Consistency/depth watch
5 regular player(s) are flagged by the weak-output/high-clanger proxy.
Flagged regulars: Mykelti Lefau, Tom Lynch, Campbell Gray, Maurice Rioli, Jonty Faull
Benchmark and profile match
How the contenders compare with recent premiers
Scored premier traits
- Top-four qualityweight 13 · median premier rank 3rd
- Strong percentageweight 10 · median premier rank 3rd
- Margin dominanceweight 10 · median premier rank 3rd
- Top-tier scoringweight 7 · median premier rank 5th
- Elite defenceweight 9 · median premier rank 3rd
- Strong true-form ratingweight 10 · median premier rank 5th
- Record vs strong teamsweight 7 · median premier rank 3rd
- Beats lower-ranked sidesweight 4 · median premier rank 5th
- Travels wellweight 4 · median premier rank 3rd
- Bottom-six qualityweight 3 · median premier rank 5th
Current teams matching most traits
-
Fremantle9 traits / In the Window
-
Hawthorn8 traits / Contender
-
Brisbane Lions8 traits / Contender
-
Sydney7 traits / In the Window
-
Adelaide7 traits / Contender
Common red flags
- Ladder position: worse than 7th.
- Defence: worse than 6th.
- Away record: worse than 6th.
- Percentage: worse than 8th.
- Average margin: worse than 8th.
- Record against top eight: worse than 9th.
Model blind spots
-
2016 Western BulldogsOutlier finals run with availability context the model cannot fully score.
-
2024 Brisbane LionsLate-season/finals form case with some profile timing hidden by season aggregates.
Oddity explanations
Why the model missed
Clues that help explain outlier premiers without changing the score.
Western Bulldogs
They were not a normal home-and-away premier profile, but close-game strength and a major finals free-kick swing help explain the flag run.
Brisbane Lions
Their full-season profile sat just below the best shapes, but late-season strength and opponent-adjusted defence were useful clues.
Benchmark metrics
Recent premier traits
Team metrics
Compare with premier average
Historical validation
What the back-test says
Season-by-season validation detail
| Season | Premier | Existing rank | LOO rank | LOO score shift | Classification |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | Hawthorn | 2 | 2 | -0.2 | In the Window to In the Window |
| 2016 | Western Bulldogs | 7 | 7 | -3.2 | Fringe Contender to Fringe Contender |
| 2017 | Richmond | 3 | 3 | -0.5 | Contender to Contender |
| 2018 | West Coast | 2 | 2 | -0.1 | In the Window to In the Window |
| 2019 | Richmond | 4 | 4 | -0.9 | In the Window to Contender |
| 2020 | Richmond | 3 | 3 | -0.1 | In the Window to In the Window |
| 2021 | Melbourne | 1 | 1 | -0.2 | In the Window to In the Window |
| 2022 | Geelong | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | In the Window to In the Window |
| 2023 | Collingwood | 1 | 1 | -0.6 | In the Window to In the Window |
| 2024 | Brisbane Lions | 4 | 5 | -2.4 | Contender to Fringe Contender |
| 2025 | Brisbane Lions | 3 | 3 | -0.8 | Contender to Contender |
| Season | Premier | Model rank | Score | Window | Top five | Helped | Hurt | False positives |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | Hawthorn | 2 | 92 | In the Window | 1. West Coast (93) 2. Hawthorn (92) 3. Sydney (85) 4. Fremantle (82) 5. Richmond (81) | Percentage 1st Average margin 1st Scoring 1st Defence 1st Record against top eight 1st | No major scored miss | West Coast (In the Window) |
| 2016 | Western Bulldogs | 7 | 66 | Fringe Contender | 1. Sydney (96) 2. Geelong (92) 3. GWS (85) 4. Hawthorn (82) 5. Adelaide (80) | Defence 3rd Bottom-six quality 4th Away record 6th Reliability against bottom ten 7th Percentage 7th | True Form 10th | Sydney (In the Window) Geelong (In the Window) GWS (In the Window) Hawthorn (Contender) Adelaide (Contender) |
| 2017 | Richmond | 3 | 85 | Contender | 1. Adelaide (93) 2. Sydney (86) 3. Richmond (85) 4. Geelong (84) 5. Port Adelaide (79) | True Form 2nd Ladder position 3rd Reliability against bottom ten 3rd Defence 3rd Percentage 4th | No major scored miss | Adelaide (In the Window) Sydney (In the Window) |
| 2018 | West Coast | 2 | 86 | In the Window | 1. Richmond (90) 2. West Coast (86) 3. Hawthorn (85) 4. Melbourne (77) 5. Geelong (74) | Ladder position 2nd Record against top eight 3rd Percentage 4th Average margin 4th Away record 4th | No major scored miss | Richmond (In the Window) |
| 2019 | Richmond | 4 | 85 | In the Window | 1. Geelong (94) 2. Collingwood (89) 3. Brisbane Lions (88) 4. Richmond (85) 5. GWS (74) | Reliability against bottom ten 2nd Ladder position 3rd Record against top eight 3rd Away record 3rd Defence 4th | No major scored miss | Geelong (In the Window) Collingwood (In the Window) Brisbane Lions (In the Window) |
| 2020 | Richmond | 3 | 88 | In the Window | 1. Port Adelaide (93) 2. Geelong (89) 3. Richmond (88) 4. Brisbane Lions (86) 5. West Coast (66) | True Form 1st Defence 2nd Record against top eight 2nd Ladder position 3rd Percentage 3rd | No major scored miss | Port Adelaide (In the Window) Geelong (In the Window) |
| 2021 | Melbourne | 1 | 94 | In the Window | 1. Melbourne (94) 2. Port Adelaide (89) 3. Brisbane Lions (82) 4. Geelong (82) 5. Sydney (78) | Ladder position 1st Defence 1st True Form 1st Record against top eight 1st Away record 1st | No major scored miss | None ahead of premier |
| 2022 | Geelong | 1 | 96 | In the Window | 1. Geelong (96) 2. Melbourne (88) 3. Sydney (86) 4. Fremantle (77) 5. Collingwood (66) | Ladder position 1st Percentage 1st Average margin 1st Record against top eight 1st True Form 2nd | No major scored miss | None ahead of premier |
| 2023 | Collingwood | 1 | 92 | In the Window | 1. Collingwood (92) 2. Melbourne (88) 3. Brisbane Lions (84) 4. Carlton (74) 5. Port Adelaide (74) | Ladder position 1st Percentage 1st Average margin 1st Reliability against bottom ten 1st Away record 1st | No major scored miss | None ahead of premier |
| 2024 | Brisbane Lions | 4 | 76 | Contender | 1. Port Adelaide (87) 2. Sydney (86) 3. Western Bulldogs (85) 4. Brisbane Lions (76) 5. Hawthorn (75) | Defence 2nd Percentage 3rd Average margin 3rd Bottom-six quality 3rd Scoring 5th | True Form 10th | Port Adelaide (In the Window) Sydney (In the Window) Western Bulldogs (In the Window) |
| 2025 | Brisbane Lions | 3 | 82 | Contender | 1. Geelong (94) 2. Adelaide (92) 3. Brisbane Lions (82) 4. GWS (74) 5. Hawthorn (70) | Away record 1st Record against top eight 2nd Ladder position 3rd True Form 3rd Bottom-six quality 5th | No major scored miss | Geelong (In the Window) Adelaide (In the Window) |
Leave-one-season-out season detail
| Season | Premier | Model rank | Score | Window | Top five | Helped | Hurt | False positives |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | Hawthorn | 2 | 92 | In the Window | 1. West Coast (93) 2. Hawthorn (92) 3. Sydney (85) 4. Fremantle (82) 5. Richmond (81) | Percentage 1st Average margin 1st Scoring 1st Defence 1st Record against top eight 1st | No major scored miss | West Coast (In the Window) |
| 2016 | Western Bulldogs | 7 | 62 | Fringe Contender | 1. Sydney (96) 2. Geelong (92) 3. GWS (85) 4. Hawthorn (81) 5. Adelaide (79) | Defence 3rd Bottom-six quality 4th Away record 6th Reliability against bottom ten 7th | True Form 10th | Sydney (In the Window) Geelong (In the Window) GWS (In the Window) Hawthorn (Contender) Adelaide (Contender) |
| 2017 | Richmond | 3 | 84 | Contender | 1. Adelaide (93) 2. Sydney (86) 3. Richmond (84) 4. Geelong (84) 5. Port Adelaide (79) | True Form 2nd Ladder position 3rd Reliability against bottom ten 3rd Defence 3rd Percentage 4th | No major scored miss | Adelaide (In the Window) Sydney (In the Window) |
| 2018 | West Coast | 2 | 86 | In the Window | 1. Richmond (90) 2. West Coast (86) 3. Hawthorn (85) 4. Melbourne (77) 5. Geelong (74) | Ladder position 2nd Record against top eight 3rd Percentage 4th Average margin 4th Away record 4th | No major scored miss | Richmond (In the Window) |
| 2019 | Richmond | 4 | 84 | Contender | 1. Geelong (94) 2. Collingwood (88) 3. Brisbane Lions (88) 4. Richmond (84) 5. GWS (73) | Reliability against bottom ten 2nd Ladder position 3rd Record against top eight 3rd Away record 3rd Defence 4th | No major scored miss | Geelong (In the Window) Collingwood (In the Window) Brisbane Lions (In the Window) |
| 2020 | Richmond | 3 | 88 | In the Window | 1. Port Adelaide (93) 2. Geelong (89) 3. Richmond (88) 4. Brisbane Lions (86) 5. West Coast (67) | True Form 1st Defence 2nd Record against top eight 2nd Ladder position 3rd Percentage 3rd | No major scored miss | Port Adelaide (In the Window) Geelong (In the Window) |
| 2021 | Melbourne | 1 | 94 | In the Window | 1. Melbourne (94) 2. Port Adelaide (89) 3. Brisbane Lions (83) 4. Geelong (82) 5. Sydney (78) | Ladder position 1st Defence 1st True Form 1st Record against top eight 1st Away record 1st | No major scored miss | None ahead of premier |
| 2022 | Geelong | 1 | 96 | In the Window | 1. Geelong (96) 2. Melbourne (88) 3. Sydney (86) 4. Fremantle (78) 5. Collingwood (66) | Ladder position 1st Percentage 1st Average margin 1st Record against top eight 1st True Form 2nd | No major scored miss | None ahead of premier |
| 2023 | Collingwood | 1 | 92 | In the Window | 1. Collingwood (92) 2. Melbourne (88) 3. Brisbane Lions (84) 4. Port Adelaide (74) 5. Carlton (74) | Ladder position 1st Percentage 1st Average margin 1st Reliability against bottom ten 1st Away record 1st | No major scored miss | None ahead of premier |
| 2024 | Brisbane Lions | 5 | 74 | Fringe Contender | 1. Port Adelaide (87) 2. Sydney (85) 3. Western Bulldogs (85) 4. Hawthorn (75) 5. Brisbane Lions (74) | Defence 2nd Percentage 3rd Average margin 3rd Bottom-six quality 3rd Scoring 5th | True Form 10th | Port Adelaide (In the Window) Sydney (In the Window) Western Bulldogs (Contender) Hawthorn (Contender) |
| 2025 | Brisbane Lions | 3 | 81 | Contender | 1. Geelong (94) 2. Adelaide (92) 3. Brisbane Lions (81) 4. GWS (73) 5. Hawthorn (70) | Away record 1st Record against top eight 2nd Ladder position 3rd True Form 3rd Bottom-six quality 5th | No major scored miss | Geelong (In the Window) Adelaide (In the Window) |
Historical signal report
Finals-specific coverage can be improved by backfilling finals box-score and availability snapshots, then reporting coverage against eligible finalists instead of all team-seasons.
| Signal | Status | Coverage | Premier rank | Why |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average margin | score | 100.0% | 3.0 | Premiers tend to bank wins with enough margin to show repeatable superiority. |
| Away record | score | 100.0% | 3.0 | Finals rarely give every contender a comfortable home-ground path. |
| Bottom-six quality | score | 100.0% | 5.0 | Premiership teams usually get competent weeks from the bottom of the regular side, but V2 keeps this as a light signal. |
| Defence | score | 100.0% | 3.0 | A strong defensive profile is one of the steadier recent premier traits. |
| Ladder position | score | 100.0% | 3.0 | Recent premiers usually finish high enough to earn a forgiving finals path. |
| Percentage | score | 100.0% | 3.0 | Percentage captures scoring and defence together without overfitting one stat. |
| Record against top eight | score | 100.0% | 3.0 | Contenders need evidence against the teams they are likely to see in finals. |
| Reliability against bottom ten | score | 100.0% | 5.0 | Premiership teams usually avoid repeatedly dropping games they should win. |
| Scoring | score | 100.0% | 5.0 | Flag teams normally score well enough to survive finals pressure. |
| True Form | score | 100.0% | 5.0 | The site's form model smooths noisy results into a current power read. |
| Accuracy | context | 100.0% | 10.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Behinds Per Game | context | 100.0% | 4.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Bounces Per Game | context | 100.0% | 6.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Clangers Per Game | context | 100.0% | 9.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Clangers Per Inside50 | context | 100.0% | 3.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Clangers per disposal | context | 100.0% | 6.0 | Turnover burden is useful context, but this proxy is too noisy to score directly. |
| Clearances Per Game | context | 100.0% | 9.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Close Win Pct | context | 100.0% | 5.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Contested Marks Per Game | context | 100.0% | 8.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Contested Possessions Per Game | context | 100.0% | 12.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Direct disposal efficiency | defer | 0.0% | The current AFLTables cache exposes clangers and disposals, but not a reliable direct disposal-efficiency field. | |
| Disposals Per Game | context | 100.0% | 8.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Finals Avg Break Days | context | 33.3% | 2.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Finals Avg Opponent Ladder Position | context | 44.4% | 6.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Finals Home Games | context | 44.4% | 3.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Finals Home Share | context | 44.4% | 4.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Finals Interstate Games | context | 44.4% | 7.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Finals Interstate Share | context | 44.4% | 6.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Finals Short Breaks | context | 44.4% | 6.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Finals Top Four Opponent Share | context | 44.4% | 7.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Finals Top Four Opponents | context | 44.4% | 8.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Form Heat | context | 100.0% | 4.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Free Kicks Against Per Game | context | 100.0% | 8.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Free Kicks For Per Game | context | 100.0% | 8.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Goal Assists Per Game | context | 100.0% | 7.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Goals Per Game | context | 100.0% | 6.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Handballs Per Game | context | 100.0% | 10.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Hit Outs Per Game | context | 100.0% | 12.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Home Win Pct | context | 100.0% | 5.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Injury and availability | defer | Context | The site has current availability signals, but historical coverage is not yet complete enough for v1 scoring. | |
| Inside 50S Per Game | context | 100.0% | 2.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Interstate Win Pct | context | 100.0% | 2.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Kicks Per Game | context | 100.0% | 6.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Late Season Avg Margin | context | 100.0% | 5.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Late Season Opponent Adjusted Defence | context | 100.0% | 3.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Late Season Opponent Adjusted Margin | context | 100.0% | 4.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Late Season Percentage | context | 100.0% | 5.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Late Season Win Pct | context | 100.0% | 4.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Margin volatility | context | 100.0% | 6.0 | Wild week-to-week swings are useful context, but historical separation is too weak for scoring. |
| Market expectation | context | Context | Market prices are useful context but intentionally excluded from the contender score. | |
| Marks Inside 50 Per Game | context | 100.0% | 4.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Marks Per Game | context | 100.0% | 6.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| One Percenters Per Game | context | 100.0% | 8.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Opponent Adjusted Margin | context | 100.0% | 3.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Opponent Adjusted Points Against | context | 100.0% | 3.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Played Schedule Strength | context | 100.0% | 13.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Prior 3Yr Deep Finals Games | context | 100.0% | 1.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Prior 3Yr Finals Campaigns | context | 100.0% | 3.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Prior 3Yr Finals Games | context | 100.0% | 4.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Prior 3Yr Finals Wins | context | 100.0% | 3.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Rebound 50S Per Game | context | 100.0% | 14.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Recent Selection Stability | context | 100.0% | 10.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Recent Win Pct | context | 100.0% | 5.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Remaining fixture difficulty | context | Context | Useful for explaining the path from here, but current-only fixture outlook is not used to score historical premier traits. | |
| Score Stddev | context | 100.0% | 11.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Selection stability | context | 100.0% | 7.0 | Stable regular contributors matter, but historical separation is too small for direct scoring. |
| Tackles Per Game | context | 100.0% | 12.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Uncontested Possessions Per Game | context | 100.0% | 7.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |
| Weak regular share | context | 100.0% | 9.0 | Regular weak contributors are a finals caveat, but the historical signal is too noisy for scoring. |
| Win Pct | context | 100.0% | 3.0 | Useful context if coverage and separation remain stable. |