# North Melbourne v Essendon — AFL Round 16 2026 AI Prediction by Alphr

## Full Time: North Melbourne 79 – 65 Essendon

_North Melbourne see off Essendon._

Half time: 39 – 30 · Alphr AI pre-game win probability: North Melbourne 77% / Essendon 23% · Marvel Stadium · Sun, 28 June, 03:15 pm AEST

**Goal Kickers** — North Melbourne: Jy Simpkin (24'), Jacob Konstanty (46'), Jack Darling (50' Tipped ⚡), Cooper Trembath (66' Tipped ⚡), Charlie Spargo (70' ×2), Nick Larkey (67' Tipped ⚡) · Essendon: Sam Durham (4' ×2 1st), Ben McKay (14'), Sullivan Robey (39' Tipped ⚡), Hussien El Achkar (78' ×2 Tipped ⚡), Nate Caddy (65' ×2 Tipped ⚡), Zach Merrett (78')

### Match Winner — AI Prediction Market (resolved)

| Team | Pre-game AI win probability | Result |
|---|---|---|
| North Melbourne | 77% | Won |
| Essendon | 23% | Lost |

Model call: **Correct** · Margin: 14.0 predicted → 14 actual · Markets hit: 4/4

_AI win probability priced pre-game · Markets hit = core betting markets._

### Full-Time Report

**North Melbourne Kangaroos vs Essendon Bombers Prediction & Tips | AFL Round 16 2026**

_By Ben Dunlop · Published: 25 June 2026, 06:48 pm · Last updated: 28 June 2026, 05:58 pm_

North Melbourne 79–65 Essendon in AFL Round 16 at Marvel Stadium. Here's how the result stacked up against the model's call, with the win-probability story and where the value landed.

North Melbourne won 79-65 at Marvel Stadium, but the final margin of 14 points undersells how comfortable this was for long stretches. At three-quarter time it was 63-38, a 25-point gap, and Essendon spent the last term clawing back rather than threatening the result. Working from the cumulative scores, Essendon actually won the final quarter 27-16. It just came too late to matter.

The scoring pattern tells the story on its own. North Melbourne led 18-14 at quarter time, stretched it to 39-30 at the main break, then blew it out to 63-38 by three-quarter time. That third term was where the game was decided, and Essendon never got closer than 14 points from that point on.

The disposal count explains why. North Melbourne finished with 435 to Essendon's 360, a gap of 75 possessions that let them control territory for most of the afternoon. They went inside 50 fifty-one times to Essendon's 40, and when they got there they made it count, with 19 marks inside 50 against just 9. Essendon had the ball in dangerous positions less often and did less with it once they arrived.

Oddly, Essendon won the ruck battle handily, 37 hit-outs to 22, despite North Melbourne carrying the stronger pre-match ruck rating, 1076 to 1000. It didn't translate into second-phase dominance, though. North Melbourne still won clearances 28-25 and contested possession 97-94, which suggests their midfield made better use of the scraps Essendon's ruckmen gave them. That's a small win for a group that came in rated below Essendon's midfield, 1144 to 1233.

Where North Melbourne really imposed themselves was pressure. Fifty-one tackles to 35 is a big differential, and it lines up with Essendon's form coming in. Essendon arrived on a five-game losing streak, LLLLL, averaging 57.8 points and conceding 86. They put up 65 today, an improvement on that average, but shipping 79 was still in keeping with a defence that's been leaking points all season. North Melbourne, by contrast, came in on three wins from five and beat their own scoring average of 70.8 by eight points, while conceding well under their recent average of 102.8.

Essendon's forward entries weren't the problem. Forty inside 50s isn't a disaster on its own. Their finishing was. Nine marks inside 50 compared to North Melbourne's 19 says they either couldn't hit targets in the forward line, or North Melbourne's defenders, rated only marginally behind Essendon's at 1143 to 1161, did enough to spoil the contest. North Melbourne also edged the intercept count, 53 to 48, even though Essendon actually took more marks overall, 129 to 124, a sign the ball spent plenty of time in dangerous areas without Essendon converting it into scoreboard pressure.

Alphr's model had North Melbourne at 77 percent to win and picked the margin at exactly 14 points, a bullseye against the actual result. The one thing it undercooked was the scoring output. It pegged the combined total at 11 points, well short of the 144 the two sides actually produced between them. Four from four model picks landed correctly for this match, but the sheer weight of scoring was the one surprise nobody saw coming.

**Scoring by Quarter**

| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| North Melbourne | 18 | 21 | 24 | 16 | 79 |
| Essendon | 14 | 16 | 8 | 27 | 65 |

**Key Match Stats**

| North Melbourne | Stat | Essendon |
|---|---|---|
| **435** | Disposals | 360 |
| **97** | Contested poss. | 94 |
| **28** | Clearances | 25 |
| **51** | Inside 50s | 40 |
| 124 | Marks | **129** |
| **19** | Marks inside 50 | 9 |
| **51** | Tackles | 35 |
| 22 | Hit-outs | **37** |
| **53** | Intercepts | 48 |
| 0.0% | Disposal eff. | 0.0% |

**Model Report Card**

Our model correctly predicted North Melbourne to win at 77% probability. The margin model was sharp, predicting North Melbourne by 14.0 vs the actual margin of 14 points. The game's 144 points came in 133 points higher than the predicted 11. A clean sweep, all 4 model picks hit for this match.

_Official AFL match stats · Generated by Alphr's model_

### Edge Analysis — the model's pre-game markets

- **Head to Head:** North Melbourne to win @ $1.45 (edge +8.3%) — model probability 77.3% — result: WON
- **Line / Spread:** Essendon +14.5 @ $1.89 (edge +0.5%) — result: WON
- **Margin Band:** North Melbourne 1-39 @ $3.30 (edge +0.0%) — result: WON
- **Total (Over/Under):** Under 171.5 @ $1.88 (edge +1.8%) — result: WON
- Predicted margin: North Melbourne by 14

### Match Preview (pre-match read)

The model is firm on North Melbourne here: 77% to see off Essendon. The heaviest factor is the ratings gap: North Melbourne sit 285 ELO points clear, 1390 to 1105. Form leans North Melbourne's way: 3 from their last 5, against 0 for Essendon.

North Melbourne own the matchup too, leading 4 of 7 factors including ELO Difference, Recent Win Rate and Forward Line ELO. The margin model has North Melbourne by 14.0, with the two sides combining for about 11. North Melbourne to win, and win clearly. The model isn't hedging.

_Pre-match read · Alphr model_

### Recent Form (Last 5)

| North Melbourne | Stat | Essendon |
|---|---|---|
| 3.0 | Wins (Last 5) | 0.0 |
| 70.8pts | Avg Score | 57.8pts |
| 102.8pts | Avg Conceded | 86.0pts |
| -32.0pts | Avg Margin | -28.2pts |
| 335.4 | Disposals | 373.4 |
| 50.0 | Inside 50s | 50.0 |
| 54.2 | Tackles | 51.0 |
| 34.4 | Clearances | 35.2 |

### Form & History

_Last 5 games, oldest → newest._

| Team | Last 5 | Avg Pts |
|---|---|---|
| North Melbourne | R10 L · R11 W · R13 L · R14 W · R15 W | 70.8 |
| Essendon | R10 L · R11 L · R12 L · R13 L · R14 L | 57.8 |

### Positional Matchup

_Season-to-date production per game with league-wide attack/defence tiers (18 teams)._

**Forwards** (Key Forwards · Med/Mid Forwards)

|  | North Melbourne | Essendon |
|---|---|---|
| Attack rank | 8th | 17th (weak) |
| Defence rank | 11th | 18th (weak) |
| Goals scored · conceded | 130 · 126 | 83 · 150 |
| Goal Assists | 4.3/g | 3/g |
| Disposals | 96/g | 78/g |
| Inside 50s | 14/g | 13.6/g |
| Marks Inside 50 | 9.4/g | 6/g |
| Disposal Efficiency | 73% | 67% |

**Midfield & Ruck** (Midfielders · Rucks)

|  | North Melbourne | Essendon |
|---|---|---|
| Attack rank | 14th (weak) | 6th (strong) |
| Defence rank | 16th (weak) | 12th |
| Goals scored · conceded | 33 · 51 | 46 · 46 |
| Goal Assists | 2.8/g | 2.6/g |
| Disposals | 145/g | 135/g |
| Inside 50s | 23.8/g | 19.6/g |
| Marks Inside 50 | 2.4/g | 2.6/g |
| Disposal Efficiency | 73.8% | 74.1% |

**Defenders** (Key & Medium Defenders)

|  | North Melbourne | Essendon |
|---|---|---|
| Attack rank | 8th | 3rd (strong) |
| Defence rank | 17th (weak) | 13th (weak) |
| Goals scored · conceded | 12 · 17 | 18 · 12 |
| Goal Assists | 1.6/g | 2.4/g |
| Disposals | 114/g | 151/g |
| Inside 50s | 9.9/g | 13.1/g |
| Marks Inside 50 | 0.9/g | 2.1/g |
| Disposal Efficiency | 81.2% | 78.6% |

**Who scores on Essendon** — Forwards 5.27/g (lg 4.45) +18% · Defenders 1.23/g (lg 1.1) +12% · Key Forwards 4.27/g (lg 3.83) +11%
**Who scores on North Melbourne** — Rucks 0.7/g (lg 0.51) +37% · Key Forwards 5.18/g (lg 3.83) +35% · Defenders 1.48/g (lg 1.1) +35%

_Goals conceded by position, last 3 seasons; positive = concedes above league average to that position._

### Goal Scorer History — Who Kicks The Goals

_Last 10 games, career record vs the opponent and at Marvel Stadium. ⚡ = our AI backs them to score; 🎯 = our AI's first-goal pick. 🏉 = scored in this game. Goal % = share of games with a goal, last 10 weighted double vs the 30 prior — historical frequency, not a market price._

**North Melbourne** (team sheet)

| # | Player | Pos | 2026 | Last 10 | vs opp | Venue | Goal % | Alphr play | This game |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| – | Nick Larkey | KF | 31 in 14g | 17/10g (1·2·4·1·0·1·2·1·4·1) | 15/10g | 140/65g | 90% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.02 AI 87% ✓ Scored; 🎯 First Goal $7.50 AI 8% ✗ Not first | 🏉 67' |
| – | Cooper Trembath | KF | 22 in 14g | 14/10g (2·3·0·0·0·1·2·1·1·4) | 2/1g | 16/7g | 74% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.10 AI 81% ✓ Scored | 🏉 66' |
| – | Jack Darling | KF | 19 in 13g | 17/10g (1·1·1·3·2·1·3·1·4·0) | 28/16g | 69/46g | 78% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.10 AI 85% ✓ Scored; 🎯 First Goal $10.50 AI 8% ✗ Not first | 🏉 50' |
| – | Zane Duursma | FWD | 15 in 14g | 8/10g (0·2·0·3·2·0·1·0·0·0) | 5/3g | 15/17g | 43% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.21 AI 59% ✗ No goal | — |
| – | Cameron Zurhaar | DEF | 8 in 14g | 2/10g (0·0·0·0·1·0·1·0·0·0) | 20/11g | 101/69g | 56% | — | — |
| – | Jy Simpkin | MID | 7 in 14g | 5/10g (0·0·1·2·1·0·1·0·0·0) | 3/12g | 35/85g | 42% | — | 🏉 24' |
| – | Harry Sheezel | MID | 6 in 14g | 5/10g (0·1·1·1·1·0·0·0·1·0) | 0/5g | 13/36g | 40% | — | — |
| – | Charlie Spargo | FWD | 5 in 10g | 5/10g (0·1·1·0·1·1·1·0·0·0) | 4/6g | 8/14g | 40% | — | 🏉 70' 82' |
| – | Finn O'Sullivan | MID | 5 in 10g | 5/10g (0·1·0·0·1·0·2·1·0·0) | 0/2g | 2/14g | 21% | — | — |
| – | George Wardlaw | MID | 5 in 11g | 5/10g (0·0·0·1·0·1·0·1·0·2) | 0/4g | 7/22g | 36% | — | — |
| – | Jacob Konstanty | FWD | 5 in 8g | 6/10g (1·0·0·1·1·0·2·0·0·1) | 0/1g | 6/13g | 46% | — | 🏉 46' |
| – | Colby McKercher | FWD | 4 in 14g | 3/10g (0·1·0·2·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 1/2g | 7/24g | 32% | — | — |
| – | Dylan Stephens | MID | 3 in 14g | 2/10g (0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·1) | 0/4g | 4/28g | 20% | — | — |
| – | Luke Davies-Uniacke | MID | 3 in 14g | 3/10g (1·1·0·0·0·0·1·0·0·0) | 3/8g | 25/62g | 28% | — | — |
| – | Luke Parker | DEF | 2 in 14g | 1/10g (0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 14/19g | 36/47g | 28% | — | — |
| – | Charlie Comben | DEF | 1 in 13g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/3g | 6/28g | 4% | — | — |
| – | Aidan Corr | DEF | 0 in 7g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/9g | 1/47g | 0% | — | — |
| – | Caleb Daniel | DEF | 0 in 14g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 5/11g | 30/104g | 2% | — | — |
| – | Callum Coleman-Jones | RUC | 0 in 4g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 5/5g | 8/16g | 26% | — | — |
| – | Cooper Harvey | DEF | 0 in 2g | 10/10g (0·1·4·2·0·2·0·1·0·0) | 0/0g | 2/5g | 50% | — | — |
| – | Josh Goater | DEF | no games | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/1g | 0/5g | 0% | — | — |
| – | Tom Blamires | MID | 0 in 1g | 0/1g (0) | 0/0g | 0/1g | 0% | — | — |
| – | Wil Dawson | RUC | 0 in 4g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/1g | 0/5g | 0% | — | — |

**Essendon** (team sheet)

| # | Player | Pos | 2026 | Last 10 | vs opp | Venue | Goal % | Alphr play | This game |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| – | Nate Caddy | KF | 25 in 13g | 19/10g (2·1·3·3·2·2·2·2·1·1) | 3/2g | 22/13g | 78% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.04 AI 86% ✓ Scored; 🎯 First Goal $8.00 AI 8% ✗ Not first | 🏉 65' 87' |
| – | Xavier Duursma | MID | 8 in 14g | 6/10g (2·2·0·0·2·0·0·0·0·0) | 4/6g | 11/24g | 36% | — | — |
| – | Isaac Kako | FWD | 7 in 6g | 10/10g (0·0·2·1·1·1·0·2·2·1) | 2/2g | 6/10g | 64% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.50 AI 65% ✗ No goal | — |
| – | Zach Merrett | MID | 7 in 14g | 5/10g (1·1·0·1·0·0·1·1·0·0) | 6/18g | 32/91g | 34% | — | 🏉 78' |
| – | Jye Caldwell | MID | 6 in 10g | 6/10g (1·1·1·1·0·1·0·0·0·1) | 1/5g | 12/34g | 48% | — | — |
| – | Sam Durham | MID | 6 in 13g | 3/10g (0·1·0·1·0·0·0·0·1·0) | 0/7g | 12/37g | 38% | — | 🏉 4' 38' |
| – | Sullivan Robey | FWD | 6 in 10g | 6/10g (0·2·0·1·0·2·0·0·0·1) | 0/0g | 1/1g | 40% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.80 AI 55% ✓ Scored | 🏉 39' |
| – | Archer Day-Wicks | FWD | 5 in 12g | 5/10g (1·0·2·0·0·0·0·2·0·0) | 0/1g | 1/5g | 26% | — | — |
| – | Ben McKay | DEF | 4 in 12g | 4/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·1·2·1) | 0/3g | 0/38g | 12% | — | 🏉 14' |
| – | Hussien El Achkar | FWD | 4 in 4g | 4/4g (1·0·2·1) | 0/0g | 0/0g | 75% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.85 AI 63% ✓ Scored | 🏉 78' 76' |
| – | Archie Perkins | FWD | 3 in 10g | 3/10g (1·1·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0) | 9/8g | 31/37g | 38% | — | — |
| – | Darcy Parish | MID | 2 in 11g | 2/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·1·1·0·0) | 1/9g | 16/58g | 16% | — | — |
| – | Dyson Sharp | FWD | 2 in 6g | 2/6g (2·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/0g | 0/1g | 17% | — | — |
| – | Lachlan Blakiston | DEF | 2 in 14g | 1/10g (0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 1/1g | 2/7g | 11% | — | — |
| – | Mason Redman | DEF | 2 in 7g | 2/10g (0·0·0·0·0·1·0·0·1·0) | 2/10g | 12/49g | 20% | — | — |
| – | Will Setterfield | MID | 2 in 4g | 3/10g (1·0·0·0·0·0·1·0·0·1) | 0/2g | 5/17g | 18% | — | — |
| – | Andrew McGrath | DEF | 1 in 11g | 1/10g (0·0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0) | 3/11g | 8/66g | 6% | — | — |
| – | Harrison Jones | DEF | 1 in 2g | 3/10g (0·1·0·0·1·0·0·0·1·0) | 6/4g | 24/21g | 50% | — | — |
| – | Zach Reid | DEF | 1 in 14g | 1/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·1·0) | 0/2g | 0/9g | 5% | — | — |
| – | Jacob Farrow | DEF | 0 in 12g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/1g | 0/3g | 0% | — | — |
| – | Jaxon Prior | DEF | 0 in 13g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/3g | 0/16g | 0% | — | — |
| – | Jordan Ridley | DEF | 0 in 3g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/7g | 0/29g | 4% | — | — |
| – | Nick Bryan | RUC | 0 in 6g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/1g | 0/9g | 5% | — | — |

### Player Props — Disposal Counts

_Bookmaker disposal lines vs our model's read. ⚡ = the validated under signal (model ≥10 points past the price) — everything else is market intel, not a tip. The ⚡ under signal's verified record: 57.7% of 1,278 flags in 2025._

**North Melbourne**

| Player | Line | Under | AI Under | Actual |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harry Sheezel ⚡ Under | 32.5 | $1.90 | 63% | 43 ✗ |
| Luke Parker | 27.5 | $1.91 | 62% | 31 ✗ |
| Caleb Daniel ⚡ Under | 27.5 | $1.88 | 68% | 40 ✗ |
| Luke Davies-Uniacke | 25.5 | $1.88 | 60% | 25 ✓ |
| Jy Simpkin | 22.5 | $1.92 | 53% | 19 ✓ |
| Finn O'Sullivan | 21.5 | $1.88 | 62% | 21 ✓ |
| Colby McKercher | 21.5 | $1.91 | 57% | 25 ✗ |
| Dylan Stephens ⚡ Under | 20.5 | $1.87 | 66% | 24 ✗ |
| George Wardlaw | 18.5 | $1.93 | 57% | 15 ✓ |
| Cooper Harvey ⚡ Under | 18.5 | $1.87 | 95% | 24 ✗ |

**Essendon**

| Player | Line | Under | AI Under | Actual |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zach Merrett | 27.5 | $1.87 | 56% | 22 ✓ |
| Will Setterfield ⚡ Under | 23.5 | $1.92 | 75% | 17 ✓ |
| Darcy Parish | 23.5 | $1.87 | 55% | 25 ✗ |
| Sam Durham ⚡ Under | 21.5 | $1.88 | 75% | 25 ✗ |
| Mason Redman | 19.5 | $1.87 | 47% | 29 ✗ |
| Jye Caldwell | 18.5 | $1.95 | 61% | 12 ✓ |
| Andrew McGrath | 18.5 | $1.87 | 59% | 26 ✗ |
| Xavier Duursma | 16.5 | $1.88 | 57% | 12 ✓ |

### Prediction Breakdown — Pure Alpha Model

**Team ELO Ratings** — North Melbourne 1390 · Essendon 1105 · ELO difference: 285 in favour of North Melbourne

**Positional Matchups** — lineup ELO by unit

| Unit | North Melbourne | Essendon | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Midfield | 1144 (best 1253) | 1233 (best 1468) | Essendon +88 |
| Forwards | 1116 (best 1600) | 1043 (best 1350) | North Melbourne +73 |
| Defence | 1143 (best 1526) | 1161 (best 1274) | Essendon +18 |
| Ruck | 1076 (best 1122) | 1000 (best 1000) | North Melbourne +76 |

**Key Prediction Factors** — what the model weighted most

| # | Factor | Weight | Favours |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ELO Difference | 14.0% | North Melbourne |
| 2 | Midfield ELO | 11.0% | Essendon |
| 3 | Recent Win Rate | 10.0% | North Melbourne |
| 4 | Forward Line ELO | 9.0% | North Melbourne |
| 5 | Defensive ELO | 8.0% | Essendon |
| 6 | Scoring Form | 8.0% | North Melbourne |
| 7 | Venue Advantage | 7.0% | — |

**Model Confidence: 77%** — North Melbourne predicted to win by 14 points · Predicted total: 11 pts

**Record:** 4/4 predictions correct

**Prediction by Alphr** (https://alphr.com.au) — free AI predictions for every AFL, NRL & Super League match, published before kick-off and never edited. Verified track record: https://alphr.com.au/accuracy

---
Canonical URL: https://alphr.com.au/afl/match/2026-r16-north-melbourne-v-essendon
RSS feed: https://alphr.com.au/feed.xml
Prediction JSON API: today https://alphr.com.au/api/predictions/today · this week https://alphr.com.au/api/predictions/weekly
Markdown view for AI agents. Machine-readable index: https://alphr.com.au/llms.txt · full reference: https://alphr.com.au/llms-full.txt
All predictions are published before kick-off and verified after full time. Free, no login. 18+ gamble responsibly (AU).
Last updated: 2026-06-28 07:58 UTC (latest tip update)