# Essendon v Port Adelaide — AFL Round 24 2026 AI Prediction by Alphr

## Full Time: Essendon 95 – 105 Port Adelaide

_Port Adelaide survive a scare against Essendon._

Half time: 38 – 54 · Alphr AI pre-game win probability: Essendon 18% / Port Adelaide 82% · Marvel Stadium · Sun, 23 Aug, 12:20 pm AEST

**Goal Kickers** — Essendon: Peter Wright (13' ×2 1st Tipped 🎯), Nate Caddy (26' ×5 Tipped ⚡), Isaac Kako (78'), Angus Clarke (82' ×2), Final quarter (35m 50s)Angus Clarke (61'), Archie Perkins (81'), Zach Merrett (91') · Port Adelaide: Tom Anastasopoulos (17'), Ollie Wines (21'), Jase Burgoyne (34' ×2), Mitch Georgiades (40' ×4 Tipped ⚡), Xavier Bamert (47'), Jordon Sweet (51'), Mitch Zadow (75' ×2 Tipped ⚡), Jack Whitlock (76' ×2 Tipped ⚡), Christian Moraes (82')

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

| Team | Pre-game AI win probability | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Port Adelaide | 82% | Won |
| Essendon | 18% | Lost |

Model call: **Correct** · Margin: 35.6 predicted → 10 actual · Markets hit: 3/4

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

### Full-Time Report

**Essendon vs Port Adelaide Prediction and Tips - AFL Round 24, 2026**

_By Ben Dunlop · Published: 20 Aug 2026, 07:05 pm · Last updated: 23 Aug 2026, 03:02 pm_

Essendon 95–105 Port Adelaide in AFL Round 24 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.

Port Adelaide edged out Essendon 105–95 at Marvel Stadium. The 10-point margin doesn't quite capture the back-and-forth nature of the game. At three-quarter time, Essendon led by a single point, 63–62. Port Adelaide turned it around in the final term, showing their mettle when it counted.

Essendon had more of the ball, with 384 disposals to Port Adelaide’s 351. They pushed forward more often, entering the forward 50 on 56 occasions compared to Port Adelaide’s 49. Despite these numbers, Essendon couldn't convert their possession into a winning score. The final quarter was where Port Adelaide found their rhythm and pulled ahead.

The Bombers brought the heat in tackling, laying 75 tackles to Port Adelaide’s 49. Their physicality was evident, but it wasn't enough to stop Port Adelaide from finding space and scoring opportunities in the last quarter. More pressure, yet less control in the closing stages, was the story for Essendon.

Both teams were evenly matched in clearances, with 37 each. Essendon's midfield, rated higher pre-match, couldn't turn their statistical advantage into a decisive win. They also led in intercepts with 65 compared to Port Adelaide’s 59, but it was Port's efficiency that made the difference in the end.

Our model had predicted a Port Adelaide win with a margin of 35.6 points, but the game was much closer. Essendon's defence, rated stronger on paper, struggled to contain Port Adelaide’s attacks. Despite their efforts, Port Adelaide managed to outscore them in key moments.

Essendon came into the match with one win in their last five games, while Port Adelaide had lost all five. This context made Essendon's early lead plausible. However, Port Adelaide, despite their recent form, found the resolve to turn predictions of a blowout into a tight contest.

The match ended with a high score of 200 points, well above the model’s predicted total of 168 points. Our model got 3 out of 4 calls right, but it was Port Adelaide's final quarter surge that sealed the victory. They covered the 6.5-point line, which proved crucial.

In the end, Essendon’s statistical advantages, more disposals, more pressure, better ball control, didn't translate into a win. Port Adelaide’s late-game composure and execution saw them through. Essendon will be left wondering what could have been.

**Scoring by Quarter**

| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Essendon | 17 | 21 | 25 | 32 | 95 |
| Port Adelaide | 21 | 33 | 8 | 43 | 105 |

**Key Match Stats**

| Essendon | Stat | Port Adelaide |
|---|---|---|
| **384** | Disposals | 351 |
| **134** | Contested poss. | 128 |
| 37 | Clearances | 37 |
| **56** | Inside 50s | 49 |
| **101** | Marks | 80 |
| **17** | Marks inside 50 | 16 |
| **75** | Tackles | 49 |
| **39** | Hit-outs | 37 |
| **65** | Intercepts | 59 |
| 0.0% | Disposal eff. | 0.0% |

**Model Report Card**

Our model correctly predicted Port Adelaide to win at 82% probability. The margin model missed here, predicting 35.6 but the actual margin was 10 points. The game's 200 points came in 32 points higher than the predicted 168. The model went 3/4 on this match. Port Adelaide covered the 6.5-point line. The 1-39 margin band call landed.

_Official AFL match stats · Generated by Alphr's model_

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

- **Head to Head:** Port Adelaide to win @ $1.66 (edge +21.6%) — model probability 81.8% — result: WON
- **Line / Spread:** Port Adelaide -6.5 @ $1.90 (edge +29.1%) — result: WON
- **Margin Band:** Port Adelaide 1-39 @ $3.30 (edge +0.0%) — result: WON
- **Total (Over/Under):** Under 176.5 @ $1.88 (edge +1.8%) — result: LOST
- Predicted margin: Port Adelaide by 36 · Predicted total: 168

### Match Preview (pre-match read)

The model is firm on Port Adelaide here: 82% to see off Essendon. The heaviest factor is the ratings gap: Port Adelaide sit 215 ELO points clear, 1303 to 1088. Form leans Essendon's way: 1 from their last 5, against 0 for Port Adelaide.

On paper Essendon shade it, ahead on 4 of 7 factors including Forward Line, Recent Form and Weather. The model still sides with Port Adelaide, which says ELO Rating and Stat Profile carry the most weight. The margin model has Port Adelaide by 35.6, with the two sides combining for about 168. Port Adelaide to win, and win clearly. The model isn't hedging.

_Pre-match read · Alphr model_

### Recent Form (Last 5)

| Essendon | Stat | Port Adelaide |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | Wins (Last 5) | 0.0 |
| 61.0pts | Avg Score | 66.2pts |
| 114.0pts | Avg Conceded | 120.6pts |
| -53.0pts | Avg Margin | -54.4pts |
| 323.0 | Disposals | 329.8 |
| 50.0 | Inside 50s | 50.0 |
| 61.6 | Tackles | 50.2 |
| 34.0 | Clearances | 37.2 |

### Form & History

_Last 5 games, oldest → newest._

| Team | Last 5 | Avg Pts |
|---|---|---|
| Essendon | R19 W · R20 L · R21 L · R22 L · R23 L | 61.0 |
| Port Adelaide | R19 L · R20 L · R21 L · R22 L · R23 L | 66.2 |

### Positional Matchup

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

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

|  | Essendon | Port Adelaide |
|---|---|---|
| Attack rank | 18th (weak) | 14th (weak) |
| Defence rank | 18th (weak) | 14th (weak) |
| Goals scored · conceded | 116 · 236 | 155 · 210 |
| Goal Assists | 2.6/g | 3.7/g |
| Disposals | 81/g | 96/g |
| Inside 50s | 14.6/g | 17.3/g |
| Marks Inside 50 | 5.1/g | 9.1/g |
| Disposal Efficiency | 67.6% | 65.5% |

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

|  | Essendon | Port Adelaide |
|---|---|---|
| Attack rank | 8th | 11th |
| Defence rank | 16th (weak) | 5th (strong) |
| Goals scored · conceded | 70 · 85 | 67 · 58 |
| Goal Assists | 2.6/g | 3.8/g |
| Disposals | 127/g | 140/g |
| Inside 50s | 18.2/g | 24/g |
| Marks Inside 50 | 3/g | 3.4/g |
| Disposal Efficiency | 73.2% | 68.1% |

**Defenders** (Key & Medium Defenders)

|  | Essendon | Port Adelaide |
|---|---|---|
| Attack rank | 1st (strong) | 9th |
| Defence rank | 15th (weak) | 10th |
| Goals scored · conceded | 29 · 20 | 15 · 16 |
| Goal Assists | 2/g | 0.9/g |
| Disposals | 146/g | 103/g |
| Inside 50s | 12.3/g | 8.9/g |
| Marks Inside 50 | 1.9/g | 0.3/g |
| Disposal Efficiency | 78.6% | 78.4% |

**Who scores on Port Adelaide** — Defenders 1.14/g (lg 1.05) +9% · Key Forwards 4.03/g (lg 3.9) +3% · Forwards 4.55/g (lg 4.5) +1%
**Who scores on Essendon** — Forwards 5.4/g (lg 4.5) +20% · Defenders 1.21/g (lg 1.05) +15% · Midfielders 2.78/g (lg 2.47) +13%

_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._

**Essendon** (team sheet)

| # | Player | Pos | 2026 | Last 10 | vs opp | Venue | Goal % | Alphr play | This game |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| – | Nate Caddy | KF | 40 in 21g | 17/10g (1·1·2·3·2·0·3·1·1·3) | 6/2g | 28/17g | 80% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.04 AI 84% ✓ Scored | 🏉 26' 38' 42' 56' 64' |
| – | Peter Wright | RUC | 26 in 17g | 20/10g (2·3·0·1·3·1·2·6·0·2) | 4/9g | 93/46g | 74% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.03 AI 87% ✓ Scored; 🎯 First Goal $8.00 AI 4% ✓ Scored first | 🏉 13' 70' |
| – | Zach Merrett | MID | 9 in 22g | 2/10g (0·0·1·0·0·1·0·0·0·0) | 4/16g | 34/95g | 26% | — | 🏉 91' |
| – | Isaac Kako | FWD | 8 in 14g | 4/10g (2·1·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0) | 1/2g | 6/14g | 47% | — | 🏉 78' |
| – | Archer Day-Wicks | FWD | 7 in 20g | 2/10g (0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0·1) | 0/0g | 2/9g | 23% | — | — |
| – | Archie Perkins | FWD | 6 in 15g | 3/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·2·1) | 6/6g | 31/39g | 40% | — | 🏉 81' |
| – | Jye Caldwell | MID | 6 in 16g | 1/10g (0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 4/8g | 12/37g | 36% | — | — |
| – | Jacob Farrow | DEF | 4 in 20g | 4/10g (0·0·0·0·0·2·0·0·2·0) | 0/0g | 2/7g | 13% | — | — |
| – | Kyle Langford | DEF | 4 in 18g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 13/11g | 68/60g | 36% | — | — |
| – | Dyson Sharp | FWD | 3 in 14g | 1/10g (0·0·0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0) | 0/1g | 1/5g | 13% | — | — |
| – | Mason Redman | DEF | 3 in 15g | 2/10g (1·0·0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0) | 1/8g | 13/53g | 20% | — | — |
| – | Will Setterfield | MID | 3 in 10g | 3/10g (1·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0·1) | 1/5g | 5/20g | 18% | — | — |
| – | Andrew McGrath | DEF | 2 in 19g | 1/10g (0·0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0) | 1/12g | 8/70g | 8% | — | — |
| – | Archie Roberts | DEF | 2 in 20g | 1/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·1·0) | 1/2g | 2/15g | 8% | — | — |
| – | Harrison Jones | DEF | 2 in 6g | 3/10g (1·0·0·0·1·0·0·0·1·0) | 2/4g | 25/23g | 46% | — | — |
| – | Nick Bryan | RUC | 2 in 12g | 2/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·2·0·0) | 0/2g | 2/13g | 9% | — | — |
| – | Angus Clarke | FWD | 1 in 5g | 2/10g (1·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·1·0) | 0/0g | 2/6g | 21% | — | 🏉 82' 73' |
| – | Jaxon Prior | DEF | 1 in 21g | 1/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·1) | 1/4g | 0/20g | 4% | — | — |
| – | Max Kondogiannis | MID | 1 in 11g | 1/10g (0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/1g | 0/3g | 10% | — | — |
| – | Rhys Unwin | FWD | 1 in 3g | 2/6g (1·0·0·0·0·1) | 0/0g | 1/2g | 33% | — | — |
| – | Vigo Visentini | RUC | 1 in 2g | 1/4g (0·0·0·1) | 0/0g | 0/1g | 25% | — | — |
| – | Zach Reid | DEF | 1 in 22g | 1/10g (1·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/3g | 0/13g | 4% | — | — |
| – | Jaxon Artemis | DEF | 0 in 5g | 0/5g (0·0·0·0·0) | 0/0g | 0/2g | 0% | — | — |

**Port Adelaide** (team sheet)

| # | Player | Pos | 2026 | Last 10 | vs opp | Venue | Goal % | Alphr play | This game |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| – | Mitch Georgiades | KF | 46 in 20g | 20/10g (1·1·2·1·3·3·0·2·3·4) | 13/5g | 21/13g | 96% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.03 AI 90% ✓ Scored; 🎯 First Goal $7.50 AI 5% ✗ Not first | 🏉 40' 53' 75' 92' |
| – | Corey Durdin | FWD | 32 in 22g | 14/10g (2·0·3·1·2·2·1·0·2·1) | 3/4g | 23/25g | 74% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.16 AI 77% ✗ No goal | — |
| – | Jack Whitlock | KF | 22 in 22g | 9/10g (0·2·0·3·0·1·0·0·3·0) | 0/1g | 7/4g | 47% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.26 AI 72% ✓ Scored | 🏉 76' 94' |
| – | Joe Berry | FWD | 14 in 22g | 5/10g (1·0·2·0·1·1·0·0·0·0) | 2/2g | 1/5g | 36% | — | — |
| – | Jordon Sweet | RUC | 10 in 21g | 5/10g (2·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·0·2) | 1/2g | 2/13g | 30% | — | 🏉 51' |
| – | Joe Richards | FWD | 9 in 19g | 5/10g (3·0·0·1·0·0·0·0·1·0) | 3/3g | 3/6g | 42% | — | — |
| – | Jase Burgoyne | MID | 8 in 22g | 5/10g (0·0·2·0·1·1·1·0·0·0) | 1/5g | 2/8g | 24% | — | 🏉 34' 70' |
| – | Todd Marshall | KF | 8 in 14g | 8/10g (0·1·1·0·0·0·2·2·1·1) | 9/9g | 20/16g | 60% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.32 AI 69% ✗ No goal | — |
| – | Dante Visentini | RUC | 6 in 14g | 5/10g (0·0·0·0·1·2·2·0·0·0) | 0/1g | 1/3g | 24% | — | — |
| – | Mitch Zadow | FWD | 6 in 7g | 6/7g (1·0·3·0·1·1·0) | 0/0g | 0/0g | 57% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.58 AI 63% ✓ Scored | 🏉 75' 71' |
| – | Darcy Byrne-Jones | DEF | 4 in 21g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 11/14g | 8/25g | 26% | — | — |
| – | Miles Bergman | DEF | 4 in 15g | 2/10g (1·0·0·0·0·0·0·1·0·0) | 2/7g | 5/16g | 22% | — | — |
| – | Xavier Bamert | FWD | 3 in 7g | 3/7g (1·0·1·0·0·1·0) | 0/0g | 1/1g | 43% | — | 🏉 47' |
| – | Christian Moraes | FWD | 2 in 11g | 2/10g (1·0·0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0) | 0/1g | 1/3g | 17% | — | 🏉 82' |
| – | Lachie Jones | DEF | 2 in 19g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/2g | 1/8g | 6% | — | — |
| – | Ollie Wines | MID | 2 in 18g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 3/14g | 9/31g | 10% | — | 🏉 21' |
| – | Jacob Wehr | MID | 1 in 16g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/1g | 1/7g | 8% | — | — |
| – | Tom Anastasopoulos | FWD | 1 in 4g | 1/4g (0·0·1·0) | 0/0g | 0/0g | 25% | — | 🏉 17' |
| – | Alex Van Wyk | RUC | 0 in 2g | 0/2g (0·0) | 0/0g | 0/0g | 0% | — | — |
| – | Balyn O'Brien | DEF | 0 in 5g | 0/5g (0·0·0·0·0) | 0/0g | 0/0g | 0% | — | — |
| – | Harrison Ramm | DEF | 0 in 5g | 0/6g (0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/0g | 0/0g | 0% | — | — |
| – | Josh Lai | DEF | 0 in 18g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/0g | 0/2g | 0% | — | — |
| – | Will Brodie | MID | 0 in 1g | 2/10g (0·1·0·0·0·1·0·0·0·0) | 0/2g | 3/9g | 18% | — | — |

### 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._

**Essendon**

| Player | Line | Under | AI Under | Actual |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zak Butters | 29.5 | — | 48% | — |
| Zachary Merrett | 28.5 | — | — | — |
| Archie Roberts | 26.5 | — | 57% | 27 ✗ |
| Elijah Tsatas | 24.5 | — | 80% | — |
| Oliver Wines | 24.5 | — | — | — |
| Darcy Parish | 24.5 | — | 44% | — |
| Will Setterfield | 23.5 | — | 61% | 32 ✗ |
| Sam Durham | 21.5 | — | 50% | — |
| Dyson Sharp | 21.5 | — | 66% | 22 ✗ |
| Jye Caldwell | 20.5 | — | 64% | 23 ✗ |
| Andrew McGrath | 19.5 | — | 48% | 25 ✗ |
| Willem Drew | 19.5 | — | 43% | — |
| Mason Redman | 19.5 | — | 55% | 14 ✓ |
| Jacob Farrow | 17.5 | — | 47% | 11 ✓ |

**Port Adelaide**

| Player | Line | Under | AI Under | Actual |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jase Burgoyne | 24.5 | — | 64% | 30 ✗ |
| Joe Richards | 23.5 | — | 75% | 22 ✓ |
| Darcy Byrne-Jones | 23.5 | — | 60% | 26 ✗ |
| Miles Bergman | 21.5 | — | 68% | 22 ✗ |
| Joe Berry | 17.5 | — | 83% | 15 ✓ |
| Jacob Wehr | 15.5 | — | 60% | 15 ✓ |
| Jordon Sweet | 14.5 | — | 59% | 15 ✗ |
| Christian Moraes | 14.5 | — | 59% | 19 ✗ |
| Mitch Georgiades | 14.5 | — | 67% | 15 ✗ |
| Xavier Bamert | 13.5 | — | 61% | 11 ✓ |
| Josh Lai | 13.5 | — | 44% | 12 ✓ |
| Todd Marshall | 12.5 | — | 87% | 8 ✓ |
| Corey Durdin | 12.5 | — | 66% | 8 ✓ |
| Tom Anastasopoulos | 11.5 | — | — | 14 ✗ |

### Prediction Breakdown — Pure Alpha Model

**Team ELO Ratings** — Essendon 1088 · Port Adelaide 1303 · ELO difference: 215 in favour of Port Adelaide

**Positional Matchups** — lineup ELO by unit

| Unit | Essendon | Port Adelaide | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Midfield | 1211 (best 1303) | 1172 (best 1259) | Essendon +38 |
| Forwards | 1052 (best 1320) | 1018 (best 1358) | Essendon +34 |
| Defence | 1240 (best 1485) | 1102 (best 1202) | Essendon +138 |
| Ruck | 1188 (best 1188) | 1089 (best 1580) | Essendon +99 |

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

| # | Factor | Weight | Favours |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ELO Rating | 36.5% | Port Adelaide |
| 2 | Stat Profile | 26.7% | Port Adelaide |
| 3 | Forward Line | 14.8% | Port Adelaide |
| 4 | Lineup Strength | 5.1% | Port Adelaide |
| 5 | Recent Form | 4.6% | Port Adelaide |
| 6 | Weather | 3.1% | Essendon |
| 7 | Defence | 2.9% | Essendon |

**Model Confidence: 82%** — Port Adelaide predicted to win by 36 points · Predicted total: 168 pts

**Record:** 3/4 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-r24-essendon-v-port-adelaide
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: 2026-08-23 05:02 UTC (latest tip update)