- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
With the Broncos’ 2025 NRL campaign complete, and the club having largely finalised its Top 30 squad for the 2026 season, it is an opportune time to review each player’s on-field production. This analysis assesses comparative rankings and identifies the most effective team configuration for the upcoming campaign.
Methodology
Players expected to comprise the Broncos’ Top 30 squad were allocated into four positional categories:
Each player’s output was assessed against defined Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) using NRL career statistics.
KPI Framework
This analysis assumes the Broncos will adopt a control-based, defence-first tactical approach in 2026, emphasising field position, repeat pressure, and defensive control over high-variance attacking play. Key principles include:
Collectively, these KPIs reflect a strategy focused on field position, repeat pressure, and defensive control, rather than high-variance attacking play.
Missed tackles are treated as a threshold metric, reflecting their disproportionate impact on field position, fatigue, and scoreboard pressure. Players must meet a minimum defensive standard before attacking contributions are weighted.
Attacking output is therefore earned through control, not forced through risk, with greater value placed on players who contribute to defensive sustainability and territorial advantage.
The purpose of this methodology is to assess not only individual performance, but system fit — identifying combinations of players that best support a defence-first, repeat-set-driven model.
Positional Findings and Rankings
Forwards
Key KPIs: 100+ run metres, <2 missed tackles, 1+ offloads
| Rank | Player | Run Metres | Missed Tackles | Offloads |
| 1 | Haas | 168 | 1 | 2 |
| 2 | Te Kura | 96 | 1 | 1 |
| 3 | Jensen | 99 | 1 | 0 |
| 4 | Willison | 96 | 1 | 0 |
| 5 | Talty | 58 | 1 | 0 |
| 6 | Carrigan | 157 | 2 | 1 |
| 7 | Tawha | 97 | 2 | 0 |
| 8 | Gosiewski | 58 | 2 | 0 |
| 9 | Hunt | 52 | 2 | 0 |
| 10 | Riki | 83 | 3 | 0 |
| 11 | Piakura | 69 | 3 | 0 |
Payne Haas is the only forward clearly meeting all positional KPIs, combining elite run metre output with strong defensive efficiency and consistent second-phase contribution.
Ben Te Kura demonstrates strong defensive reliability and meets the offload requirement. However, his run metre output sits just below the 100m benchmark, limiting his overall impact.
Corey Jensen provides consistent defensive output and approaches the run metre threshold, though he offers no second-phase contribution, reducing his effectiveness as a middle forward.
Xavier Willison presents a similar profile to Jensen, maintaining defensive standards but falling short in both run metres and offloads.
Ben Talty meets the defensive KPI but contributes minimally in both run metres and second-phase play, limiting his overall influence.
Patrick Carrigan delivers elite attacking output through high run metres and offloads. However, his missed tackle count exceeds the acceptable threshold, which is heavily weighted in this model.
Aublix Tawha approaches the run metre requirement but falls short in both defensive efficiency and second-phase contribution, indicating an incomplete KPI profile.
Jack Gosiewski meets neither the run metre nor second-phase KPIs and sits above the defensive threshold, limiting his effectiveness.
Jayden Hunt provides limited contribution across all KPIs, failing to meet the required benchmarks in run metres, defence, and offloads.
Jordan Riki offers moderate run metre output but far exceeds the missed tackle threshold and provides no offload contribution.
Brendan Piakura similarly fails to meet key KPIs, with below-benchmark run metres, poor defensive efficiency, and no second-phase impact.
With the Broncos requiring eight effective forwards (two props, two second rowers, a lock, and three bench forwards), the following configuration appears optimal based on the club’s current forward stocks. This structure allows the props and lock to rotate with the bench forwards at the 20- and 60-minute marks:
| Position | Player | Interchange Rotation | |
| 20 Minutes | 60 Minutes | ||
| Second Row | Willison | – | – |
| Prop | Haas | Te Kura | Haas |
| Lock | Carrigan | Talty | Carrigan |
| Prop | Jensen | Gosiewski | Jensen |
| Second Row | Tawha | – | – |
While Jack Gosiewski’s selection within the forward rotation is sub-optimal, he represents the best available option among Hunt, Riki and Piakura, recording the lowest number of missed tackles and the highest average run metres of those player with the equivalent number of missed tackles. This ultimately highlights a broader deficiency within the Broncos’ forward depth.
Centres and Wingers
Key KPIs: 100+ run metres, <2 missed tackles
| Rank | Players | Run Metres | Missed Tackles |
| 1 | Karapani | 141 | 1 |
| 2 | Mariner | 136 | 1 |
| 3 | Arthars | 92 | 1 |
| 4 | Shibasaki | 128 | 2 |
| 5 | Anderson | 127 | 2 |
| 6 | Hoeter | 107 | 2 |
| 7 | Staggs | 106 | 3 |
Josiah Karapani meets all KPIs, combining strong yardage output with reliable defensive performance, positioning him as a clear selection.
Deine Mariner also meets all KPIs, demonstrating consistent run metres and defensive efficiency.
Jesse Arthars meets the defensive KPI but falls marginally short of the run metre benchmark, slightly limiting his yardage contribution.
Gehamat Shibasaki exceeds the run metre requirement but sits at the defensive threshold, making his selection a compromise.
Grant Anderson provides strong yardage output but similarly sits above the defensive threshold, reducing overall reliability.
Delouise Hoeter meets the run metre KPI but does not meet the defensive standard, limiting his effectiveness within a defence-first model.
Kotoni Staggs exceeds the run metre benchmark but significantly exceeds the missed tackle threshold, which heavily impacts his suitability under this framework.
With centres and wingers typically playing full 80-minute roles and not subject to rotation, selection must prioritise players capable of consistently meeting both run metre and defensive KPIs, with particular emphasis on defensive reliability.
Accordingly, the following configuration appears optimal based on the club’s current centre and wing options:
| Position | Player | |
| Wing | Arthars | |
| Centre | Karapani | |
| Centre | Mariner | |
| Wing | Shibasaki |
While Shibasaki’s selection on the wing is sub-optimal, he represents the best available option among Anderson, Hoeter and Staggs, recording the equal lowest number of missed tackles and the highest average run metres.
Halves and Hooker
Key KPIs: <2 missed tackles, 1+ try assists, 100+ kicking metres, 1+ dropouts
| Rank | Player | Try Assists | Missed Tackles | Kicking Metres | Dropouts |
| 1 | Paix | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
| 2 | Reynolds | 1 | 2 | 360 | 1 |
| 3 | Duffy | 1 | 2 | 240 | 0 |
| 4 | Rodgers | 1 | 2 | 105 | 0 |
| 5 | Mozer | 0 | 2 | 5 | 0 |
| 6 | Hunt | 1 | 3 | 266 | 0 |
| 7 | Walters | 0 | 3 | 33 | 0 |
| 8 | Mam | 1 | 4 | 47 | 0 |
No player within this positional group meets all key positional KPIs of 1+ try assists, fewer than two missed tackles, more than 100 kicking metres, and at least one forced dropout per game.
Given the tactical emphasis on defence, Cory Paix provides the most reliable defensive output, recording fewer than two missed tackles. However, his limited contribution in try assists, kicking metres and forced dropouts reduces his overall effectiveness in key playmaking responsibilities.
Adam Reynolds provides elite kicking metres, meets try assist and dropout KPIs, and demonstrates strong game control. However, he sits marginally above the missed tackle threshold.
Tom Duffy meets both the try assist and kicking metre KPIs, indicating strong attacking contribution. However, his defensive output sits above the acceptable threshold, and he provides no forced dropouts.
Josh Rodgers presents a similar profile to Duffy, meeting attacking KPIs but falling short defensively and in forced dropout production.v
Blake Mozer offers limited contribution across all attacking KPIs and does not meet the defensive standard, reducing his overall impact.
Ben Hunt meets the try assist and kicking metre KPIs, demonstrating strong attacking output. However, he significantly fails both the defensive and forced dropout KPIs, impacting his overall rating.
Billy Walters does not meet any key KPIs, with low attacking contribution and poor defensive efficiency.
Ezra Mam contributes through try assists but falls well short across defensive and kicking KPIs, resulting in a highly unbalanced profile.
Given no player meets all KPIs, selection prioritises the best available balance, with defensive reliability weighted most heavily, even where thresholds are marginally exceeded.
With the Broncos requiring a starting five-eighth, halfback and two hookers (one starting and one bench option), the following configuration appears optimal based on the club’s current halves and hooking stocks. This structure allows the hookers to rotate at the 20- and 60-minute marks:
| Position | Player | Interchange Rotation | |
| 20 Minutes | 60 Minutes | ||
| Five-Eighth | Duffy | – | – |
| Hooker | Paix | Rodgers | Paix |
| Halfback | Reynolds | – | – |
While Paix and Duffy’s selection at hooker and five-eighth is not without limitation, they represent the best available options. This again highlights a deficiency within the Broncos’ squad.
Fullback
Key KPIs: 100+ run metres, 1+ try assists, 100+ kicking metres, 1+ dropouts
| Rank | Player | Try Assists | Run Metres | Kicking Metres | Dropouts |
| 1 | Walsh | 1 | 140 | 125 | 0 |
| 2 | Perham | 0 | 126 | 3 | 0 |
Reece Walsh meets the try assist, run metre, and kicking metre KPIs, demonstrating strong attacking and yardage contribution. However, he does not meet the forced dropout KPI, leaving his profile incomplete.
Hayze Perham meets the run metre KPI but fails to contribute meaningfully across try assists, kicking metres, and forced dropouts, significantly limiting his effectiveness.
With the fullback position principally responsible for attacking playmaking and yardage support, selection must prioritise players capable of contributing effectively across try assists, run metres, and kicking metres.
With the Broncos requiring only one fullback capable of playing 80 minutes, Walsh is the clear winner in this positional battle, despite his deficiency in forced dropout production.
Line up
Based on the above analysis, the 17 players that comprise the Broncos’ most effective lineup are:
| Position | Player | Interchange Rotation | |
| 20 Minutes | 60 Minutes | ||
| Fullback | Walsh | – | – |
| Winger | Arthurs | – | – |
| Centre | Mariner | – | – |
| Five-Eighth | Duffy | – | – |
| Second Row | Willison | – | – |
| Prop | Haas | Te Kura | Haas |
| Lock | Carrigan | Talty | Carrigan |
| Hooker | Paix | Rodgers | Paix |
| Prop | Jensen | Gosiewski | Jensen |
| Second Row | Tawha | – | – |
| Halfback | Reynolds | – | – |
| Centre | Karapani | – | – |
| Wing | Shibasaki | – | – |
This analysis reinforces a clear strategic position:
Sustainable success is built on defensive control, field position, and repeat pressure, rather than reliance on high-variance attacking play.
Where no players fully meet KPI requirements, selection is driven by system fit and balance, with priority given to defensive reliability and game control.
Freddie08
My Brisbane Broncos 