Your Arizona Cardinals now hold the 16th pick in the 2025 NFL Draft

[Chopper0080]

I have no issue with the MHJ pick. I wouldnt trade MHJ for Bowers straight up even now.

Edit. Wouldn’t trade.

 

[WisconsinCard]

Not at all WC. Just a lot of posters insist on 20/20 hindsight.
You Da Man!

I can't be the man cuz you da man...

 

[Chopper0080]

Armand Membou
Welcome to AZ(in the 2nd round) @Chopper0080

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

You want him at OT? Or OG?

 

[Russ Smith]

My info says he played hurt

Sort of what I'm asking, was he actually hurt earlier and they didn't tell us? The thing is it wasn't just him having trouble blocking speed rushers after the bye, it seemed like him jumping early happened more after the bye too. Although I suppose that could be connected too, he's playing hurt so he's trying to time the snap to drop back quicker since he's slower than normal?

 

[Harry]

Sort of what I'm asking, was he actually hurt earlier and they didn't tell us? The thing is it wasn't just him having trouble blocking speed rushers after the bye, it seemed like him jumping early happened more after the bye too. Although I suppose that could be connected too, he's playing hurt so he's trying to time the snap to drop back quicker since he's slower than normal?

I think the penalties indcated he needed a jump on his opponents considering his limitations. Injuries progressing is common especially late in the season.

 

[DVontel]

You want him at OT? Or OG?

OT

 

[Chopper0080]

OT

I am generally hesitant about OTs 6’3 and under.

 

[Chopper0080]

Just a size outlier I don’t want any part of.

 

[BACH]

And nothing indicates he will be. Bowers is ALREADY great.



Lol… passed the eye test? He passed EVERY TEST. Statiscal, rookie honors, Pro Bowl honors.

Oh yeah… and FIRST TEAM ALL-PRO.



This is not a real argument. His drops, his lack of focus, his mid stats AND the eye say he wasn’t even close to pro bowl level. That is a joke. He ranks in the 30s for WRs in yards. That’s a just below Pro Bowl WR? Come on man.

I should just stop reading here after that laughable argument point, but I’m bored so let’s carry on.



No… YOU can not compare stats because to do so shows the Grand Canyon difference between the two players and are you kidding me? Calling the Raiders a “passing” offense is an even bigger joke. He had absolutely TERRIBLE QBs throwing the ball, he was the ONLY option, faced constant double teams and STILL broke out as arguably the best TE in the game… as a rookie.



Right… so MJH saw LESS coverage than Bowers and still couldn’t get open at near the same rates.

As for your “garbage” point… it’s garbage also. Unless you want to go back and claim Fitz or Boldin’s yards were garbage all those years we were bad.



Wait… on one hand you say in point 1 that we can’t make the analysis after 1 year yet NO WAY THIS WASNT THE RIGHT PICK? Well, you just violated your own argument.


Newsflash BACH… hindsight is how GMs are judged! Why? Because you can actually see their decisions play out on the field. Weird shocking concept!

Not sure if I should be honored that you replied only because you were bored when you actually didn't want to OR I reply in the same condescending tone.

I'll go with the latter, since I have a issue with people that think they have a better argumentation by "yelling louder".

With that I now face the dilemma if I even want to engage in a discussion with a person that is clearly so clueless about football. Honestly not worth my time, but I'm bored....

So, I clearly state that Bowers looked better in the eyetest, yet you are making it out like I didn't acknowledge that. First. Bowers was NOT the best TE in the league. That was CLEARLY Kittle, followed by McBride and then Bowers. It's still impressive as a rookie to be the 3rd best TE in the NFL.

Bowers eyetest doesn't impact MHJ's eyetest, however. He looked ALL-Pro in a few game, completely disappeared in a few games and like a solid WR in most - as a rookie. Over the season that gave him a pff rating as the 21st best WR in the NFL, which is (tah-dah) just below the pro-bowl threshold. MHJ had a good season for a rookie WR, which is a position typically with a highlearning curve. I'm assuming that this is where you will bring in the immediate impact rookie WRs. Sorry, you cannot cherry pick your data to prove a point. You have to use complete datasets. Take the top WRs in the NFL. You will be comparing MHJ to Chase, Nakua and Jefferson as rookies, but are conveniently leaving out Collins's 436 yards as a rookie and that MHJ had similar rookie stats to AJ Brown, St. Brown, Tee Higgins and Drake London.

On the Raiders not being a passing attack... Even with those horrible QBs to hold the team back, the Raiders had the 13th best passing attack, hence a passing offense... That means the entire scheme and personel is designed to pass, which is the opposite of a 12 scheme focusing on running the ball. That actually has a huge impact on the stats, especially when you are schemed to be the #1 weapon. You clearly fail to understand the game and schemes in garbage time. No, a passing offense means scheming to put your #1 waepon in the best position. And garbage time doesn't mean tighter coverages, it's means loser coverage underneath (to TEs). Bowers had a total 166 yards when Raiders were in front and the Raiders didn't have to force the ball. 37% of Bowers' production came in the 4th quarter.

You then call me out for stating that MHJ was the right pick, when I also said it's too early to evaluate. You get that take from a section on my post, where I explain positional value and mention that word several time. Not sure if you conveniently ignoring that to prove your point, you are not able to read the words I'm writing or you simply do not know enough about NFL to know positional value. Let me spell it out.... different positions has different value. That is based both on the importance of the position on the field, how easy it is to get a "run of the mill" solid starter and where the elite talent seperate the most from your average good players. WR has the 4th highest positional value, TE is usually considered the 9th. Based on POSITIONAL VALUE, MHJ was the right pick. We can then discuss if Monti should have drafted Nabers or if MHJ will develop to an elite WR - this is were the development factor comes in for later evaluation. But the point is that you do not draft a low positional value player that high, when you have higher value position player available with the same talent. You certainly do not do choose to pass on a bluechip player at a high value position of need in order to draft a bluechip player from a lower position value and a position where you already have a bluechip player.

NEWSFLASH! GMs are evaluated on talent brought (in hindsigt) in as a whole and not players cherry picked by you to spin your narrative. That is the true joke here - your cherrypicking in hindsight to build your argumentation. Should the Chiefs fire Andy Reid for not drafting G Puni? Should Howie Roseman be fired for drafting Quinyon Mitchell and not Lassiter? How about the Commanders GM? Yeah, he drafted Rookie of the Year, but he missed on Sweat, Fiske, DeJean, Lassiter, when he drafted Newton. Should all GMs in the league be fired for not drafting Bucky Irving or Trotter Jr.?. Did you fire your financial advisor returning a 20% ROI for not buying Gamestop stocks?

All that matters is if MHJ develop or not, because that was the logical and rational pick. You actually must have a tough life if you are basing quality on all the birds on the roof and not the birds you have in your hand. Does Monti bat above average? To Be Determined! But so far with an incomplete grade it certainly looks like it.

 

[kerouac9]

Not sure if I should be honored that you replied only because you were bored when you actually didn't want to OR I reply in the same condescending tone.

I'll go with the latter, since I have a issue with people that think they have a better argumentation by "yelling louder".

With that I now face the dilemma if I even want to engage in a discussion with a person that is clearly so clueless about football. Honestly not worth my time, but I'm bored....

So, I clearly state that Bowers looked better in the eyetest, yet you are making it out like I didn't acknowledge that. First. Bowers was NOT the best TE in the league. That was CLEARLY Kittle, followed by McBride and then Bowers. It's still impressive as a rookie to be the 3rd best TE in the NFL.

Bowers eyetest doesn't impact MHJ's eyetest, however. He looked ALL-Pro in a few game, completely disappeared in a few games and like a solid WR in most - as a rookie. Over the season that gave him a pff rating as the 21st best WR in the NFL, which is (tah-dah) just below the pro-bowl threshold. MHJ had a good season for a rookie WR, which is a position typically with a highlearning curve. I'm assuming that this is where you will bring in the immediate impact rookie WRs. Sorry, you cannot cherry pick your data to prove a point. You have to use complete datasets. Take the top WRs in the NFL. You will be comparing MHJ to Chase, Nakua and Jefferson as rookies, but are conveniently leaving out Collins's 436 yards as a rookie and that MHJ had similar rookie stats to AJ Brown, St. Brown, Tee Higgins and Drake London.

On the Raiders not being a passing attack... Even with those horrible QBs to hold the team back, the Raiders had the 13th best passing attack, hence a passing offense... That means the entire scheme and personel is designed to pass, which is the opposite of a 12 scheme focusing on running the ball. That actually has a huge impact on the stats, especially when you are schemed to be the #1 weapon. You clearly fail to understand the game and schemes in garbage time. No, a passing offense means scheming to put your #1 waepon in the best position. And garbage time doesn't mean tighter coverages, it's means loser coverage underneath (to TEs). Bowers had a total 166 yards when Raiders were in front and the Raiders didn't have to force the ball. 37% of Bowers' production came in the 4th quarter.

You then call me out for stating that MHJ was the right pick, when I also said it's too early to evaluate. You get that take from a section on my post, where I explain positional value and mention that word several time. Not sure if you conveniently ignoring that to prove your point, you are not able to read the words I'm writing or you simply do not know enough about NFL to know positional value. Let me spell it out.... different positions has different value. That is based both on the importance of the position on the field, how easy it is to get a "run of the mill" solid starter and where the elite talent seperate the most from your average good players. WR has the 4th highest positional value, TE is usually considered the 9th. Based on POSITIONAL VALUE, MHJ was the right pick. We can then discuss if Monti should have drafted Nabers or if MHJ will develop to an elite WR - this is were the development factor comes in for later evaluation. But the point is that you do not draft a low positional value player that high, when you have higher value position player available with the same talent. You certainly do not do choose to pass on a bluechip player at a high value position of need in order to draft a bluechip player from a lower position value and a position where you already have a bluechip player.

NEWSFLASH! GMs are evaluated on talent brought (in hindsigt) in as a whole and not players cherry picked by you to spin your narrative. That is the true joke here - your cherrypicking in hindsight to build your argumentation. Should the Chiefs fire Andy Reid for not drafting G Puni? Should Howie Roseman be fired for drafting Quinyon Mitchell and not Lassiter? How about the Commanders GM? Yeah, he drafted Rookie of the Year, but he missed on Sweat, Fiske, DeJean, Lassiter, when he drafted Newton. Should all GMs in the league be fired for not drafting Bucky Irving or Trotter Jr.?. Did you fire your financial advisor returning a 20% ROI for not buying Gamestop stocks?

All that matters is if MHJ develop or not, because that was the logical and rational pick. You actually must have a tough life if you are basing quality on all the birds on the roof and not the birds you have in your hand. Does Monti bat above average? To Be Determined! But so far with an incomplete grade it certainly looks like it.

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[Cardinal88]

I am bored too so I wanted too see how many words were used in Bach’s response…. Messed up after 120 due to my attention span. Rather than starting over, I used a word counter and the final answer is:
865 words 4,698 characters - whew!

That is some great work there Bach!

 

[oaken1]

Wow...eighteen letters

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Okay, that is your opinion.

Any rookie that leads his position in stats and ranks 3rd in pff is clearly a great pick.

But I do not think it's that simple.

1. We cannot make this analysis after year 1 IMO. Nothing indicates that MHJ will not be great. All we know is that MHJ wasn't as ready as everyone expected and couldn't live up to the unrealistic hype. We'll only know after year 3. I agree Bowers certainly passed the eyetest better, but MHJ did play to just below/pro-bowl level per pff.

2. You cannot compare stats. Bowers was the #1 receiving weapon in a passing offense. MHJ was the #2 receiving weapon in a rushing offense. And how much garbage time did Bowers play compared to MHJ. A LOT!

3. Both were considered the greatest talent at their position in 10 years. But there is positional value to consider. MHJ plays the #4 most valuable position in the NFL. Bowers plays the 8th most valuable position. Even if MHJ had not been the pick, Bowers would not have been it.

4. Team needs. Cardinals already had a top 3 TE in the league. The WR room was poor. No way this wasn't the right pick for Monti at the time.

5. Hindsight is 20/20.

I agree with a lot of this except #5. We pay GMs a LOT of money to have foresight. Just because they failed like fans fail doesn’t mean they should get the 20/20 hindsight pass. This is a weird fascination this board has with accepting failure.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Not at all WC. Just a lot of posters insist on 20/20 hindsight.
You Da Man!

I’m telling you this is the weirdest fascination this board possesses. GMs job description is literally to the FORESIGHT to make decisions that look right using 20/20 hindsight. What other criteria are you going to use to measure them? That they made the pick that fans and magazines said they should make?

 

[Chopper0080]

@DVontel they are all coming to the Senior Bowl. It’s gonna be awesome.

 

[Chopper0080]

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[Chopper0080]

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[BACH]

I agree with a lot of this except #5. We pay GMs a LOT of money to have foresight. Just because they failed like fans fail doesn’t mean they should get the 20/20 hindsight pass. This is a weird fascination this board has with accepting failure.

I’m absolutely not giving a free pass for failure.

But I’m calling out not being fair in the evaluation of what is a failure. Monti drafted a perceived generational talent at a position of need at a high value position. The player develops nicely and on par, but doesn’t meet the crazy expectations. To then call him out for not drafting a generational talent at a way lower value position, where you already have an all-pro player is insane - especially considering that MHJ didn’t flop.

 

[kerouac9]

Monti drafted a perceived generational talent at a position of need at a high value position. The player develops nicely and on par, but doesn’t meet the crazy expectations.

The expectations weren’t crazy because many players had achieved similar goals recently, including several in his draft class.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I’m absolutely not giving a free pass for failure.

But I’m calling out not being fair in the evaluation of what is a failure. Monti drafted a perceived generational talent at a position of need at a high value position. The player develops nicely and on par, but doesn’t meet the crazy expectations. To then call him out for not drafting a generational talent at a way lower value position, where you already have an all-pro player is insane - especially considering that MHJ didn’t flop.

Not so much the fact pattern I’m calling out as much as the general perspective around here that you can’t judge a GM using hindsight. You absolutely should judge them in that because they’re supposed to have foresight.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

The expectations weren’t crazy because many players had achieved similar goals recently, including several in his draft class.

Correct. He was being talked about as the best prospect in a decade. Even if he didn’t reach that, there are so many levels above sub-900 yard season that others before have acheived with some regularity these days that you can’t really tap his rookie year anything other than disappointing, particularly when you look beyond the mere underwhelming numbers. If you watch him play there are just too many gaffs and too few wow plays for the 4th pick in the draft.

Now I’m not calling him a bust. I think he’ll learn and develop. But he’s not what was advertised or what I’m sure the Cardinals thought they were getting.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I’m absolutely not giving a free pass for failure.

But I’m calling out not being fair in the evaluation of what is a failure. Monti drafted a perceived generational talent at a position of need at a high value position. The player develops nicely and on par, but doesn’t meet the crazy expectations. To then call him out for not drafting a generational talent at a way lower value position, where you already have an all-pro player is insane - especially considering that MHJ didn’t flop.

Insane is calling MHJ’s rookie season near Pro Bowl level.

And then saying GMs can’t be judged with hindsight.

But seriously, the near Pro Bowl level comment is one of the most insane things I’ve ever read on this board.

 

[Chopper0080]

Correct. He was being talked about as the best prospect in a decade. Even if he didn’t reach that, there are so many levels above sub-900 yard season that others before have acheived with some regularity these days that you can’t really tap his rookie year anything other than disappointing, particularly when you look beyond the mere underwhelming numbers. If you watch him play there are just too many gaffs and too few wow plays for the 4th pick in the draft.

Now I’m not calling him a bust. I think he’ll learn and develop. But he’s not what was advertised or what I’m sure the Cardinals thought they were getting.

I think it is fair to say people expected Justin Jefferson and got Tee Higgins. MHJ wasn't bad, but people thought they were getting more. (also, I am on record saying I think MHJ is impacted by Kyler's unique QBing and that he is not a finished product)

 

[football karma]

pretty sure 32 out of 32 NFL GMs take MHJ if they are sitting where the Cardinals were given their roster

there is SO MUCH randomness in the draft that even the best drafting GMs miss on picks all the time.

Drafting is like batting average in baseball -- so many peaks and valleys. No idea if Monti and his scouting operation is better, the same or worse than Keim-- not enough at bats yet.

 

[MadCardDisease]

Insane is calling MHJ’s rookie season near Pro Bowl level.

And then saying GMs can’t be judged with hindsight.

But seriously, the near Pro Bowl level comment is one of the most insane things I’ve ever read on this board.

Yes MHJr was nowhere near pro bowl level this season. There are at least 5-6 NFC players ahead of him who didn't make the Pro Bowl roster this season.

Drake London
Malik Nabers
JSN
AJ Brown
Mike Evans
Puka Nacua


IMO That isn't to say that MHJr couldn't easily make the leap next season. His 8 TDs puts him right in line with some of those guys. He just needs to be more consistent and add about 250 yards and 2 TDs. Then you could say that he is on the bubble of making the Pro Bowl. Right now that is not the case.