Jaylen Warren cracks top 20 list.

I don't think they should overpay, either, but $7 million for one year of Harris isn't overpaying.

 

See.....LoL....
It appears there must be another STD on this board.....because I have not once said He was fumble prone.....what I said is He has the same amount of fumbles as Najee with over 600 less carries as Najee. I've only stated this 5 million times.

 

My Friend.....Yards aren't yards....You know this.
Example 3, and 20.....and a player gains 16....great job, but not what is needed......3, and 2, and a player gains 3......now which one I the most significant yards?? Yet stats will show one had 16 yards, and the other only 3. Also take into account of what the D is looking for.

 

No You didn't.....You never take into account one had over 100 more carries(if anyone does anything 100 more times the averages should be different), or that some of Warren's biggest runs came when both RBs are on the field....yet nobody ever brings that up.

 

I'll say it. Warren fumbled too much last season. He's also not nearly as good with pass protection as Najee.

This is not meant as bashing on Warren. Just where improvement is needed.

 

wow just wow to both std and scribe. give me a complete back any day of the week. lev bell was good here because he could do it all. sorry you all are butt hurt that the steelers didn't sign harris to that contract. they must have their reasons.

 

can we end this thread, mods.

like the kenny debacle debate, this horse is beat to death.

please season, start soon!

 

That's the best you can come up with? They must have their reasons. So is your argument now that whatever the Steelers do is right because they have a reason for doing it? To be clear, that is the point made by the words you just posted. I'm not sure you meant to post something that foolish.

Harris is a complete back. He is a productive runner. He a strong blocker. He is a very good receiver out of the backfield. He has proven that he can handle a heavy workload. He has proven he can protect the ball. He has proven that he can be effective in short yardage.

You cannot accurately make those last three statements about Warren.

 

never once in any of these threads have i said harris wasn't a good back. never.

i said the steelers must have their reasons for not signing him to that contract.

warren is also a good running back. don't put words in my mouth that i didn't say. they haven't signed either beyond this year.

what players do in college is kinda why you draft them or add them to your team. players can get better in the NFL after college. so don't discount what i said about warren carrying the load for his senior season like you did.

no i didn't say everything they do is right, but it's their choice. that's why they are paid to make those decisions.

i stand by my statements that warren is a complete back. i like those types of players.

 

I'm not putting words in your mouth. I'm reflecting your words back at you. That you posted something mindless and didn't even think about what it means doesn't change that. To be clear, I'm referring to your argument that they must have their reasons. By that logic, everything the Steelers do is right because they have a reason for doing it. You aren't that much of a delusional fanboy, so perhaps you should put more thought into your deflections.

I never claimed that you wrote that Harris wasn't a good back. That is an example of a poster putting words in someone else's mouth, except it is you doing it to me.

That a player does something in college doesn't mean they can do it in the pros. You know this, so why are you relying on that as a crutch to support your point?

Your statement that Warren is a complete back in this context implies that Harris is not. That is why I explained how Harris is a more complete back. He is a better blocker. He protects the ball better. He has proven he can carry a heavy workload. He has proven himself in short yardage. Warren might be able to do those last three things, but he hasn't proven it in the NFL.

 

i tire of this ignorance.

 

I tried to tell you about 5 weeks ago to just stop with him.

just leave it alone.

 

If you can't respond with integrity, it would be better if you didn't respond. There was nothing ignorant in my post. If you didn't mean to imply that Warren is more of a complete back than Harris, say so. You had two opportunities to do so and didn't, which tells me I read your post correctly. You can't counter any of what I wrote about Harris and how he compares to Warren, so you post this bull****.

 

Please kindly mind your own business and bless your heart.

 

Unlike some fans, the Steelers have a vision for what they want at the RB position. That vision may include next year's RB class. While the top might not be elite, it is a very good, and deep, class for RBs with some that can both run and receive. Watch out for a small school RB Ashton Jeanty for example

 

Why use a draft pick on an RB, when they already have a good starting RB?

 

and the rumor is another kid they have on the roster may blossom. We will see....we do need RB's, once Najee is gone, that is why use a draft pick.

You need a good stable of horses, ask the Ravens....

 

Truth spoken here. Anyone thinking you are 'set' with one starting RB hasn't watched the NFL in the last half decade. And in Smith's offense it is doubly true that you can never have enough.

 

Add in the prospect of 18 game schedule and we probably need 3 minimum. This is not the only reason RB salaries are falling, but it is why teams don't want to pay a lot for any 1RB.

 

The basis of the argument that I am trying to combat is; that Warren gets "fluff" yardage by being the third down back and getting to run in 3rd and long or other "passing situations". This is supposedly making his yardage much easier to gain... I went through an entire 2023 highlight for Warren that showed his top runs and listed the down, distance and yardage gained. These runs were his best, so it included all of his largest runs for the season. When I went through it, nearly all of his damage was done on first and second down. Only one was a "tricky" play (short yardage situation end around). The rest were just first and second down runs in running sets. My point is that the biggest chunks of yards he gained WEREN'T in fact due to being a 3rd down back, but done in the same manner that Najee gets his yards. This, in my opinion of course, pretty much disproves that Jaylen is getting all this fake yardage in passing sets (on passing downs) therefore boosting his stats to make him look better than he is. It just doesn't happen that way, and there isn't any evidence to prove that it does. It is almost to the point that I would need to see evidence that it DOES happen for me to take that argument/perspective seriously.

Where that argument DOES have merit is in the passing game. Most of Jaylen's passing yards are just him picking up yardage after the catch from a dump off in the flat. They didn't use him to run too many different routes, he was just a safety valve for an extremely limited QB and a lot of his bigger yardage receiving was done on 1-5 yard routes that turned into 15-20 yard gains. There IS evidence to this, and its not something that I am saying doesn't happen. It is fine to try to get someone the ball in space when it is something they excel at. Where this DOESN'T happen is in the running game. Warren's usage is as a secondary back, not a 3rd down back. He gets in for stretches of the game as if he were no different than Harris, not just for certain down/distance situations. He is the back up RB that is good enough at the game to get touches, not just the 3rd down back. He isn't Verron Haynes or Mewelde Moore, he is more in the mold of Willie Parker.

Jaylen Warren is a starting quality back, and I believe he could be a very good one. He has the game to be an every down back, and it is pretty evident by just watching the games. We don't have to shell out good money to a wildly mediocre Harris when we have someone like Warren on the roster (and I am glad that the FO chose not to). We can let Harris get paid somewhere else and ride out the next 4-5 years of Warren and pair him with a different back.

 

Yes, I did. And yes, volume is part of the reason why Harris' average is lower, but that doesn't mean its impossible to have a good YPC with volume. Tell Nick Chubb, Christian McCaffrey, or Derrick Henry that their averages have to be lower because they get a high volume of carries.... If Harris were a better back, he would gain more yards, it is that simple. Would Warren's YPC be less than 5.3 if he got the same number of carries as Harris? Probably so. Would it be as low as 4.0? Probably not. Harris is what he is. He is just fine. A perfectly normal, middle of the road, NFL starting quality back. I am not saying he sucks. He just isn't really that good either. He's just a dude. I personally think Warren could be better based on his caliber of play so far in his career. I hope we give him the opportunity.

Nobody brings up the second part because it doesn't happen. Can you prove that it does? Harris and Warren are VERY rarely on the field together and only 1 time did a play with both of them on the field end up in a Warren carry for 10+ yards (3rd and 1 end around vs Tennessee). Aside from that, you wont see any highlights from them being on the field at the same time. They were on the field together for maybe a snap or two per game? This argument is simply false.

 

They would have to pay Warren, too, and we don’t know if he can carry the heavier workload of a lead back. He hasn’t proven that he can in the NFL. I wouldn’t say his yards are fluff, but they are easier. What you are ignoring is that teams are more likely to play for the pass with him in there than they do with Harris. It is about tendencies as well as abilities.

Also, simply going through a highlight package isn’t what I would call statistically valid.

 

Yeah, but what is the cost for Warren? What are each player's skillset worth? I want a backfield where we get the most bang for our buck. In a perfect world we keep them both, but I don't want to spend 10 million plus (thanks Patriots) on a 26 year old volume runner who has shouldered 900 carries (1048 touches) the past 3 years. Jaylen is pretty much the same age, but he has less miles, is far more explosive and could be had in all likelihood for less money.

I don't care whether or not Jaylen could carry a 20+ carry workload. He needs 17-18 touches a game (13-14ish carries and a few receptions). That isn't a crazy high workload. Warren and Harris accounted for 29 touches a game between the two of them in 2023. We can find a decent player in the draft or in FA to shoulder 8-9 carries and a catch or two for pretty cheap. My argument isn't to drop Najee and just make Warren that player. I want a Warren plus (insert player) backfield instead of a Najee dominated one. It would cost us less money and be more effective imo.

I used a highlight package because it included the biggest runs of the season for Warren. I get that it isn't a perfect scenario, but it shows all of his best plays of the season. It's a pretty solid foundation when the argument against it is that he gets "easier" yards due to usage on passing downs and stuff. I also don't see the fact that teams are more likely to play for the pass when Warren is in than with Najee as a knock on Warren. He is more versatile, and keeping the defense guessing is good thing. Najee's limitations make it easier for defenses to key in on him. Why is it bad that Warren's lack of limitations in the same areas a negative and not a positive?