Would You Draft a Running Back in Round 1?

LOL. I love the irony seeing this from you given how you have lectured me about the way I interact with other posters on this board. Do you somehow think what you did is productive or respectful? It is even better given that you are incorrect. The numbers on first and second down exist. I don't remember who posted them previously so I don't have them to re-post. Questioning that would have been the fair response, but you went for the cheap laugh with a rude, inaccurate post instead. Referencing something that was posted that I can't find is not the same as assuming things that haven't happened yet. We don't know what tender the Steelers will place on Warren or if they will sign him to a longer-term deal.

I hope you see the the lack of hypocrisy in my posts and the existence of it in yours. Thank you and have a wonderful day.

 

DL and WR are bigger need

3rd maybe if someone talented dropped

 

Either one of the Ohio St. running backs in the third round would be a poem

 

So can a tackling dummy, what does that mean? I don't think, and obviously the Steelers agree, that his production/ability is unsatisfactory. They either believe that his ability limits what they want their lead back to be, or able to do. Or, that his asking price isn't congruent with his production. Or both of those things. You're argument is what? That they're wrong about his ability? Wrong about their offensive philosophy?

You continue to argue your point as if this is an either or situation. As if not signing Harris for big money means they have chosen Warren over Harris, despite the fact that their previous actions would sugest that they favor Harris. And maybe they did, but whether or not he's more durable than Warren, or fumbles less, or Warren's carries were given to Patterson, has nothing to do with this situation. We're talking about right now, moving forward. It's not as if they've signed Warren to the big contract that Harris would've wanted. They haven't. We have no idea what their long term plans for Warren are, other than he'll almost certainly be back next year because of his status. Maybe they have no intentions to give big money to Warren either.

Personally, I don't know why you're so hell bent on giving a big contract to a mid RB. There are rookie RB's every year that meet or exceed his production. Some of them even offer options in the passing game, and even the occasional big play. Some RB's are actually able to run more than 30 yards without getting rundown by a nose tackle.

 

Or they want to be cheap about running backs. Or they don't want to go past four or five years with a back because they usually don't last long.

My comment was part of a comparison of Harris and Warren. Durability is one of Harris's big advantages over Warren. Did you not notice that it was bad for the team when Warren was out or limited last season? Durability is a big part of any NFL player's value and Harris has never missed a game. Warren has not been durable and he has not shown that he can carry the ball even 10 times per game. The most he ever handled in a season was 8.8 carries per game. He has reached 15 carries in an NFL game once.

Please find the post of mine in which I suggested re-signing Harris now or giving him an extension in the past. I'll give you a hint. It doesn't exist. In fact, I have always argued the opposite, that they should not sign him past 2025. What I argued was that they should have kept him on the fifth-year option, then cut him loose. It would help if you understood the argument before jumping in next time. If you don't know, ask for clarification.

Also, tackling dummies can't carry the ball once, much less the 15-to-20 carries a lead back gets.

 

No, no. Thats what an option is. A fifth year option is an extension that the player can't refuse. That's why it's a club option, but the club has to compensate that player to a much higher salary based on many factors. So, advocating for a club to exercise their club option is asking for that team to forcibly extend a player to an un-negotiated one year deal.

 

The option would have been less than $7 million. That is not signing him to a big deal. Teams use the fifth-year option all the time. It isn't something unusual.

 

Well, it would be triple what he's currently making. However, like @Blast Furnace said, they have plenty of caproom to extend him, and didn't. Being that they could easily afford him leads me to belive that he's gone for either personal, or schematic reasons. Or, maybe it is money, but that makes less sense.

 

No, it doesn't. They think they can get by with cheaper options. They were always going to keep Warren, though perhaps still in his current role, but they are going to have to add another back. That could be a cheap free agent or a draft pick. This is a deep class for running backs. Keeping Warren by tendering him for less money than Harris would have cost and adding a rookie with a pick on day two or three would be cheaper.

 

In the first and second round they should address WR and DL, this draft is deep at RB they could find one in the 3rd or 4th rd.

 

So you put yourself in the role of the lazy person with no interest in understanding the situation.

 

I was throwing your own rhetoric back at you.

Saying things aren't worth addressing is usually an excuse for not being able to address them.

Where did you get that number from Warren? I've been trying to find that. I think the number someone posted was more specific than that, but it's still useful. I may be wrong about that one thing, but you are wrong about the rest.

Harris has proven his durability. Warren has proven that durability is a question mark for him. Smaller guys who run that hard can be prone to injury as time goes on. Your posts imply that you don't think durability matters in an NFL running back. Is that right?

Harris protects the ball extremely well. Warren has fumbled more in far fewer carries. You don't think ball security matters. Right?

Then there is the simplest evidence that the Steelers favored Harris over Warren the last three years. Harris started every game and consistently got more carries. You don't think that matters. Right?

By the way, of course those things matter. I am certain you know they matter. Just because they don't fit your argument doesn't mean they aren't worth addressing.

 

Nice try. And given your past behavior you're the last person on this board that should be harping about respectful discourse. Get over it or find somewhere else to share your "respectful" tone.

A split metric of "running situations" on first and second downs doesn't exist - not that I've ever seen anyway, and given the other specifics you presented I don't think you have either. If you have it, fine. Post it. Otherwise, naming it as a source whose numbers side with your argument would be "citing facts not yet in evidence to prop up your argument."

 

Are you now arguing on my behalf now? I'm done. Have fun dude.

 

Please try to keep better track of the argument next time. Thanks.

 

It wasn't a try at all. Given your history of lecturing others about being respectful, it was hypocritical for you to do otherwise.

Citing a number I saw somewhere that I can't post is not the same thing as assuming things that haven't happened yet, especially because I'm acknowledging that I don't have it while Blast is not acknowledging that the Steelers haven't done anything with Warren yet.

 

I'm not ignoring anything. I'm reminding you of the other factors you are ignoring with your take on that detail. Also, haven't they stated that they have interest in bringing Harris back, too? The difference is that they can't tender him and he is likely to get more than $7 million somewhere and Warren won't. If they were both willing to take the same contract, then it would be an apples-to-apples comparison.

Teams like players better but move on from them all the time for financial reasons. You know this.

Did the Steelers want to move on from Joey Porter after the 2006 season or were they saving money? I notice you stepped away from that point of yours once I reminded you that the Steelers spent their first two draft picks that offseason on outside linebackers. I also reminded you that Harrison already started seven games in the NFL, so he had proven a lot more by then than Warren has now.

AI is not a valid source. One of the biggest problems with using AI is that it makes factual errors. Your data may be right, but that source is not valid.

 

Doesn't the majority of the people on this board feel that Warren
Is their number 1 back? I believe 4th round or later should be
Good for the RB position.We found Warren as an UDFA.

 

Just because they found a good player as an UDFA doesn't mean they can count on similar events happening again. I think that was part of the problem with the offensive line. They got lucky with guys like Villanueva and Foster and assumed they could rebuild the line the same way.

 

I guess what I was trying to say, many people on this board consider Warren way above Najee, I am not one of them.
If/When Najee leaves we will need another RB to compliment Warren our number 1 back.

 

No where on the offensive side does this team have a #1 anything.

Yeah, by default on paper. Some one has to be listed first. SO WHAT!?!

 

Kicker

 

Don't make me go all scribble on ya.
You know dang well that's actually Special Teams