1. Hi Guest, Registrations are now open. See you on the inside.
    Dismiss Notice

Najees Market Set

Discussion in 'Steelers Talk' started by Blast Furnace, Jun 20, 2024.

  1. Formerscribe

    Formerscribe Well-Known Member

    23,245
    3,870
    Dec 18, 2016
    Or, as I suggested, Khan is sacrificing the good in pursuit of the perfect. He is so caught up in everything being a great deal that he is missing some solid moves that would help the team. Overall, he is doing a great job, but that doesn't mean he isn't making any mistakes.
     
  2. SGSteeler

    SGSteeler Well-Known Member

    6,389
    1,545
    Sep 9, 2013
    That is a fair belief. It wouldn't have been the worst move ever, but I don't blame them for wanting to move on sooner. They obviously feel like they either want to feature Warren sooner or they can get the same or better production elsewhere at a lower cost. Neither are wholeheartedly right or wrong actions imo.
     
  3. SGSteeler

    SGSteeler Well-Known Member

    6,389
    1,545
    Sep 9, 2013
    We will only be able to tell after we have seen what he does in replacement of Harris. If we draft a better player than Harris or sign someone who produces at the same rate at a reduced cost, then Khan would have made the correct move. If we can't find a suitable replacement or pick another McFarland to replace Harris, then it would have been the wrong move. Only time will tell. Hard to classify this as a mistake at this stage.
     
  4. Vox Ferrum

    Vox Ferrum Well-Known Member

    6,430
    2,308
    Apr 22, 2019
    I do not disagree, to me Najee was the one 1st round pick in recent years I would have put that option on. That said, with a new OC that highlights the running game, and perhaps wanting to secure one of the 2 productive backs they have, the wait and see approach makes some sense. It can and may bite you in the end, but I honestly do not think its about saving a couple of million over the life of a contract. The contract the Pats gave is not a back breaker, nor is it defining as pertaining the RB market. It is a benchmark against several others and is actually on the lower end of those.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. BigBensBigBong

    BigBensBigBong Well-Known Member

    5,970
    892
    Dec 14, 2014
    Mmm. Maybe we end up trading Harris for a good receiver.
     
  6. Thor

    Thor

    2,750
    1,079
    Mar 20, 2014
    You playing with words? I never would've suspected ;)
     
    • Hilarious Hilarious x 1
  7. D0bre Shunka

    D0bre Shunka Well-Known Member

    3,389
    479
    Jan 24, 2012
    This is the first move by Khan I don’t get? Why pass on the Harris Option UNLESS he’s gone in a year? A new contract or tag is gonna cost them more than the option IF they decide to keep him no matter the term length. It just seems like the mental gymnastics are causing them to over think this one.

    Jus Don’t get it?:read:
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  8. SGSteeler

    SGSteeler Well-Known Member

    6,389
    1,545
    Sep 9, 2013
    Probably more carries
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Hilarious Hilarious x 1
  9. Vox Ferrum

    Vox Ferrum Well-Known Member

    6,430
    2,308
    Apr 22, 2019
    the only thing I can think of is the option is guaranteed, the money on a long term deal can be worked out cap wise over that term. Unless you are talking the very top end of the RB spectrum the money itself should not be an issue. I think it comes down to who adapts and performs best in Smith's system. They are not going to keep both Najee and Warren.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  10. D0bre Shunka

    D0bre Shunka Well-Known Member

    3,389
    479
    Jan 24, 2012
    Yeah but that guarantee is only for a year and then you have to do a contract anyways or let him go. It comes down to is he worth 6.7 for one year and then sign him to another for whatever? Now, with the NE back resetting the market it’d cost them more even for one year.

    Fairly obvious they are going to move on from Harris in 25. I like his work ethic, power, and I thing he brought ball security back to their focus. The one two punch of Najee Warren I like and is worth it. IMO.

    KHANs already removed the Velcro name tag from the theoretical jersey.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. steelersrule6

    steelersrule6 Well-Known Member

    29,806
    7,324
    Nov 14, 2011
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  12. Steelpens65

    Steelpens65 Well-Known Member

    7,572
    1,574
    Nov 28, 2021
    I honestly think that Najee’s fate is sealed. This will be his last season as a Steeler.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  13. Steelpens65

    Steelpens65 Well-Known Member

    7,572
    1,574
    Nov 28, 2021
    1,000 yd rusher isnt such a big deal now that you play 17 games. That is 58 yds a game.
    But, hats off for Harris doing it, cause we have had absolutely no passing game.
     
  14. Formerscribe

    Formerscribe Well-Known Member

    23,245
    3,870
    Dec 18, 2016
    Only six backs had more yards than Harris this past season, so what he did wasn't all that easy.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. Thor

    Thor

    2,750
    1,079
    Mar 20, 2014
    And only three backs (Henry, Taylor, Jacobs) have had more rushing yards over the past three years.

    Harris can be fairly criticized for his lack of elite speed and questionable vision, but there's something to be said for the health, ball security, and overall productivity he brings as well.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  16. mac daddyo

    mac daddyo Well-Known Member

    28,734
    5,730
    Oct 22, 2011
    it's sure hard to gauge any of our players with the qb play and how the line didn't gel until late in the year and the offense in general that has been in place. this will be a more telling year and i think kahn wants to keep that option open. :cool:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. steelersrule6

    steelersrule6 Well-Known Member

    29,806
    7,324
    Nov 14, 2011
    You do realize Najee's numbers would be better if he didn't have to share the load with Warren, as a rookie with no Warren he ran for 1,200 yards and caught 70 passes :shrug:.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. Brice

    Brice

    6,354
    1,792
    Jul 18, 2018
    Quick, Name another back that had 1,000 yards in each of the last 3 years..... I dare you!!! Give Up? LOL.... Not such a big deal I am sure there are dozens of them you can name. :)

    The Best of the Best of the Best..... "In the end, there can be only one."

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2024
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Thor

    Thor

    2,750
    1,079
    Mar 20, 2014
    I agree to an extent. I just think Harris has shown enough under subpar OC, QB, and at times OL to justify the $7M in 2025. If he improves upon that production this year they'll be in a bidding market that will require multiple years with an APY north of that figure.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. mac daddyo

    mac daddyo Well-Known Member

    28,734
    5,730
    Oct 22, 2011
    if it's a couple of million more per year next year it won't kill them. if they paid him 7 mil. for just next year they would have to do it all over again with him a year older and let's face it, the price won't go down after next year. this will be 4 years with a ton of milage on him. then we have to pay warren too. it could be paying two backs north of 9 mil. next year. kahn seems to like to keep many on rookie deals in the system. i don't think we will be seeing many with long term contracts or expensive contracts as they age. daniels? cam possibly? DJ? fields so far? i think he is being very selective with how he builds and for the money spent. i think he has a plan and this just may be part of it. just guessing though. :cool:
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  21. Formerscribe

    Formerscribe Well-Known Member

    23,245
    3,870
    Dec 18, 2016
    The four years with a ton of mileage is why the option would have been better than waiting to see if they want to sign him to a longer-term deal later. You keep him on the option for 2025, then let him walk and some other team overpays for his inevitable decline.
     
  22. Mashburn

    Mashburn Well-Known Member

    4,158
    1,210
    Apr 30, 2021
    We didn't pay that 7 million extension. We are not paying 9 million. I feel the Steelers are looking to draft RBs until they find a top 5 that can stay healthy.
     
  23. mac daddyo

    mac daddyo Well-Known Member

    28,734
    5,730
    Oct 22, 2011
    maybe they want to see if there is a decline after 4. if so the 7 mil. saved will be a bigger bargain then the couple of million more than that 7. that is the only thing that would make sense. then they won't have to pay for him and warren. they could move on with a first contract guy for a couple of years. :cool:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  24. Vox Ferrum

    Vox Ferrum Well-Known Member

    6,430
    2,308
    Apr 22, 2019
    I think this as well. The option was a reasonable amount and doable, but they also have Warren who has immense skill as well. A new OC, an unproven but highly regarded set of highly drafted OL guys. The wait and see could cost, but the decision really comes down to who works best in this system. I do not think either guy is going to reset the high end of the RB market, the contract with bonus can be calculated to offset the (what might be minimal differences) over a longer period.
     
  25. S.T.D

    S.T.D Well-Known Member

    34,086
    8,926
    Dec 23, 2020
    Ever wonder why they didn't wear a steel collar to protect getting their heads cut off???
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page

Welcome to the ultimate resource for Steelers fans. Sign Up Here!