Two-year extension for Jaylen Warren

If you want to make an accurate comparison, use Harris and Warren last year to Warren and Gainwell this year. Even then, this year's group has a better passing game, creating more opportunities for them.

 

You can find run and pass success rates on player pages at profootball reference. You're right that I should have linked them. But not sure why you are calling them nonsense...

PFR is where I go for the vast majority of my stats. That's where I got all the individual numbers from in the post where I quote them above. Although the team stat came from here because I couldn't find a team list quickly on pfr.

I won't post all the players, but here's Warren's PFR page. The nice thing is that since success% has become pretty widely adopted, it's not even under advanced metrics. Just Rushing & Receiving (or passing for QBs like Rodgers).

My guess is that the discrepancy with broken tackles is because it's a subjective stat (unlike success% which is objective). Like somehow, pfr only has Washington with one broken tackle on the season. And he wasn't credited with a breaking a tackle in the Bengals game despite doing this...he breaks 2 tackles on that play alone.The Depot had him with 3 in the Bengals game alone. Clearly there's no set methodology for this particular stat. Unlike success rate (40% of yards remaining on 1st, 60% on 2nd, 100% on 3rd/4th).

Even tackle stats are dubious IMO. It's a while ago now, but remember when Ray Lewis was credited with tackles against us in a game where he didn't play?

I agree re: Warren. Good but not great. I think he's a really good RB2, and an OK but not great RB1. I wouldn't sign him to a deal that guaranteed money 2 years out either (which the 5th year option would have done for Najee). But his extension wasn't terrible. I think being 18th AAV in the league isn't terrible for him. Especially since there are no guaranteed beyond this year and his SB was only $6MM.

I wouldn't have given Najee the option, and I think doing so would have been a (small) mistake. But if they did I would have said "meh". I was hoping that we'd be able to give him an extension that was something like what we gave Warren. But I get why a 1st round pick wouldn't have wanted to do that. Especially since he was consistently losing snap share to Warren.

 

Our RBs will have meaningfully fewer opportunities this year because our offense is the worst in the league at running plays. I think this is more on the D than the O (shown below)

Stats from profootballreference unless otherwise linked.

Let's look at touches between the top 2 backs this year and last year.

2025

• Warren: 159 rushes. 30 rec (35 targets). That's 189 touches and 194 opportunities. On pace for 247 touches.
• Gainwell: 80 rushes. 50 rec (58 trg). 130 touches. 138 opportunities. On pace for 170 touches.
• On pace for 417 touches.

2024:

• Najee: 263 rushes. 36 rec (48 targets). 299 touches and 311 opportunities.
• Warren: 120 rushes. 38 receptions (47 targets). 158 touches and 167 opportunities.
• 457 touches.

That's almost 10% more touches this year vs. last year...about 1.6 games at this year's pace. That's a lot.

IMO, this is also the reason we're averaging 89.2 rushing yards / game this year down from 127.4 last year despite having much higher success rates for both RBs (values from pfr posted upthread). It's true that part of this is the offense. But I think a lot of it is that the D is bad at getting off the field.

Don't know if you listen to Scouts Eye...but he talks about a stat that talks about some rate stat that talks about how often you turn a 1st down into a new set of downs (or a TD).

I can't remember what they call it, so I can't look it up...but I'll use 3rd down conversion% as a proxy. My guess is that we're somewhere around average on offense (not the same thing but we're 13th in 3rd down conversion rate at 40%). Not setting the world on fire, but an average offense from this team is a godsend after the last few seasons. And I bet we're below average on defense (again...not the same thing but defense is 28th in 3rd down conversion rate at 43.16%).

Again...I think our biggest problem is that the D sucks at getting off the field. At least they're good at turning the ball over. Hopefully we get that tonight.

 

The only way using the option on Harris would have been a mistake is if the injury still happened, but despite some false claims here, we don't know that. Funny thing is that I was the one to bring up concerns over wear and tear as a reason the Steelers might have let him leave, but that was dismissed until someone thought they could use the Achilles injury to bolster their argument. lol

That is my problem with some of those stats, that they are subjective. In the statistics that aren't objective, Warren isn't even a top-15 back.

 

They got plenty of plays tonight. Warren ran 12 times for 33 yards. (Yeah, I know he had one called back. Y'all going to tell me Harris never had a big run called back?)

 

By the way, with tonight's game, Warren is down to 4.0 yards per carry. I thought he played well given the circumstances, but there were also times they could have used a bigger back and they don't have one.

 

Not sure if you're talking about me here, but clearly this was a big reason they didn't do the option. I wasn't on this board at the time, but I was saying this in real time. There are very, very few RBs in today's NFL that go 5 seasons without a serious injury.

And options are guaranteed now and they happen at the end of year 3. So they are guaranteeing money for 2 years in the future. Before the most recent offseason (DK), the Steelers only did this with Ben, TJ, and Minkah. Arguably the GOAT QB for the franchise (I'd say he is anyway), and two guys who were all pros for the team. This proposition is always risky in football. It's especially risky for RBs. And even in that group, it's especially risky for a guy with as many touches as we gave to Najee. Tomlin has loved running backs into the ground since Willie Parker. Although getting Warren as a UDFA changed that (for the better IMO).

And since guarantees were put on the option, we've only ever exercised it for guys who were 1st team all-pros during their rookie deals (TJ and Minkah). We haven't yet had the opportunity to see if the team will do this for someone who makes a probowl (for real, not as an injury replacement). Najee got the playing time level. Same as Edmunds. And he's basically the Edmunds of RBs IMO (although a better verson). Pretty good, but not great (better than Edmunds comparatively IMO). Doesn't make the big impact plays. Insanely durable for us.

So I think it would have been a (small) mistake because of the extra injury risk. But also because it would shatter the precedent the team has set with options. But even with that, I think it was basically a coin flip. And since the team seems to have valued Warren and Najee pretty similarly, they opted for the guy who didn't require the guarantees. And my guess is they would have had to sign Najee for more for him to stay with the team.

When he went to the Chargers, I thought it was a pretty good fit for him. They have an above average QB, so Najee would be allowed to be a good all around guy who wasn't great at anything. And they wouldn't have to build the offense all around him. Then they drafted Hampton, who pushed him down the depth chart. Then he got hurt.

re: those stats. I think you're right about broken tackles. But success rate is an objective stat. And I think it's a much better stat than YPC because it tells you more about what you want to know. Especially for a guy like Najee with a poor YPC. Because YPC is really just a proxy for "does the RB get big plays"...and in ~1000 carries Najee has never matched Jerome Bettis' long from his final year when the entire league was making fun of him for only rushing a yard or two at a time.

 

Gainwell has outplayed Warren plain and simple. There were 2 plays last night where Warren had a chance to pop something and he couldn’t break a tackle in space.

 

No, YPC is not just about big plays. It is about avoiding negative plays. It is about consistency. Maybe it is skewed by big plays in a single game, but over a season? Not so much.

The success rate is subjective in what they consider success. Total yards and yards per carry measure things that are purely objective.

No, that wasn't about you, who changed your tune about wear and tear. That was Blast.

 

The funny thing about Warren is lI love what he did last night. I think his knee is still bothering him. I know he was sick enough that they put him on the injury report very late. He gutted it out and helped the Steelers win. IF that one big run hadn't been called back, his numbers would have looked a lot better. I respected the hell out of what he gave them under those circumstances.

That said, he is slowed by a nagging injury. His season YPC did drop for the fourth consecutive game. The trends continue to support everything I've been saying about him.

 

Gainwell is better that Harris in our offense and he don't cost 7 millions,so Khan was right on that

 

If it was my post then it was broken tackle %, ie, #brktackles/attempts.

PFR lists the stat as attempts/brkntackle. This means many broken tackles on fewer attempts is a lower number. If a player has 100 attempts with 1 broken tackle that's 100. This is an odd way to show it.

Are you saying Harris' 12.1 from last year is better than Warren's 10.1 from this year?

If you want advanced stats look here. They've been in it for many years. Broken tackles are subjective and will vary slightly depending on source.

https://www.sportsinfosolutions.com/research-analysis/

 

Have to go PFF mode to feel good about Warren this year.

 

This is not about Warren vs Harris since Warren would been with the steelers no matter what in 2025...This is about Harris vs Gainwell and Gainwell is a big upgrade vs Harris in this offense,so Khan was right on that.Sometimes you need to take the L and move on from that

 

It needs to be on order to not be wrong about Warren this far.

Let’s face reality here folks. Warren hasn’t played up to expectations given how fans talked about his explosiveness compared to Najee. That dang ypc isn’t helping either.

 

haha.. Aaron Rodgers facial expression last night doesn’t agree with this reach.

 

Don't have the distributions to prove it, but you're almost certainly wrong about YPC in the vast majority of cases. Most backs are going to have a similar mode and median for run plays over a season. It's how frequently they have the "long tail" big runs that skew the average. This is exactly the same reason that countries report median income. Because the monsters at the end of the distribution skew the mean so much that it's not super meaningful. This is the reason that Najee's YPC was always poor relative to other starting backs even though he had OK success rates. Because he's had something like a handful of runs > 30 yards in 1112 carries. And he's never had a 38+ yard run or reception in the NFL.

This is the reason that people developed success rate. They wanted a stat that gave them a better idea of what you're saying YPC does. Since success rate is a "yes/no" decision on every carry, it's not skewed skewed by the outlier carries that drive high YPCs. It's literally how consistently do you get a good result. When you put together the two stats and compare backs (over medium to large samples), you get an idea of how consistent a back is and how likely they are to deliver bigger runs.

Plus it doesn't penalize a player for getting 2 yards on 3rd and 1. This last part was a common refrain from pro-Najee guys on the last board I was on. That he had a low YPC because he got short yardage duties. And there's even some truth in that. Success rate solves this problem with YPC too.

The issue before (which you alluded to up thread) was that succ% used to be hard to find because it wasn't on the main stats sites. But I think it's been on pfr for at least 3 seasons now.

I don't know why you think success rate is subjective. It's an objective sat. As I stated upthread, a play is considered successful if you get 40% of the required yards on 1st down. 60% on 2nd. 100% on 3rd or 4th.

The great thing about it being objective is that sites like PFR can crawl back in time to get older success rates. Because it's completely objective and not subjective.

This is why we know that Jerome Bettis had a succ% of 57.5 as a rookie with the Rams in 1993 even though no one had though of succ% in 1993. All they need is a copy of the play by play and a bot that tells them the player, the down and distance, and the result.

 

Yep.

Just like Najee's 2nd season was respectable even though the numbers was bad. He was a warrior for playing through the foot injury.

 

yards after catch? yes

yards after contact? Not this year imo.

and I think the frustration was about Warren not getting a chunk on that play. Just because announcers say it was something else doesn’t mean make it true. That would’ve been a huge gain if he breaks that tackle or makes him miss.

 

that’s funny since you always used ypc as evidence of decline in previous convos.

 

That would require him admitting he was wrong

And well you know the rest of the story