Najee NO 5th yr Option

[3rivers]

4 hours ago, warfelg said:

The only reason RBs got paid was the draft sucked for RBs this year. Draft is good for RBs next year so I bet we see the position devalued again. 

This year was good evidence of WR deep and OR deep means those positions got screwed in FA. 

Khan is playing the draft where it's talent is to help the roster. As a result, there shouldn't be any major reaches out of desperation that are actually fails in the making like colbert had in recent years. 

[Chieferific]

14 minutes ago, warfelg said:

One thing for me to put out there. It’s not the $7mil. It’s that it’s GTD. That’s why I keep bringing that up. I don’t like the concept of GTD fully for RBs. At all. It’s why I don’t mind not doing it, having him perform, then using the transition rage for $3mil more. And if he isn’t a fit? Oh well you aren’t committed to anything. 

I get that. It seems like I'd rather "gamble" on the front end because I'm confident he'll fit. You'd prefer to see before you invest at the price of $3m more. Two different strategies. 

[warfelg]

22 minutes ago, Chieferific said:

I get that. It seems like I'd rather "gamble" on the front end because I'm confident he'll fit. You'd prefer to see before you invest at the price of $3m more. Two different strategies. 

Yea. And I just feel I would always do that with RBs. I mean, as we keep bringing up, we have $80mm+ in cap space next year. So what’s an extra $3mm to know confidently he fits in the offense rather then gambling to save $3mm and have it not work?

I think “roster security” (not my word, I heard a podcast use it and love it) in the NFL is super overrated. We know 100% Warren is back for 2 more years because of RFA tenders so it’s not like the roster will completely overturn. Who cares about the rookie thing because we did it a few times over now. And Patterson is around for another year after this, and though he’s a KR guy on the primary side, he can also give RB snaps a good bit. 

We’ve seen Kahn completely flip or nearly completely flip 5 position groups now (QB, OL, ILB, CB, WR) from what was left for him. So I think this fan fear of “we’ll need all new RBs” is clearly something Kahn is not worried about. 

[Magnus-Viktor]

4 hours ago, warfelg said:

Ok here’s the unpopular part. Unless you are a top 2 at your position, you shouldn’t pick up a 5-the year option on RBs period. 

I'd say top 5 anyway.  Depends on that.  To me, there's McCaffrey in his own class, and then a handful of guys that are essentially the same, and then another group.  Different tiers.  So I'd say unless you're top tier, which Najee isn't, it makes sense to decline the option. 

[warfelg]

19 minutes ago, Magnus-Viktor said:

I'd say top 5 anyway.  Depends on that.  To me, there's McCaffrey in his own class, and then a handful of guys that are essentially the same, and then another group.  Different tiers.  So I'd say unless you're top tier, which Najee isn't, it makes sense to decline the option. 

I amended to top 5 in a next response. But yea. Najee isn’t what I would call a system breaker (top tier). I think Henry’s of 2/$16m with incentives. 

[Dcash4]

I am getting a little confuses on this argument, so asking for some clarification:

We are against guaranteed money for running backs. 

But we are also cool with a multi-year deal of some kind for Najee to forward the 5th year/franchise money...therefore, giving him guaranteed money. Someone can show me I am wrong, but I know of zero NFL contracts signed without guarantees.

So, it's just the date of which he gets the checks that's the problem? 

[warfelg]

1 hour ago, Dcash4 said:

 

I am getting a little confuses on this argument, so asking for some clarification:

 

The question in house with this new offense is fit. I’m fine with them not locking in fully guaranteed without them being confident. The transition tag, should he ball out, is not significantly enough more to regret waiting if it’s a fit. If they do decide to do 2 years now, I hope the total guarantees isn’t more than the 5th year plus this year. 

So it goes back to the main point of not liking guaranteed money of the full amount in a year for a RB and the added level of unsure of offensive fit. 

[Magnus-Viktor]

2 hours ago, Dcash4 said:

I am getting a little confuses on this argument, so asking for some clarification:

We are against guaranteed money for running backs. 

But we are also cool with a multi-year deal of some kind for Najee to forward the 5th year/franchise money...therefore, giving him guaranteed money. Someone can show me I am wrong, but I know of zero NFL contracts signed without guarantees.

So, it's just the date of which he gets the checks that's the problem? 

Yeah as Warfelg said, it's the fact that he's getting next year's contract ONE HUNDRED PERCENT guaranteed if they pick up the 5th year option.  He could get hurt this year, or not mesh with the new OC and the new system.  You're still on the hook next year for 7 mill if he gets hurt or doesn't fit, if you picked the option up.  We're not opposed to a RB getting SOME guaranteed money, but not 100% guaranteed.  I'm opposed to anyone getting 100% guaranteed as a rule lol.  

[jebrick]

How I see it is if he gets $8M for a year he will want/expect more the following contract.  Is he worth $8M per year?  Not even for the Steelers is he worth that.  So can you get an extension for him at $5m per year?

[warfelg]

21 minutes ago, jebrick said:

How I see it is if he gets $8M for a year he will want/expect more the following contract.  Is he worth $8M per year?  Not even for the Steelers is he worth that.  So can you get an extension for him at $5m per year?

If he wants that, it would have to be really incentive laden on carries, yards, and TD’s.  Personally if I were in position to negotiate contracts that’s the way I would work with RB contracts. I don’t mind admitting that they need to be on constant prove it deals. Heck I would be ok with vesting guarantees for the following season for hitting those metrics.

[3rivers]

46 minutes ago, jebrick said:

How I see it is if he gets $8M for a year he will want/expect more the following contract.  Is he worth $8M per year?  Not even for the Steelers is he worth that.  So can you get an extension for him at $5m per year?

He will want more

is this a sign that the new FO is removing colberts players and moving on?  who will be in line for this exit?

I expect CA3, muth, loudermilk, leal  to be next

[armsteeld]

I think Najee not getting the extension is a win-win for the team and Najee. We just overhauled and improved the OL plus we have an OC that loves to run the ball so I expect Najee's production to increase. With an increase in production, I expect Najee to get a fair market contract that he will sign for the long haul. 

[Dcash4]

15 hours ago, Magnus-Viktor said:

Yeah as Warfelg said, it's the fact that he's getting next year's contract ONE HUNDRED PERCENT guaranteed if they pick up the 5th year option.  He could get hurt this year, or not mesh with the new OC and the new system.  You're still on the hook next year for 7 mill if he gets hurt or doesn't fit, if you picked the option up.  We're not opposed to a RB getting SOME guaranteed money, but not 100% guaranteed.  I'm opposed to anyone getting 100% guaranteed as a rule lol.  

So I can understand the idea of not paying a fully guaranteed contract 1 year out if that's what you like, but it's contradicting the idea with also saying you are pro an extension. 

Let's be realistic about it. That 5th year option was right around fair market value. AAV for RBs signing this year were $12.5M/year, $12M, $8M ($15M guaranteed), $8M ($9M guaranteed), $7M ($10.5M guaranteed), $7M, $5.5M ($9.5M guaranteed), $4M (Ekeler coming off his worst year and looking toast at 29), $4M (Zack Moss whose best showing before this year was 481 yards his rookie season). Go back to last year in a weak RB class and you still had Sanders at $6.25M  ($13M-G) and Montgomery at $6M (11M-G).  We are not talking about some absurd contract (would rank 12th this year in AAV this year), which is why so many people were surprised this wasn't a slam dunk. 

$6.8M for Najee is just flat out realistic compensation. So is guaranteeing the first year on an extension (why would he do it if it wasn't?). So essentially, if you are pro-Najee extension, you are pro guaranteeing the 5th year option. The only difference is when he gets his money, up front on an extension or next year in weekly pay outs via the option. 

It's just 6 of one, half dozen of the other, IMO. The only thing you change is when he the money hits the account. 

[Magnus-Viktor]

40 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

So I can understand the idea of not paying a fully guaranteed contract 1 year out if that's what you like, but it's contradicting the idea with also saying you are pro an extension. 

Let's be realistic about it. That 5th year option was right around fair market value. AAV for RBs signing this year were $12.5M/year, $12M, $8M ($15M guaranteed), $8M ($9M guaranteed), $7M ($10.5M guaranteed), $7M, $5.5M ($9.5M guaranteed), $4M (Ekeler coming off his worst year and looking toast at 29), $4M (Zack Moss whose best showing before this year was 481 yards his rookie season). Go back to last year in a weak RB class and you still had Sanders at $6.25M  ($13M-G) and Montgomery at $6M (11M-G).  We are not talking about some absurd contract (would rank 12th this year in AAV this year), which is why so many people were surprised this wasn't a slam dunk. 

$6.8M for Najee is just flat out realistic compensation. So is guaranteeing the first year on an extension (why would he do it if it wasn't?). So essentially, if you are pro-Najee extension, you are pro guaranteeing the 5th year option. The only difference is when he gets his money, up front on an extension or next year in weekly pay outs via the option. 

It's just 6 of one, half dozen of the other, IMO. The only thing you change is when he the money hits the account. 

It's not really contradictory, with the caveat that the extension would only be partially guaranteed.  That's the entire key here.  If you're on the hook for 7 mill next year no matter what happens, that's entirely different than lets say a 3 year extension worth 5 mill per, with only 2 mil guaranteed per.  That's 6 mill guaranteed, instead of 7, and you have a guy cheaper too.  Smaller cap space taken up next season, with less risk.  (My #s are way off, just throwing something out there)

I don't disagree that Najee at 7 is unrealistic/market.  However, if you have the option to wait and see how he fits into the system, and still re-sign him for the same basic contract, why would you not do it?  Let him play 4 games or whatever (I have no clue off the top of my head when the deadline is for getting a deal done in-season), and if it is great, re-sign him.  If he doesn't fit well, or gets injured, you're done with him and hope someone else signs him big time so you get a nice comp pick.  

My personal hope?  They re-sign him to a 3 year extension in-season after he shows he can fit the new scheme and prosper.  That way we don't waste draft capital on another RB.  Najee isn't as fast as I'd prefer and why I wouldn't pay him anywhere near top dollar, but if he gets the job done, that's all that matters.

[AFF]

Signing  Harris to anything beyond the 2025 season would be incredibly dumb…just my opinion, nothing personal.

They would his rights thru his age 27 season and will be 28 going into the 2026 season…

Harris already between college and 3 seasons in the NFL has roughly 1800 touches on him…plus the presumed what 500+ touches or so in the next 2 years health permitting?

Yea I’m not doing that.