I think it's less a matter of more or less progressive and more about competence and beholdenness to big financial interests, which has influenced many of the strategic moves both have made (particularly Schumer). I think a lot of members of congress view the midterm wins as being more in spite of than because of Schumer/Jeffries. Great example, would be Florida. They left Nixon out to dry and she nearly won with no money.
As getting money out of politics becomes a more and more salient bipartisan issue, leaders like Schumer and Jeffries, who are in their positions solely because of their ability to raise big money from corporate interests, don't make a ton of electoral sense anymore. Nancy Pelosi literally got her seat (and eventual leadership) because she hosted the best fundraisers in San Francisco. That model is dying out.