[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

8 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Interesting stuff from George beemer. He said the $16 million was never demanded by Taylor’s deal. It was around the $12 million. He said if what he heard colts were willing to offer he understands why Taylor was not happy. I know Irsay said they never offered but sure sounds like Colts might of tried to low ball him.

Destin Adams is saying Taylor is looking for a contract over 13M a year. So one of them doesn't have a good source... 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

47 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

How often does a second round pick last 8 years? Statistically speaking, expecting that kind of return from a second rounder is pretty naive. I don't think teams even expect to get 8 years from first rounders. Yeah, you hope you hit on a guy and he plays out two contracts, but statistically speaking, it doesn't happen.

 

So if I can get a player who can be an immediate starter/producer, which is typical of RBs, and then get four years of production on a rookie contract ($2-3m/year), that's a win. And if he wants a record setting contract and the team thinks that's not a good decision, then you can trade him for more draft resources, or get a comp pick. You might also decide to sign him to a second contract, and then you're potentially getting closer to the 8 years you want.

 

I'm not lining up to spend a second rounder on a RB every year, but I'm not opposed to spending that pick on a RB, getting his prime production, and moving on. If teams are still shying away from using first rounders on RBs, then the second round is probably where the value is maximized.

I've been thinking about formulating my philosophy on whether you should be drafting players of low-value positions early in the draft, especially if you know that you won't be extending them if they hit... and even more - the better they hit the less likely it will be that you will extend them(because they will want top of the market money?

 

In general for me the draft is one of the ways to obtain premier talent, and quite possibly the best way... And it's also the best way, BAR NONE to get value over the salary market, simply because the rookie contracts are capped, thus you might have top of the market talent for bottom of the market pay. And if you have a lot of those, this leaves you with a lot of capspace to go out and address needs in FA or in trade. 

 

Now the question is... what happens when the rookie contract is over? Well... for contract purposes this player becomes the same as any other player in the league. Whether you pay Jonathan Taylor 15M or Chubb 15M, there is no major difference(if you consider their talents similar). So... at first sight, you shouldn't have a problem to be letting low-value position players go, when you can have similar level talent for the same price from elsewhere... There is no added benefit to keeping your own(strictly non-rookie contract-wise). 

 

So is there any further benefit to our own rookie contracts once they expire? Well, besides the institutional knowledge and PR of "keeping our own"... one of the biggest benefits is that you can actually franchise tag your own player and you have the inside track on keeping them if you want to keep them. For valuable position this is actually valuable aspect of having that as an own contract. But for a position you know in advance you won't want to keep, especially if they hit big(i.e. they require top of the market money), this is moot point. Here the consideration becomes the draft pick you can get in return(in a trade or compensatory picks).

 

I think at the end it boils down to the following question - Is that draft pick more valuable than the extra years you get from hitting on a valuable position at market value? 

 

By some studies most positions bust and hit at about the same rates in similar ranges of the draft, so this scenario will be happening with similar frequency for both cases(hit at valuable position vs hit at non-valuable position)... so this is really the question... 

 

I guess my answer would have to be considered on case by case basis and be influenced by where you are in your competitive cycle as a team. 

 

I still feel like you should be spending premier resources on premier position in general, with the allowance of some outliers, mainly because of opportunity cost. Because yes, Jonathan Taylor on rookie deal is really nice. But Jalen Hurts or Trevon Diggs or Deebo Samuel or AJ Brown on rookie contracts is much better. 

 

 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

15 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

I don’t get any of this feeling sorry for JT stuff and being vague about something going wrong with his ankle because of the colts. Keep your mouth shut unless your going to come out and say what the issue is.

 

 

I'm sorry but NO! He can play the game right now. If he wants to! Or if he's healthy. And he can play it for literally millions! If he's not healthy, my sympathies for him and wish him quick recovery, but then the team's actions are even more understandable.

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

58 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

This tweet is 100% correct. There seems to be a lot of JT isn’t faking a injury with no explanation and why would a team would trade for him if he is still injured.

 

 

THIS is the real question Colts media and reporters for some unknown reason don't want to touch. THIS should be the second biggest story in this whole ordeal after the Taylor asking for a trade bit... This should be the immediate second question every Colts reporter asks when presented with the opportunity to talk to anyone from the Colts or Taylor's camp. 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

Just now, w87r said:

3 reasons:

 

1. It cost something to get something

2. Hunt is FA next year, and with their cap situation, I don't see him being part of the future.

3. 2 other young guards behind him

 

 

Anyway, that doesn't mean they will, but those are valid reasons to why they might if pressed to.

Yes, it does cost something and that something will be picks IMO. It just doesn't make sense to me for them to have an established OL and open up a hole in it to get Taylor when they are a contender. Hunt is more valuable for them than for us IMO.

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

I keep seeing Robert Hunt being included in hypothetical trade scenarios with Miami. Why would Miami do this? Why would they be including starters as a contending team. They would be doing this trade because they think they have a relatively complete team and want to go for it right away. They wouldn't just open a bigger hole on their roster to get Taylor. If the Dolphins trade for Taylor IMO the value will be picks plus maybe one of their RBs...

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

Just now, hoosierhawk said:

Cards. Those will be high picks.

I was thinking the same. But same applies to Bears and Panthers likely. 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

Yup, and I meant to say that also. I don't know if there would be any proof, but it's worth it to do an investigation.

Yeah, I've been very suspicious from the very beginning. When the agent started liking those tweets. It was really weird. To me he either knew something or this was a really stupid thing to do... hell, even if he knew something it still is a stupid thing to do... but what can we say? Nothing out of the ordinary for an agent who was once fired on live TV and who's being sued by ex-clients for trying to swindle them in business deals. 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

Just now, Jackie Daytona said:

Yeah, but aside from the glaringly obvious and cliche "under the table kickback" scenario.....why would an agent, yes, even this skidmark wannabe, force a client to a team simply because they live in the area?

 

 

Start giving Taylor some agency. He's not a mere witness to this whole ordeal. At some point he has to own what his agent is doing on his behalf. It's very likely he wants the same thing... 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

3 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

Is my memory failing me?  Or did JT's agent float the "Miami" word a couple/few weeks ago when this all started?

Starting to smell like a tampering situation.

Yes, he did. He was liking like... a dozen tweets suggesting the Colts should trade him to Miami. The interesting thing was... he was liking ONLY Miami tweets and none of the other fanbases' desires for their team to trade for Taylor. 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

6 minutes ago, Superman said:

The more it seems like Taylor and his agent are steering toward Miami, the more inclined I would be to shut this all down, tell Taylor 'no trade, play here or don't play,' be prepared to put him on IR, and still be prepared to tag him in 2024.

And ask the league to do an investigation. Seize their communication and lets see if they can find something weird. Because there has definitely been something weird from the moment his agent started this %storm and started liking tweets about the Colts trading him to Miami before the trade request even being public. 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Nope, different from an injury settlement. An injury split is negotiated into a lot of contracts, and the result is that when a player goes on IR, his pay for that season gets reduced. I'm not sure whether Taylor has an injury split in his contract, though.

Oh, that makes more sense. His contract is a rookie deal so whatever is in his contract is likely standard for rookie deals. 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

6 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Start with PUP, and make it clear that if he's not ready to go in four weeks, we're considering IR. And that would come with an injury split, so his $4.3m goes down to something like $1m.

How does that work? Do you mean injury settlement and getting him cut? Because that's very likely one of his better options - yes, he will lose 3M in pay but he will be able to go wherever he wants and get paid by that team. Hell, he very likely will get more than those 3M for this year alone. 

 

I don't think this is good outcome at all. 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

1 minute ago, JColts72 said:

Holder says 6 teams inquired about JT and two mafe offers. Care to guess? Dolphins and Bears perhaps.

- Dolphins

- Chiefs

- Eagles

- Panthers(Frank would love to get his favorite RB so Bryce can hand him the ball on every 1st and 2nd down)

- Broncos

- Patriots?

 

 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

51 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

To serve what purpose, though? Unless Richardson is outstanding this season, I think we're a 6-7 win team at best, even with Taylor. Maybe we have a higher ceiling in 2024, but we also have ways of replacing Taylor's production next offseason.

 

I think, from a resource management standpoint, trading him now is an acceptable move. I'd be fine with tagging him next year, but we're seeing a preview of how that would go right now; I have little doubt that he'd decline to sign the tender, not report for camp, and then who knows what we get during the season. If we could get a 2nd rounder and change (maybe a player?) for him now, that's a good recoup. It also gives us some additional ammo as we go into what should be a pivotal offseason in 2024.

 

And that's setting aside questions of whether he's healthy or not.

 

 

Okay, prove it.

The league will have to do an investigation and prove it. It's not like they haven't been able to in the past. Hell, the Dolphins were one of the teams with high picks taken away for tampering.

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

59 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

The two teams that made offers probably didn’t meet colts standard of a deal would be done.

Tampering 

I sure hope the Colts will be inquiring the league conduct investigation once this thing is over. Hell, use the threat of it to get the 1st you want.

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

33 minutes ago, azcolt said:

If you don’t think he is isolating himself from the team even when he is present, that’s your opinion. I think he is and he is using the hoodie to help with the isolation. He might as well pitch a tent and sit in it during practice.

 

BTW, the hoodie at the Eagles practice read “I am stronger than my darkest." What a teammate.

For the record the hoodie is team gear and is part of the Colts' mental health awareness campaign "Kicking the stigma". A lot of players and coaches are wearing things with that slogan at or around Colts facility and practices... 

 

Example... here's Steichen and Eberflus with the same shirts last week:

 

Here's Richardson and Fields with the same ones:

 

Here's a video about it with more Colts players wearing the same slogan:

 

 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

 

 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

13 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I'm not exactly sure but if the Chargers offered Ekeler a contract without his teams permission I think it's called tampering.  ??

The Chargers were Ekeler's team. They can offer contract/extension any time they want. 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

5 hours ago, Zoltan said:

I still believe there’s a 90% chance Taylor resigns with us. Taylor and the team were very far apart on compensation, so they are allowing him to see what he can get elsewhere. The Chargers did the exact same thing with Ekeler. 

The difference is... the Chargers had actually offered him a contract before he requested a trade. The Colts to my knowledge still haven't made him an offer. 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

22 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

 

This is a great thread by Zach that summarizes the situation much better than you would ever hear from any of the national media talking heads, who have decided that "Irsay bad" is the best they can do with this one or with anything negative happening around the Colts. 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

 

[Jonathan Taylor comments on his contract/Request trade (Merge)]

Just now, Matabix said:

Let's say we don't trade JT, he plays out his contract and doesn't resign. Would we receive a compensatory pick for him. What would it be?

Still not sure how compensatory picks work.

We will unless we sign another free agent of similar value. If he gets the 16M he wants it would most probably be a 3d round comp pick. Or 4th... depending on the market. The last 3d rounder last year was for Mike McGlinchey who signed for 17.5M a year. The first 4th round compensatory pick was Zach Allen for 15.25M a year... so ... he would be at about the border between 3d and 4th... IF he gets what he seems to want.