One reaction to the TRich trade that I simply don't understand.

[Insert Colts Pun Here]

There's been a fair amount of negative reaction to the Trent Richardson trade, some of which I can understand. A 1st round pick is a pretty steep price, he's had his injury problems, it could even be argued that he under-achieved his rookie year.

 

However, some have been saying that this trade signifies that the Colts are sacrificing their future in an attempt to win now. This kid is 22 years old and only in his second year. He could potentially be here for another 8-10 years. 

[YOUR GM]

There's been a fair amount of negative reaction to the Trent Richardson trade, some of which I can understand. A 1st round pick is a pretty steep price, he's had his injury problems, it could even be argued that he under-achieved his rookie year.

 

However, some have been saying that this trade signifies that the Colts are sacrificing their future in an attempt to win now. This kid is 22 years old and only in his second year. He could potentially be here for another 8-10 years. 

 

I think the biggest problem with the trade is that it doesn't address any of our weaknesses. It was a luxury move, and an overpriced one, at that

[jvan1973]

I think the biggest problem with the trade is that it doesn't address any of our weaknesses. It was a luxury move, and an overpriced one, at that

why not let things play out before saying it was overpriced. Its impossible to know at this point

[NewEra]

I think the biggest problem with the trade is that it doesn't address any of our weaknesses. It was a luxury move, and an overpriced one, at that

So what happens when/if Bradshaw would have gotten hurt? That would of left us with Brown. No thx. I feel much better with Trent/Bradshaw and next year Trent/Vick as our starters

[YOUR GM]

why not let things play out before saying it was overpriced. Its impossible to know at this point

I mean overpriced in the sense that the running back position is not one that can command a 1st round pick all that often (unless it's a once in a generation type player) I just don't see anything in Richardson that makes him head and shoulders above anyone else. I would've loved this trade if it was for Peterson or Lesean McCoy.... but Trent "3 ypc" Richardson?......

[Insert Colts Pun Here]

I think the biggest problem with the trade is that it doesn't address any of our weaknesses. It was a luxury move, and an overpriced one, at that

 

That's a valid argument. I'd disagree to a certain extent but it certainly has some merit.

 

Just saying in my OP that most of the arguments against the trade are, at the very least, somewhat valid. But saying that we have sacrificed our future in an attempt to win now is just baseless when we have signed a 22 year old, 2nd year player.

[cmgww]

Yeah I don't get the injury thing either. He missed ONE GAME last year. Naysayers are pointing to the two knee surgeries in college, but a lot of players have had knee surgeries and been fine. And the price? Well, we're getting a 1st rounder a year early essentially (a top 3 first rounder), and we're paying on the rookie wage scale at that, which is peanuts now compared to 3-4 years ago

[YOUR GM]

So what happens when/if Bradshaw would have gotten hurt? That would of left us with Brown. No thx. I feel much better with Trent/Bradshaw and next year Trent/Vick as our starters

 

Who cares? It's a running back. Plug and play, next man up. Our offense should be centered around it's franchsie player anyways. If we're depending on Bradshaw or Ballard to carry the bulk of the offense, something else is seriously wrong. 

[jvan1973]

I mean overpriced in the sense that the running back position is not one that can command a 1st round pick all that often (unless it's a once in a generation type player) I just don't see anything in Richardson that makes him head and shoulders above anyone else. I would've loved this trade if it was for Peterson or Lesean McCoy.... but Trent "3 ypc" Richardson?......

3.6 ypc with zero threat of the qb killing you if you load the box. Lets see what he can do when he isn't the only playmaker on offense

[cmgww]

So what happens when/if Bradshaw would have gotten hurt? That would of left us with Brown. No thx. I feel much better with Trent/Bradshaw and next year Trent/Vick as our starters

Exactly. And did anyone see his receiving stats from last year? Pretty solid for an RB. With Ballard and Allen going down, we missed both a strong runner (in Ballard) and a good blocker and receiver (in Allen). Richardson can address both, more the running side of things, but don't forget his blocking/receiving abilities.

[YOUR GM]

3.6 ypc with zero threat of the qb killing you if you load the box. Lets see what he can do when he isn't the only playmaker on offense

 

I don't buy that argument. Adrian Peterson rushed for over 2,000 yards with Christian Ponder as his QB, and accounting for more than half of the team's offense. If Trent is a rare talent , he should at least be able to crack the 4 ypc mark with Joe Thomas and Alex Mack opening running lanes for him. Now he has Costanzo and McGlynn   

[cmgww]

Who cares? It's a running back. Plug and play, next man up. Our offense should be centered around it's franchsie player anyways. If we're depending on Bradshaw or Ballard to carry the bulk of the offense, something else is seriously wrong. 

I care. Ask Manning how his seasons went later in the Colts years without a strong running game? One and dones. The only outlier was in 2009, when he carried a 32nd ranked rushing attack to the SB....and lost. Several "one and done" playoff games were due in part to the lack of a strong running game/back. Remember 3rd and 2 in SD in 2008?? We passed, and Peyton got sacked bc someone (can't remember who) missed his block. With a power running game, that doesn't happen.

Plug and play?? Um, well we plugged Brown in last week and he whiffed and we lost. Obvious troll is trolling

[jvan1973]

I don't buy that argument. Adrian Peterson rushed for over 2,000 yards with Christian Ponder as his QB, and accounting for more than half of the team's offense. If Trent is a rare talent , he should at least be able to crack the 4 ypc mark with Joe Thomas and Alex Mack opening running lanes for him. Now he has Costanzo and McGlynn

i don't recall anyone saying he was Adrian Peterson. He was a rookie last year. Nobody knows for sure what he will become. Richardson is also a threat to catch the ball out of the backfield.

[YOUR GM]

I care. Ask Manning how his seasons went later in the Colts years without a strong running game? One and dones. The only outlier was in 2009, when he carried a 32nd ranked rushing attack to the SB....and lost. Several "one and done" playoff games were due in part to the lack of a strong running game/back. Remember 3rd and 2 in SD in 2008?? We passed, and Peyton got sacked bc someone (can't remember who) missed his block. With a power running game, that doesn't happen.

Plug and play?? Um, well we plugged Brown in last week and he whiffed and we lost. Obvious troll is trolling

 

We had a strong run game for as long as we had a strong offensive line. It's not a coincidence that Joseph Addai went from looking like "Edge 2.0" in his rookie season, to out of the league all together in 5 years. Championships are won in the trenches. You would think a former offensive linemen would grasp that concept more than anyone else. My mistake

[cmgww]

I don't buy that argument. Adrian Peterson rushed for over 2,000 yards with Christian Ponder as his QB, and accounting for more than half of the team's offense. If Trent is a rare talent , he should at least be able to crack the 4 ypc mark with Joe Thomas and Alex Mack opening running lanes for him. Now he has Costanzo and McGlynn   

Your argument just collapsed on itself when you mentioned CHRISTIAN PONDER!! We have Luck, and there is no way Richardson will account for more than half of the Colts offense. The whole reason he was brought in was to take some pressure off Luck by having a legit RB in the backfield. And last I checked, we were running the ball pretty well.

[YOUR GM]

i don't recall anyone saying he was Adrian Peterson. He was a rookie last year. Nobody knows for sure what he will become. Richardson is also a threat to catch the ball out of the backfield.

 

I didn't even say he was Adrian Peterson. I'm just saying if he's as talented as he's being touted, he should be able to create plays on his own, like any rare talent does. Not carry a 3.6 ypc average.  By giving up a first round pick, Grigson is saying he is a rare talent

[YOUR GM]

Your argument just collapsed on itself when you mentioned CHRISTIAN PONDER!! We have Luck, and there is no way Richardson will account for more than half of the Colts offense. The whole reason he was brought in was to take some pressure off Luck by having a legit RB in the backfield. And last I checked, we were running the ball pretty well.

 

Actually my argument went over your head. Ponder being a bad QB was precisely my point. Go back and read the post I was responding to first

[NewEra]

Who cares? It's a running back. Plug and play, next man up. Our offense should be centered around it's franchsie player anyways. If we're depending on Bradshaw or Ballard to carry the bulk of the offense, something else is seriously wrong.

Doesn't work that easy. If that were the case how about when we lost Edge and then Addai. Production dropped big time.

[YOUR GM]

Doesn't work that easy. If that were the case how about when we lost Edge and then Addai. Production dropped big time.

 

Like I said, that was due more to the deterioration of the o-line than anything. Addai's play dropped considerably 

[IndyD4U]

3.6 ypc with zero threat of the qb killing you if you load the box. Lets see what he can do when he isn't the only playmaker on offense

 

Agree 110%

 

He won't be facing 8-9 in the box with Luck as QB. Plus having a fb will help tremedously!

[Warhawk]

I do think one problem is that some people seem to be applying the usual criticism of trades, that you shouldn't be trading a draft pick for a guy who's, like, 30, to this situation.  Anyone saying that the Colts are losing the opportunity to acquire a young player with that draft pick are completely oblivious to the fact that they just acquired a young player with that draft pick.

 

And, hey, people are welcome to criticize the decision to acquire Richardson specifically, I would argue against them but that's my opinion, it's just that people arguing against making any trade of this sort based on some kind of overarching philosophical code are being asinine.

[Valpo2004]

That's a valid argument. I'd disagree to a certain extent but it certainly has some merit.

 

Just saying in my OP that most of the arguments against the trade are, at the very least, somewhat valid. But saying that we have sacrificed our future in an attempt to win now is just baseless when we have signed a 22 year old, 2nd year player.

 

I would agree with you on the sacrificing the future part.  However I certainly agree that this was somewhat of a Luxury move (we could have used a better RB, but we didn't need Richardson's caliber) and that it was overpriced.  I maintain that unless you are getting an Adrian Peterson type of talent, an RB isn't worth a first rounder.  

 

You have to remember that teams are grabbing RB's who can play at the NFL level, do decent jobs as far as blocking, pass catching, and running in the 4th and later rounds.  When you can get a decent starter in the late rounds of the draft, why would you want to spend a first rounder on one?  

 

Because most other positions on the field you don't find decent starters after the 3rd round unless you hit on a gem.  

 

There are some positions such as QB, and OT that you don't typically find decent starters after the first round unless you hit on a gem. 

[Valpo2004]

I do think one problem is that some people seem to be applying the usual criticism of trades, that you shouldn't be trading a draft pick for a guy who's, like, 30, to this situation.  Anyone saying that the Colts are losing the opportunity to acquire a young player with that draft pick are completely oblivious to the fact that they just acquired a young player with that draft pick.

 

And, hey, people are welcome to criticize the decision to acquire Richardson specifically, I would argue against them but that's my opinion, it's just that people arguing against making any trade of this sort based on some kind of overarching philosophical code are being asinine.

 

I agree, no question he's a young player and no question he will help us out in all phases.  I think being on a team with a decent passing game will help him improve his yards per carry as well.  I just don't think he's Adrian Peterson 2.0 and therefore not worth a first rounder.  

 

When you can go into the draft and grab a decent starter at RB in the late rounds, it just makes more sense to me to spend that first rounder on something else. . . Offensive line, defense (pretty much anywhere other then safety and MLB), a top WR.  

 

If you listed off all our long term team needs, RB was towards the bottom, probably above only TE and QB. 

[Insert Colts Pun Here]

I would agree with you on the sacrificing the future part.  However I certainly agree that this was somewhat of a Luxury move (we could have used a better RB, but we didn't need Richardson's caliber) and that it was overpriced.  I maintain that unless you are getting an Adrian Peterson type of talent, an RB isn't worth a first rounder.  

 

You have to remember that teams are grabbing RB's who can play at the NFL level, do decent jobs as far as blocking, pass catching, and running in the 4th and later rounds.  When you can get a decent starter in the late rounds of the draft, why would you want to spend a first rounder on one?  

 

Because most other positions on the field you don't find decent starters after the 3rd round unless you hit on a gem.  

 

There are some positions such as QB, and OT that you don't typically find decent starters after the first round unless you hit on a gem. 

 

It was a luxury move, for sure. I'm certainly not disputing that.

 

I'd argue that to improve this team, we need to establish an effective (power) run game and we've just taken a huge step towards achieving that goal.

 

I'd also argue that Trent Richardson is better value than any offensive lineman we could take in next year's first round. Of course, this is just a prediction at this stage but I think we'll finish 10-6 and pick around 20th. Elite OL prospects will be gone by then and we could wait to pick up another Hugh Thornton and another Khaled Holmes slightly later on imo.

[Kyle]

Castonzo Thomas Holmes Thornton Cherilious

 

At this point that is the future of our o-line... Thornton will be a beast, Holmes we dont know yet, Thomas looked good and will be back next year, Cherilious has played great, Castonzo.....not sure.

 

We are not as far from a great line as some think.  

 

We are not going to win the superbowl this year.  Next FA we have like 35 million.  Sign a T and a G and our oline is set.  There are always youngish oline guys who can play into their 30s available in FA.  There are not good young RBs in FA.  

 

i completely agree that our oline is not set, but neither was RB.  

[Insert Colts Pun Here]

I do think one problem is that some people seem to be applying the usual criticism of trades, that you shouldn't be trading a draft pick for a guy who's, like, 30, to this situation.  Anyone saying that the Colts are losing the opportunity to acquire a young player with that draft pick are completely oblivious to the fact that they just acquired a young player with that draft pick.

 

And, hey, people are welcome to criticize the decision to acquire Richardson specifically, I would argue against them but that's my opinion, it's just that people arguing against making any trade of this sort based on some kind of overarching philosophical code are being asinine.

 

Yeah, this is my point.

 

For all intents and purposes, we traded our 2014 1st for an extra 2013 1st and used it to draft a RB.

[Insert Colts Pun Here]

Castonzo Thomas Holmes Thornton Cherilious

 

At this point that is the future of our o-line... Thornton will be a beast, Holmes we dont know yet, Thomas looked good and will be back next year, Cherilious has played great, Castonzo.....not sure.

 

We are not as far from a great line as some think.  

 

We are not going to win the superbowl this year.  Next FA we have like 35 million.  Sign a T and a G and our oline is set.  There are always youngish oline guys who can play into their 30s available in FA.  There are not good young RBs in FA.  

 

i completely agree that our oline is not set, but neither was RB.  

 

I think we're still pretty far away from having a "great" line but I don't think we're too far away from having a good line.

 

I'd try to pick up another LT and another C in FA next year. Then draft another G in one of the middle rounds.

[Le Neon]

We dumped Marshall Faulk after he averaged 3.8 ypc for us.  Got a draft pick for him and everything.

[Blueblazes]

We had a strong run game for as long as we had a strong offensive line. It's not a coincidence that Joseph Addai went from looking like "Edge 2.0" in his rookie season, to out of the league all together in 5 years. Championships are won in the trenches. You would think a former offensive linemen would grasp that concept more than anyone else. My mistake

Wow. Someone gets it totally. With the large amount of quality RBs in the league, the RB position has been greatly devalued over the past several years. The big impacter is the quality of the o-line. There are exceptions of course. I think AP would get 4.0 ypc if anyone were blocking for him. But it most cases, the O line is the difference.

[Goodtimes]

There's been a fair amount of negative reaction to the Trent Richardson trade, some of which I can understand. A 1st round pick is a pretty steep price, he's had his injury problems, it could even be argued that he under-achieved his rookie year.

 

However, some have been saying that this trade signifies that the Colts are sacrificing their future in an attempt to win now. This kid is 22 years old and only in his second year. He could potentially be here for another 8-10 years. 

 

I agree with the trade but the average NFL career is something like three years and a running back rarely lasts 8 to 10 years.

Edited September 20, 2013 by Superman

[Warhawk]

You have to remember that teams are grabbing RB's who can play at the NFL level, do decent jobs as far as blocking, pass catching, and running in the 4th and later rounds.  When you can get a decent starter in the late rounds of the draft, why would you want to spend a first rounder on one?  

 

Because most other positions on the field you don't find decent starters after the 3rd round unless you hit on a gem.

 

There are some positions such as QB, and OT that you don't typically find decent starters after the first round unless you hit on a gem

 

 

You can absolutely find a decent enough guy late in the draft or undrafted, but you can do that at other positions too, and we have several of those guys, most notably Bethea and Mathis, and Freeman was undrafted.  Toler was a 4th round guy and he's looked pretty good for us so far.

 

I think the issue is that people seem to look at a guy like Arian Foster and draw too significant a conclusion from him, that you can find a top running back late in the draft, and that it's not worth drafting a running back early.

 

So I just looked up all the all-pro running backs since the year 2000, as representative of the very best running backs in the nfl over that period (not all AP all-pros, I included anyone who was listed as an all-pro by any of the outlets tracked by PFR).  There have been precisely 30 all-pro running backs since 2000 (a number of repeats from year to year).  2 of them were undrafted (Foster and Priest Holmes).  Only 2 were drafted later than the 3rd round.  That means that 26 of the 30 were what we'd now call Day 1-2 drafted players.  16 - over half - were drafted in the first round.

 

By contrast, if you look at QBs, one of the positions you said you need to spend a high pick on, of 11 all-pro QBs since 2000, just 4 were drafted in the first round, and just 6 were drafted in the first 3 rounds.

[fvantagio]

I don't buy that argument. Adrian Peterson rushed for over 2,000 yards with Christian Ponder as his QB, and accounting for more than half of the team's offense. If Trent is a rare talent , he should at least be able to crack the 4 ypc mark with Joe Thomas and Alex Mack opening running lanes for him. Now he has Costanzo and McGlynn   

 

"opening up holes for him" Really? Please stop just looking at stats and judging the players skill. Browns Oline is worse then ours!! I know they have Thomas and Mack is a pretty good C as well, but both their guards are awful as well as their RT. They get no push off the line and without exaggerating T-Rich was getting hit 8/10 times behind or at the LOS every time he got the ball. In fact the rare times he actually got to the LOS untouched and was able to get going down hill, he picked up 5+ yards every time.

[jbaron04]

I didn't even say he was Adrian Peterson. I'm just saying if he's as talented as he's being touted, he should be able to create plays on his own, like any rare talent does. Not carry a 3.6 ypc average. By giving up a first round pick, Grigson is saying he is a rare talent

A first round pick is not a rare player just a sure starter .... If we make the play off we picking in the 20s anyway t rich for an20 pick I'll take it

[colts_mp]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1539572-are-running-backs-really-worth-a-first-round-pick-in-todays-nfl

 

not a bad read about rb's in the draft here

[crazycolt1]

I think the biggest problem with the trade is that it doesn't address any of our weaknesses. It was a luxury move, and an overpriced one, at that

Overpriced??  A top tier running back for 6 million for 3 years?  List one other top draft pick that makes equal or less money that this contract will pay. TRs signing bonus is already paid so all that is left is his contract money. And your opinion is the Colts don't need a high quality RB?  Having Bradshaw as a starter was a weakness because he is not an every down RB. Plus, according to most fans Brown shouldn't even be on the roster. I don't feel that way but it is what it is. TR was the 3rd overall pick behind Luck and RG3 and the Colts get him for a yet unknown 1st round pick? For you to say it is overpriced is only your opinion and is not shared by the larger part of the fan base. 

[crazycolt1]

I mean overpriced in the sense that the running back position is not one that can command a 1st round pick all that often (unless it's a once in a generation type player) I just don't see anything in Richardson that makes him head and shoulders above anyone else. I would've loved this trade if it was for Peterson or Lesean McCoy.... but Trent "3 ypc" Richardson?......

AP or Shady?? Get real. If you would be so kind as telling the difference in the pay between TR and those two. Both those two RBs get paid more in one season than TR will get paid in three. You live in a dreamland.

[Insert Colts Pun Here]

A first round pick is not a rare player just a sure starter .... If we make the play off we picking in the 20s anyway t rich for an20 pick I'll take it

 

This.

 

We pick anywhere later than 20th next year and nobody has an issue with this trade.

[Danfish98]

I agree that the argument that the Colts have mortgaged their future is crazy.  They basically decided to draft a RB first round next year with what will probably be a pick in the teens and they don't even have to give him a signing bonus.  This year and next year he's cheaper than GD Brown.  The money side of this deal is a slam dunk.  The argument about using a first round pick on a RB is quite valid though.  It's why I'm hesitant to give my stamp of approval on this move (which I'm sure has Grigson and Pagano up late at night wondering how they could have gone so wrong).  

[Danfish98]

Overpriced??  A top tier running back for 6 million for 3 years?  List one other top draft pick that makes equal or less money that this contract will pay. TRs signing bonus is already paid so all that is left is his contract money. And your opinion is the Colts don't need a high quality RB?  Having Bradshaw as a starter was a weakness because he is not an every down RB. Plus, according to most fans Brown shouldn't even be on the roster. I don't feel that way but it is what it is. TR was the 3rd overall pick behind Luck and RG3 and the Colts get him for a yet unknown 1st round pick? For you to say it is overpriced is only your opinion and is not shared by the larger part of the fan base. 

Everyone who is calling this overpriced is referring to the draft pick given up.  The money we will pay him is quite reasonable, but a first round draft pick is a steep price for any back not named Adrian Peterson.

[crazycolt1]

Who cares? It's a running back. Plug and play, next man up. Our offense should be centered around it's franchsie player anyways. If we're depending on Bradshaw or Ballard to carry the bulk of the offense, something else is seriously wrong. 

If we are depending on Bradshaw or Ballard to carry  the bulk something is seriously wrong??  That is why TR was signed. Make up you mind.