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

[Nickster]

6 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

I think Jonathan Taylor is capable of being any type of runner he wants to be.   He can be a straight line down hill runner, and he can also be a zone runner capable of hitting any hole the blocking gives him.    I don’t think there are any restrictions to what JT can do.

Well maybe you are on to something but all the tape, college scouting reports, pro scouting reports, charts that show where he’s good, high percentage of stuffed runs when running parallel, etc., etc., etc. seem to suggest that Taylor is very much a straight line one cut type of back.  He runs inside zone plays with cracks very well with square shoulders, one his shoulders turn perpendicular to the Los, he’s not particularly effective.  His good year they started running him almost exclusively down hill.

 

At least that’s what all the apparent evidence seems to suggest.

[Superman]

11 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

He will be offered a market value contract this year

 

Define "market value" though. That's the question, because the market is going through a significant correction right now.

 

Mixon just took a reduced salary -- and from what I've read, it's not a cap magic restructure, it's an actual pay cut. I think Barkley and Jacobs fail to get new contracts by today's deadline, which means they play the season on the tag, and they'll probably hold out at least part of training camp. So there's probably no new RB contract on the way to establish the current market value. In fact, there was reporting recently that Barkley and Jacobs were hoping for Taylor's contract to get done so they could use it as a new starting point.

 

So I just don't think there is a market right now. Teams are burning and churning RBs on rookie contracts, not re-signing them to new deals. 

[Superman]

53 minutes ago, Nickster said:

He runs inside zone plays with cracks very well with square shoulders, one his shoulders turn perpendicular to the Los, he’s not particularly effective

 

What RB is good going sideways? Might seem like a snarky question, but it's not meant to be. I'm assuming the charts you're looking at would say that every RB has better production going toward the LOS, right? Is the separation between JT and other backs significant?

 

Same thing for the quality of the blocking. The Colts OL was outstanding in the run game in 2021, but JT maximized what they gave him. The OL was downright bad in 2022, especially at the beginning of the season, including in the run game. Then JT was hurt the rest of the year. I think it's premature to say that he can't produce unless the run blocking is spectacular; I think it's fair to say that any back would have struggled behind our OL last season.

 

On the surface, I would describe JT as a one-cut, downhill runner. He's like a faster Arian Foster. I'd describe Derrick Henry the same way, so it's not meant to be a criticism; Henry is in another world when it comes to destroying would-be tacklers, though. I think we might disagree when talking about JT's ability to make defenders miss, to break tackles, change direction quickly, etc. And I don't think JT has been given a real chance to perform as a receiver, but I don't think he's physically deficient in that area. 

 

You've always felt JT is limited, though. I'm interested in what charts and numbers you're working from.

[jvan1973]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Define "market value" though. That's the question, because the market is going through a significant correction right now.

 

Mixon just took a reduced salary -- and from what I've read, it's not a cap magic restructure, it's an actual pay cut. I think Barkley and Jacobs fail to get new contracts by today's deadline, which means they play the season on the tag, and they'll probably hold out at least part of training camp. So there's probably no new RB contract on the way to establish the current market value. In fact, there was reporting recently that Barkley and Jacobs were hoping for Taylor's contract to get done so they could use it as a new starting point.

 

So I just don't think there is a market right now. Teams are burning and churning RBs on rookie contracts, not re-signing them to new deals. 

Mixon is also staring down gun charges.   If the Bengals cut him,  his prospects would look pretty grim.   

 

I'm not sure what they offer.  Over 11 Million per is my guess.   Far from the "they don't want to re-sign him" narrative that moose laid out

[NewColtsFan]

4 hours ago, Nickster said:

Well maybe you are on to something but all the tape, college scouting reports, pro scouting reports, charts that show where he’s good, high percentage of stuffed runs when running parallel, etc., etc., etc. seem to suggest that Taylor is very much a straight line one cut type of back.  He runs inside zone plays with cracks very well with square shoulders, one his shoulders turn perpendicular to the Los, he’s not particularly effective.  His good year they started running him almost exclusively down hill.

 

At least that’s what all the apparent evidence seems to suggest.

I recognize that JT does most of his damage between the tackles.   But I also have strong memories of the first two years of sweeps left and right behind pulling lineman like Nelson and AC and Smith.   So Taylor can go wide.   The Colts did less of that last year, but as Superman noted the Colts OL was a hot mess, and the entire offense lacked basic coordination. 
 

I’m cautiously hopeful that things have to get better this year. 

[stitches]

 

 

[cjwhiskers]

No contracts for both Jacobs and Barkley and if they want to play this year, they will have to play on the franchise tag. Neither of them has signed it. My guess is they will sit out most of pre-season and play the year out on the tag.

 

I'm curious if the Colts and JT get a deal signed now that there really isn't anyone else to change or reinforce the market. I imagine them not getting deals could help the Colts leverage. 

 

I really hope we don't get to the point of tagging JT and forcing him to decide to sit out or not as leverage though. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

With neither Barkley and Jabobs not reaching a deal that could really put a end to a new contract for Taylor before the season.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

29 minutes ago, cjrulli said:

No contracts for both Jacobs and Barkley and if they want to play this year, they will have to play on the franchise tag. Neither of them has signed it. My guess is they will sit out most of pre-season and play the year out on the tag.

 

I'm curious if the Colts and JT get a deal signed now that there really isn't anyone else to change or reinforce the market. I imagine them not getting deals could help the Colts leverage. 

 

I really hope we don't get to the point of tagging JT and forcing him to decide to sit out or not as leverage though. 

I was thinking the opposite and could hurt a deal getting done.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, jvan1973 said:

Mixon is also staring down gun charges.   If the Bengals cut him,  his prospects would look pretty grim.   

 

I'm not sure what they offer.  Over 11 Million per is my guess.   Far from the "they don't want to re-sign him" narrative that moose laid out

 

Any more grim than Dalvin Cook's prospects? Cook is a year older, but a better and more productive player, more available... 

 

I think Mixon looked at the fact that Cook and Elliott have been free agents for months, with no bites, and decided he'd rather lock in the lower compensation right now than risk being a free agent. I guess we could argue that Mixon is on a lower tier than Barkley, Jacobs, Taylor, Cook, and so his market might not be representative of theirs. But Cook is still out there, with no offers. I don't think the market is great for any of them.

 

I don't think the 'they don't want to re-sign him' narrative is accurate. I think 'they don't want to re-sign him at current top of market price' is more like it. If he would do $40m through 2026, basically $13m/year in new money, but spread out over four years, I think that would be fine for the team. That would basically put him at #3 on the RB list, behind McCaffrey and Kamara, but effective average would be $10m/year. Or they could tag him at $13m in 2024, and see what happens after that. I think that's the way it's probably headed, and that's assuming he has a great season.

 

Just from a roster/cap management standpoint, the most cost-effective approach is to tag and trade him after this season. But I don't think the Colts will do that. No team seems to be fully committed to any RB strategy right now. I think the Giants and Raiders are kind of waiting to see what happens. The Colts aren't actually on the clock with Taylor. The Cowboys are probably not going to commit anything to Pollard. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

This could go either way for Taylor. Him and his agent could just agree to terms understanding RB are just not getting paid after these guys not getting deals done. Or all these running backs could play hardball. My guess is that running backs will realize teams just are not paying running backs what they are with and will just have to except what they will give them. If teams are all in the same page and running backs have nowhere to turn then they are stuck.

[NewColtsFan]

32 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Any more grim than Dalvin Cook's prospects? Cook is a year older, but a better and more productive player, more available... 

 

I think Mixon looked at the fact that Cook and Elliott have been free agents for months, with no bites, and decided he'd rather lock in the lower compensation right now than risk being a free agent. I guess we could argue that Mixon is on a lower tier than Barkley, Jacobs, Taylor, Cook, and so his market might not be representative of theirs. But Cook is still out there, with no offers. I don't think the market is great for any of them.

 

I don't think the 'they don't want to re-sign him' narrative is accurate. I think 'they don't want to re-sign him at current top of market price' is more like it. If he would do $40m through 2026, basically $13m/year in new money, but spread out over four years, I think that would be fine for the team. That would basically put him at #3 on the RB list, behind McCaffrey and Kamara, but effective average would be $10m/year. Or they could tag him at $13m in 2024, and see what happens after that. I think that's the way it's probably headed, and that's assuming he has a great season.

 

Just from a roster/cap management standpoint, the most cost-effective approach is to tag and trade him after this season. But I don't think the Colts will do that. No team seems to be fully committed to any RB strategy right now. I think the Giants and Raiders are kind of waiting to see what happens. The Colts aren't actually on the clock with Taylor. The Cowboys are probably not going to commit anything to Pollard. 

“Tag him at $13 mill in 24” ???    Sorry, you lost me.    
 

Everything I’ve read projects the tag for JT in 24 will be $10.1, the same as the RB tag this year.   Then a second tag in 25 would be $12.2, with the 20 percent bump.   I’ve seen that in multiple stories.   
 

But you’ve written a $13 mill tag for 24.   Is that a typo, or do you see another way to calculate?    
 

 

[Superman]

7 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

“Tag him at $13 mill in 24” ???    Sorry, you lost me.    
 

Everything I’ve read projects the tag for JT in 24 will be $10.1, the same as the RB tag this year.   Then a second tag in 25 would be $12.2, with the 20 percent bump.   I’ve seen that in multiple stories.   
 

But you’ve written a $13 mill tag for 24.   Is that a typo, or do you see another way to calculate?    

 

I'm using OTC's projection. I think $13m is a little aggressive, especially now that Mixon, Cook and Elliott are no longer top five, but the non-exclusive tag calculation is convoluted. But I don't think the non-exclusive tag in 2024 will be the same as it is this season; part of the methodology is based on the previous year's tag amount and the current year's salary cap, so it's likely to increase at least some.

 

It might wind up being somewhere between $11-13m/year. 

 

https://overthecap.com/franchise-transition-and-rfa-tenders

[Moosejawcolt]

1 hour ago, cjrulli said:

No contracts for both Jacobs and Barkley and if they want to play this year, they will have to play on the franchise tag. Neither of them has signed it. My guess is they will sit out most of pre-season and play the year out on the tag.

 

I'm curious if the Colts and JT get a deal signed now that there really isn't anyone else to change or reinforce the market. I imagine them not getting deals could help the Colts leverage. 

 

I really hope we don't get to the point of tagging JT and forcing him to decide to sit out or not as leverage though. 

The market has spoken. Now if Ballard were to sign Taylor to a deal, it would go against what the rest of the NFL is doing. I stated that it would be a mistake to give another deal to Tayor, and apparently, the Raiders and Giants agree. If Ballard extends Taylor's contract, I will be so done with him as a GM and this  is from someone who said I would give him a 2nd chance now that he has his qb.

[NewColtsFan]

6 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm using OTC's projection. I think $13m is a little aggressive, especially now that Mixon, Cook and Elliott are no longer top five, but the non-exclusive tag calculation is convoluted. But I don't think the non-exclusive tag in 2024 will be the same as it is this season; part of the methodology is based on the previous year's tag amount and the current year's salary cap, so it's likely to increase at least some.

 

It might wind up being somewhere between $11-13m/year. 

 

https://overthecap.com/franchise-transition-and-rfa-tenders

Thanks, I have not seen that before.   
 

With RB salaries either flat lining or going down,  it’s hard to wrap my mind around the tag going up from $10.1 to $13.1.    I wonder if this will hold?    Wonder if/when it will get updated? 

Anyway, thanks for the good 411. 

[NewColtsFan]

3 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

The market has spoken. Now if Ballard were to sign Taylor to a deal, it would go against what the rest of the NFL is doing. I stated that it would be a mistake to give another deal to Tayor, and apparently, the Raiders and Giants agree. If Ballard extends Taylor's contract, I will be so done with him as a GM and this  is from someone who said I would give him a 2nd chance now that he has his qb.

The Raiders and Giants agree?  Both teams tried to sign their RB to a multi-year deal.   They wanted to but couldn’t come to terms.    How is that agreeing?

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

 

I don’t think colts are close to extending Taylor by those comments.

[CR91]

JT seeing other RBs not get paid is gonna do one of two things. Make him sign whatever potential low ball offer the colts are offering to avoid the franchise tag or stand on the high horse like Barkley, Jacobs, and Pollard and waste what little prime years RBs have. As much as this sucks for RBs, it's the reality of the position.

[NewColtsFan]

11 minutes ago, CR91 said:

JT seeing other RBs not get paid is gonna do one of two things. Make him sign whatever potential low ball offer the colts are offering to avoid the franchise tag or stand on the high horse like Barkley, Jacobs, and Pollard and waste what little prime years RBs have. As much as this sucks for RBs, it's the reality of the position.

Reminder….   JT is not on the same clock as Barkley, Jacob’s, Pollard….  They had to have their deals done by today.   Taylor did not.   
 

The Colts can still sign him or tag him next year and the year after if need be.   

[CR91]

1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:

Reminder….   JT is not on the same clock as Barkley, Jacob’s, Pollard….  They had to have their deals done by today.   Taylor did not.   
 

The Colts can still sign him or tag him next year and the year after if need be.   

 

Which was my point because this time next year, JT could find himself in the same position.

[Nickster]

4 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

I recognize that JT does most of his damage between the tackles.   But I also have strong memories of the first two years of sweeps left and right behind pulling lineman like Nelson and AC and Smith.   So Taylor can go wide.   The Colts did less of that last year, but as Superman noted the Colts OL was a hot mess, and the entire offense lacked basic coordination. 
 

I’m cautiously hopeful that things have to get better this year. 

He gets around the edge occasionally but his damage is mostly done right through the box.

 

I don’t think that JT is a particularly versatile back.  But there are no real 3 down backs anymore except I guess Barkley anyway though.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

If this is true what is one to two million more? 
 

 

[Moosejawcolt]

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

The Raiders and Giants agree?  Both teams tried to sign their RB to a multi-year deal.   They wanted to but couldn’t come to terms.    How is that agreeing?

I meant they agree on the market in terms of what they worth.  Sure they wanted to resign them on their terms and were quite happy to let them play on the franchise.  They may have offered say 13 at 2 years and the players  probably wanted 15 at 3 years. Just speculating but  I bet both teams wanted two years probably 2 or 3 million below what the player wanted.  If that is true them they have set the market for the Colts in what they would offer Taylor. Honestly, I don't even know why the Colts r discussing contract terms with him

[Moosejawcolt]

2 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

 

How bout this  Derrick. If u r a man who weighs 230 and runs 4.4, maybe u should be switching positions early in your career? I imagine he would have been a great edge and/or linebacker if he would have focused on that postion.

[NewColtsFan]

9 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I meant they agree on the market in terms of what they worth.  Sure they wanted to resign them on their terms and were quite happy to let them play on the franchise.  They may have offered say 13 at 2 years and the players  probably wanted 15 at 3 years. Just speculating but  I bet both teams wanted two years probably 2 or 3 million below what the player wanted.  If that is true them they have set the market for the Colts in what they would offer Taylor. Honestly, I don't even know why the Colts r discussing contract terms with him

The Colts are talking to Taylor because Ballard’s history is to extend his top players during the last year of their rookie contract.    The Colts value Taylor and Pittman even if you don’t.    The question becomes, how much?   
 

We may not find out for a while.   Last year the Nelson deal wasn’t announced until the weekend of the season opener at Houston.   So these things can take time.   That could happen again this year with both JT and MP.  
 

[BlackTiger]

 

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

If u r a man who weighs 230 and runs 4.4, maybe u should be switching positions early in your career?

 He set nation wide records in high school and won a Heisman in college.  Hes a RB, no way he was switching positions 

[2006Coltsbestever]

7 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

 

Henry has a point, so does Taylor with their tweets. They are outliers at the RB position is why. Those 2 and guys like McCaffrey, Barkley are tough to find that are that great. If Barkley decides to sit out, you can kiss the Giants season good bye imo. Giants are making a huge mistake considering Barkley's age.

[Nickster]

17 hours ago, Superman said:

 

What RB is good going sideways? Might seem like a snarky question, but it's not meant to be. I'm assuming the charts you're looking at would say that every RB has better production going toward the LOS, right? Is the separation between JT and other backs significant

If you don’t watch enough football to realize that there are different running styles I don’t have the motivation to explain in to you from the ground up, but suffice it to say there are lots of plays that start without square shoulders, including quite famously for  Colts fans the outside zone stretch play James ran so famously.  They quit trying this type of play as much with Taylor when he kept running into the backs of his blockers.

 

I couldn’t find the run charts that we saw awhile back but I remember discussing with another poster that they seemed to be using Taylor wrong by running him sideways then they stopped doing it as much.  There was a clear adjustment on how he was used.  And I’m pretty sure in one of these threads there is a simple run tracker that showed that visually.  Can’t find it.  Yeah u don’t have to believe it but like many other things you’re u are seeing the evidence.  Recent article said Taylor was not creative and he isn’t.  He’s mediocre around the LOs and HOF at the 2nd and 3rd levels and almost untouchable in the open field.

 

he’s had high percentages of stuffed runs his whole career including thw all pro year.

 

not much controversy about JTs skill set I guess except for this board.

[Solid84]

11 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

 

I fully understand why RBs don't feel at all appreciated, but it is what it is. After those first 4-5 years in the league RBs very often start fighting the injury bug and it's just not worth it from a cap management point of view. Even if a RB plays 5-6 years injury free you can almost guarantee the bug is just around the corner.

[csmopar]

16 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

I fully understand why RBs don't feel at all appreciated, but it is what it is. After those first 4-5 years in the league RBs very often start fighting the injury bug and it's just not worth it from a cap management point of view. Even if a RB plays 5-6 years injury free you can almost guarantee the bug is just around the corner.

Which is why you don’t sign them long term.

 

this is what I’d offer JT, 2 years, 30 million, with the cap hit being 17 mil the first year, 13 mil the second. With 10 mil guaranteed each year. 

[AwesomeAustin]

13 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

The market has spoken. Now if Ballard were to sign Taylor to a deal, it would go against what the rest of the NFL is doing. I stated that it would be a mistake to give another deal to Tayor, and apparently, the Raiders and Giants agree. If Ballard extends Taylor's contract, I will be so done with him as a GM and this  is from someone who said I would give him a 2nd chance now that he has his qb.

What if he signs him to a 4yr 44-48mil deal with 22-25mil guaranteed and small signing bonus. It replaces the rookie contract and begins this season but colts have an out after two years with very little dead cap hit?  I’ve been saying for a year the Colts needed to trade JT to bring in as much draft capital as possible.  Not a fan of paying RBs second contracts but I could see that one making sense for the Colts. 

[stitches]

 

 

[jskinnz]

13 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

The market has spoken. Now if Ballard were to sign Taylor to a deal, it would go against what the rest of the NFL is doing. I stated that it would be a mistake to give another deal to Tayor, and apparently, the Raiders and Giants agree. If Ballard extends Taylor's contract, I will be so done with him as a GM and this  is from someone who said I would give him a 2nd chance now that he has his qb.

Genuinely curious - what will “you being done with Ballard as a GM look like if Taylor gets extended?”  Will you not watch games anymore until Ballard is gone?  Will you stop posting here?  What is the tangible impact of a Taylor extension?

[cjwhiskers]

15 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

The market has spoken. Now if Ballard were to sign Taylor to a deal, it would go against what the rest of the NFL is doing. I stated that it would be a mistake to give another deal to Tayor, and apparently, the Raiders and Giants agree. If Ballard extends Taylor's contract, I will be so done with him as a GM and this  is from someone who said I would give him a 2nd chance now that he has his qb.

 

Both the Raiders and Giants attempted to resign Jacobs and Barkly. For less than they wanted but you make it sound like the market is dictating no contracts to RBs. It's a bit different IMO. 

 

All reports are the deals were approximately ~10-12 million per year with ~20-22 million GTD. If Ballard and Taylor can get a deal signed in the 11-13.5 million range APY for 3 years, 19-25m GTD I think that would be fair with what the market is dictating and would put him in line with backs like Henry and Chubb. on APY.

 

Taylor is younger than Jacobs and Barkley and a key playmaker on this team. I think he deserves a better deal than them and the Colts are equipped to afford it with the team being this young. 

 

I doubt we will see anymore 16 million APY that Christan Mcaffrey got in 2020 and I do not think we should go that high, but the team needs to be fair. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 hours ago, Solid84 said:

I fully understand why RBs don't feel at all appreciated, but it is what it is. After those first 4-5 years in the league RBs very often start fighting the injury bug and it's just not worth it from a cap management point of view. Even if a RB plays 5-6 years injury free you can almost guarantee the bug is just around the corner.

Both sides are right in this case. The RB deserves to be paid and the teams are right about  wanting to pay them more. Running backs have to understand the history with their position and why this is happening. Every position has value and not every one gets paid the same.

[rockywoj]

In what world is getting $10M+ = to not getting paid?

 

I mean, if one is worried about positional relativity, there is that, but seriously, 10, 11, 12, 13 million vs 17, 18, 19M?  Boohoo.

 

Ignoring QB, Across the 3 skill offensive positions (rb, te, we) the average tag value is roughly 13M.  So, get into ball park offers with security of several years and guaranteed money, and all should be good.  

[Nevbot]

the players union should try to push for scrapping the rookie pay scale for the running back position so that young RBs can cash in on NFL first contract money right away, since many aren't even seeing that second contract anyway,

Finding a way to do it gets a lot trickier, but the logic makes sense.  

[cjwhiskers]

This isn't a coincidentally timed Tweet by Irsay. He knows JT is a fan favorite and knows the Colts have an opportunity for some positive PR with all the noise around the league from yesterday. 

 

Projecting JT contract. 

11-13.5 APY

3 years 

20-24 GTD. 

 

[BlackTiger]

I would add a bonus incentive to franchise tags for Rbs.