SI Prediction: Colts look to trade Jonathan Taylor in 2023

[TylerDurden]

So, Connor Orr of SI made a prediction for the upcoming season for each of the 32 teams and interestingly enough, he days the Colts will likely look to deal Taylor as he is in the final year of his rookie deal so they can get some value back without having to pay him for the next contract, much like we did with CMC. Now, I dont think investing high picks or money into RBs is good business nowadays and in the current NFL, its just dumb unless you're a piece or two away from a championship push.  BUT, I think this is worth sharing considering the connection and history of success between Taylor and Reich.  FWIW, his prediction for us is that Burns, Brown, and Horn make the Pro Bowl this season.

Excerpt: 

Indianapolis Colts

Prediction: They will trade Jonathan Taylor at some point during the 2023 season.

This isn’t necessarily a bold take. They’ll have a new offensive philosophy and will need to start long-term planning around a running game that potentially suits a different back. Taylor is hitting free agency next year and, like Christian McCaffrey with the Panthers in 2022, can only do so much for the franchise before it’s senseless to hold onto him without recouping value.

 

[Basbear]

Isnt Connor Orr a turd??

[CarolinaRideorDie]

Trading for Taylor would only make sense if we plan to sign him long term but it still comes down to value. Will he ask for too much money? Taylor is better than Foreman but we did just fine with Foreman and Hubbard for a fraction of what Taylor would ask for. Listening to Duce Staley's presser, sounds like he is in favor of running back by committee, doesn't make sense to get a bell cow RB. 

 

[Jon Snow]

Seriously doubt they would trade him to us even we were interested.  Which I hope we are not. 

[OnlyPantherFaninMaine]

This year’s RB class has an elite back and is very deep behind him in rounds 2-4/5. No chance we are investing in another high-priced back after having just traded CMC. Taylor is a hell of a player but this ain’t it for me. I’m wanting Charbonnet out of UCLA personally. 

[therealmjl]

Nah

[NanuqoftheNorth]

Probably one of the easiest positions to fill.  Please, no more expensive running backs. 

[rayzor]

4 minutes ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

Probably one of the easiest positions to fill.  Please, no more expensive running backs. 

This

[TylerDurden]

18 minutes ago, OnlyPantherFaninMaine said:

This year’s RB class has an elite back and is very deep behind him in rounds 2-4/5. No chance we are investing in another high-priced back after having just traded CMC. Taylor is a hell of a player but this ain’t it for me. I’m wanting Charbonnet out of UCLA personally. 

Not familiar with many of the RB prospects coming out this year outside of the guy from Texas, but this is pretty much my take as well.  It's just proven time and time again that you can find a back that produces at a high level in the mid to late rounds and/or even as an UDFA, win and let them play out their rookie deal and then move onto another one.  The value is just not there for me to trade for one already in the league and approaching a new contract, regardless of how talented they are.  It's really why I wasn't opposed to dealing CMC even before his extension.  Incredible talent, but the value just isn't there at the position he plays.

[Brooklyn 3.0]

We had an elite RB and traded him and are left with servicable scraps. Why would we pay big bucks to go back to elite?

[KatsAzz]

The money it would probably take to sign Jonathan Taylor could be used more wisely at other positions of need.

[csx]

No to giving up assets for running backs. Would love to keep Forman at the right price. If so not sure we need to mess with the position at all unless someone interests them later in the draft.

[ForJimmy]

Draft Tank Bigsby in the mid rounds.

[LinvilleGorge]

Draft RBs or sign mid-level FAs. Let other teams pay the big money RBs. We have an embarrassment of riches at RB and off the ball LBs in our franchise history but spending too many premium resources on non-premium positions has been a significant contributor to our overall losing record.