The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

The rumor mill is flying.  Its no secret Jonathan Taylor has requested to be traded by the Colts.  However, once again the Dolphins name has come up as a potential trade partner.

I'm seeing trade compensation no higher than a 2nd round value, per the analysts and NFL execs, but the Colts of course want at least a 1st round pick.

Do you want the Dolphins to play in this playground?  Or is enough enough already with bringing in new RBs?

I would trade for a 2nd round pick, if that's the asking price, sure.

It's pretty hilarious that Jim Irsay says "Running backs just don't have value" one day and then says "I won't accept anything less than a first-round pick for my running back" the next.

I would do a third going to a second if he surpasses certain stats (goes over 1000 yds, makes the Pro Bowl, etc...)  The reason being, this is a contract year for him and the Dolphins risk losing him for nothing at season's end.

Can't do it because he wants a new contract and no way should we give any running back a real contract in the year 2023. Achane should only miss a few games and we got Mostert/Wilson Jr. Yes, disaster does seem to strike us but must we have 4 starting caliber players at every position in case of injury?

Roll with what we got. We are low on future draft picks anyway, we will miss that 2nd or 3rd rounder when the time comes.

Don't need him.

I don't think we need him, but i do think he would give us another threat when we have fragile players (not that Taylor isn't, himself, fragile).
I don't mind having him on a 1 year rental and let him walk if it means a real hard push for the trophy.

5th rounder for one year? That sounds cool. 2nd rounder and he wants a big contract so he won't be happy splitting reps? No, thanks.

The picks ain't shit.  It's the salary hit I'd be more concerned about.  If we can make the number work on money, I don't care about a 2nd round pick.

There wouldn't be much of a salary hit unless he is re-signed.   He's on the final year of his rookie deal.   

I assume that we would only acquire him if we thought we could extend that somehow.

The attitude about picks can only get you so far before every member of your roster is making real money because no one is on a rookie deal.

I'm glad we traded a lot of our picks for big talent like Tyreek and Chubbs, but with a salary cap you're going to need some of your starters to come cheap.

Are the Dolphins in win-now mode?

If yes, I say bring in Taylor, try to win a Super Bowl this season

If no, then worry about picks and future contracts.

I seem to think we are looking at a win-now team.  Tyreek said he's retiring in 2 years.  Tua is due a big pay day soon.  The time window of keeping this roster on the same field is very narrow.

We are win now, but we want to win for a few years, not just this year. 2nd rounder for another RB who might not even be better than what we have on the roster? Absolutely not worth it for me.

It seems this is the fundamental sticking point.  I love Raheem Mostert and Jeff Wilson, but Jonathan Taylor is head and shoulders better.  Probably so i Dalvin Cook.

But, to be real, our O-line is such trash that the RB doesn't really matter, and we will need a guy with size that can block from the backfield.

The asking price is going to be a first round pick. No thanks.

Are you really thinking that Taylor isn't a significantly better player than the guys we have?  He's like a top 3 back, isn't he?

Someone like Taylor gives us an edge. Running backs are not in demand like it used to be but he’s one of a few guys that can still take over and change a game. If we add him it gives us a higher chance to capitalize on this short window we appear to have. The pressure it takes off Tua would be tremendous and it’s naturally going to open up the passing game even more.

I say take a swing, don’t gamble the entire future on him but I’d pair a couple of second’s no questions.

I feel terrible for pro running backs the bind the owners have put them in is very unfortunate.

Rumor i saw was Ogbah + a 2nd round pick.

Sounds like they are close to making it happen.

God, I hope that's not true. Weaken our defense AND lose a 2nd rounder for a one year rental at a position that doesn't need drastic improvement?

If that were the case Indy wouldn't be shopping him.

Indy is shopping him because he's unhappy and doesn't want to play for them.  He might hold out and waste his last year before hitting FA next season and they lose him for nothing.

Weaken the defense, dump 15million of salary, maybe he's not a 1 year rental anymore...?

Never pay big money for a running back in today's NFL. The drop off from a Top 5 RB to a 3rd round rookie isn't worth money. We're better with Ogbah and our current RBs than with Taylor and without Ogbah.

isn't Ogbah bench depth when you have 2 better edge rushers on the team?  at 15 million per year, is it worth a defensive rotation?

He's not happy and doesn't want to play for them because he wants a new contract and Indy doesn't want to pay him. If he was a top 3 RB they would have already given him a new contract. He's coming off a season where his numbers were down, I think they would like to see those numbers come back to where they were in 2021 before giving him a new contract, so they gave him a chance to find a trade partner so that they can get something for him if he decides to sit out the season. I remember when Zeke was holding the Cowboys hostage 2 years before his contract was up and the Cowboys paid him. That was a mistake and he's a lot better RB than Jonathan Taylor.

I'm happy with the RB's we have here now. They're not as good as Taylor, but the Dolphins don't really need Taylor either. Their offense isn't built upon the run game, it's built on the pass game and hitting for a few big runs a game which the RB's on the roster can do.

That is an inaccurate assessment.

Taylor is unhappy because of the comments from Indy's owner about running backs.  Taylor believes that no matter how well he does, the Colts won't pay him because Jim Irsay doesn't value that position.  Or, to quote Taylor directly:


Furthermore:

That's not true at all in 2023.
Who would you call the top 3 RBs in the league right now, and what contracts are they playing under?

So he doesn't want a new contract and Indy does want to pay him? I'd like to know what part of my statement is inaccurate.

Well he's probably also unhappy about those comments, but that's just more kindling for the fire.

I fail to see how this is different from what I said. He wants a new contract and Indy doesn't want to give it to him.

The following seems about right to me at least based on last year's stats. If he regains his form he might be a top 5 RB, but there's no guarantee of that.

https://www.nfl.com/news/rb-index-ranking-all-75-starting-running-backs-from-the-2022-nfl-season

"Doesn't want to pay" is present tense.  That is not the reason Taylor wants to be traded.
He believes they will not (future tense) want to pay him, based on Irsay's comments.

I think Taylor would be willing to be traded to a different team without necessarily receiving a new contract this year.  The crux of the issue is that Taylor believes he is on a team that does not value him and will not pay him - regardless of how well he plays - because Irsay views running backs as inherently expendable.

You're splitting hairs. He wants an extension to his current contract. Now it's quite possible that he would be willing to wait till next year to get it, but he wants it now. He in fact went to Irsay to talk about an extension and was rebuffed. That's what he's unhappy about. In fact I've seen several articles that say one of the sticking points with trading for him is the contract that he wants. Most teams aren't willing to make him a contract offer this year, they want to see him play in 2023 just like Indy. He wants it now or at least he wants to be in conversations about it now. Whether or not he gets that is a different story.

I'm sure that's true. Neither is anyone else based on his 2022 production at least not the contract that he wants. This is the problem not just for the Colts but for everyone thinking about trading for him. He wants a new contract and he wants it without having to "prove" himself this year. No one wants to do that. They'd either like to give him a contract more in line with his production from 2022 which is not top 5 RB or wait to see how he performs in 2023 and then discuss a new contract. Neither is what Taylor wants.

Willing, but not happy about it.

Which is pretty much a common theme in the NFL. They also would like to see him return to 2021 form before giving him a new contract and he's not happy about that.

1) McCaffrey (SF): signed a 4-year $64M extension in 2020 to make him the highest paid RB ever (is getting paid)
2) Ekeler (LAC): playing on final year of a 4-year $24.5M deal, team has refused new extension (is not getting paid)
3) Jacobs (LV): playing on franchise tag after end of rookie contract (is not getting paid)
4) Henry (TEN): playing on final year of 4-year $50M deal (is getting paid)
5) Chubb (CLE): signed a 3-year $36M extension in 2021 (is arguably getting paid)
6) Barkley (NYG): playing on franchise tag after end of rookie contract (is not getting paid)
7) Cook (NYJ): after getting cut by MIN, is playing on a 1-year $7M contract (is REALLY not getting paid)
8) Jones (GB): signed a 4-year $48M contract in 2021 (is getting paid)
9) Stevenson (NE): playing on rookie deal (is REALLY not getting paid)
10) Sanders (CAR): just signed a 4-year $25M contract (is barely getting paid?)

Of the top 10 RBs, there are at most four that you could say are being paid commensurately... and of those, only one is currently rated in the top 3.  From 2019-2021 you saw some big RB contracts go out to Elliott, Henry, Cook, McCaffrey and Jones, but since then the well has basically gone dry.

The idea of "If he was a top 3 RB they would have already given him a new contract" is very far from true in today's NFL; even you later acknowledge that refusing to pay RBs is a common theme.

Which just reinforces the whole problem with Taylor. He wants to get paid like a top 5 RB but Indy and pretty much everyone else is not prepared to do that right now. He could take a lesser contract now which he doesn't want to do or he can play out 2023 and then negotiate a new contract which he doesn't want to do either. That's why he's unhappy. He feels like he deserves to get paid now like a top 5 RB and not have to prove it in 2023. If he plays for Indy in 2023 and returns to 2021 form, Indy will pay him despite what Irsay says which is just rhetoric to not have to discuss a new contract with him now. As you said Irsay says he doesn't value a RB but he sure does want to be compensated like it's a value to him. He's talking out both sides of his mouth.

That's fair enough, but then that only matters if he was a top 3 RB which he isn't.

Again, I don't think that's it.  We've seen players unhappy with their pay that threaten a holdout or what have you.  A player that demands a trade usually does so because they are unhappy with the team's management, either because they don't think management will be willing to pay up in the future, or due to other interpersonal issues.

Taylor isn't holding out for an extension; he doesn't want to play for the Colts because of Irsay's comments.

Again, I don't think that's true at all!  LV isn't paying Jacobs and NYG isn't paying Barkley.  The system is set up for them to squeeze two extra years out of a good RB on the franchise tag (at a pricey-but-manageable cost), and then dump them after they have consumed the most useful bit of tread on the tires.

Well, yes: Irsay is currently representing the position that he believes he can get a first for Taylor.  His problem is that most other owners agree with his original commentary and are also not willing to pay a high cost (in $$$ or picks) for a RB.

I think you can argue that players playing on a franchise tag are getting paid, if only for a single year. If you include them 5 out of the top 6 RB's in the league are getting paid this year. Are being fairly compensated is a little more questionable.

I think this article accurately depicts my opinion on this subject.

https://www.stampedeblue.com/2023/8/21/23840878/report-the-contract-the-colts-jonathan-taylor-is-expecting-is-the-challenge-for-trade

First off, RBs are so underpaid that even the value of their franchise tag is pathetic (around $10M).  So given the gap between an RB's franchise tag and, say, a WR's franchise tag, I would not agree that players on a franchise tag are "getting paid."

Second, franchise tags are inflicted on players by teams.  They consume a year of a player's prime playing window and offer no future security.   No player wants to play on a franchise tag, but they effectively have no choice: it's either "Lose a prime earning year with no future security for 1 season of above average NFL pay," or "Lose a prime earning year and receive no pay."  The only reason franchise tags exist is because the NFLPA is weak.

Ultimately, when we talk about whether a player is "getting paid," the context is a contract with large guarantees.  I don't consider a player on a franchise tag to be "getting paid" for the same reason that I wouldn't consider a player on a backloaded contract with no signing bonus to be "getting paid": no one knows what the future may bring, so the only meaningful pay is that which is guaranteed.  In the context of the NFL, a $10M guarantee is not much of a guarantee at all.

I'm all for player empowerment and for players to get paid as much as they can get paid.

The issue here is that the RB position is being perceived to be of little value to a team. The perception is that the drop off from RB 1 to RB 10 is minor and in the end whether you pick up a "top 5" RB, or you plug in the guy from the practice squad, the production is very similar.

So why pay large salaries to RBs when they're a dime a dozen? WRs are much more impactful in today's game.

^ This is definitely true.

But there is an argument that there are a few guys that still have that "feature back" ability: McCaffery, Henry...maybe Taylor.

And it also might help our specific situation by alleviating some pressure on Tua and trying to preserve his brains.

There are a few guys who can still change a game. No one can argue that if we had peak Henry ( or peak Ricky ) right now that we would be that much more of a threat.

Taylor is staying with the Colts for now and placed on the PUP List. Apparently, Indy didn't get an offer to their liking so they are keeping him for now.

Hard to ask for a 1st or 2nd rounder for a guy who is on the last year of his deal and states he wants a new contract now. Even if he didn't, a 1st rounder for one year left is a big ask. Not surprised no one came close.

Unless he plays this year and proves that he still is a top 5 RB, I don't think they'll be much interest in signing him to one of the biggest contracts for RB's like he wants next year either. Either he plays this year and proves his worth or the best offer is probably going to be a franchise tag from Indy.

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

The days of big deals for RB's are almost 100% over. They break down way too fast (not their fault), the league is going away from running and replacements at 80% production or greater are dirt cheap.

It's weird that the Colts would get nothing and now the guy is out for a quarter for the season, at least.

Jim Irsay is an insane man who loves painkillers. So, nothing should be surprising.

He's not healthy. He's still recovering from offseason surgery. There was not really any expectation that he would play right away if he was traded anyway.

I'm just saying from the Colts perspective.

They had an opportunity to cut ties and get 2 second rounders for a guy who's going to not be ready for the season, and then presumably they're going to lose anyway.

They'll franchise tag him next year. So either he plays for the Colts or he doesn't play. I assume the feeling is that he'll play, if not this year then next year or they'll get what they want in trade.

I understand.

Did any team actually offer two 2nd rounders? Because that would be insane to offer and even crazier to turn down.

I can't find evidence of it and I don't remember where I saw it, if it was accurate, and these are all leaks/rumors anyway, but I thought the Dolphins offered a 2nd this year and next year and then a few bum players for salary purposes.

And that maybe the Colts wanted a first or something like that.

According to what I saw the Colts wanted Jaylen Waddle and a mid round pick for Taylor. Miami turned them down.

As would I.

I don't like to trade pieces that are working for pieces that might not work.  I'd rather trade pieces that aren't working or trade away futures.

The Colts have big ones to ask for Waddle.  there's not a GM in this league that would make that trade, unless it was Waddle for Taylor + picks.

3 years of Waddle for 13 games (maybe) of Taylor means the picks would have to be their next 5 1st Rounders for it to be reasonable.

EDIT: Since this is being confirmed by many outlets, it appears that Irsay has fallen back on his painkiller addiction. There is no other reasonable answer for why he asked for 3 years of Waddle PLUS MORE in exchange for 13 games of a running back. Let us now pray for Jim Irsay's recovery.