Story by
Vikings May Be Cooling on Star Running Back Trade
- Story by
- Vikings May Be Cooling on Star Running Back Trade
Brad Rempel-Imagn Images via Reuters Connect
Six days. That is all the time the Minnesota Vikings have left to reshape their roster before the NFL trade deadline hits at 3 p.m. CT on Nov. 10, and one name has followed them around for weeks: Indianapolis Colts running back Jonathan Taylor.
The interest has been real. The Colts opened the door to a Taylor trade on Halloween, and earlier this week Minnesota was named first among the handful of teams leading the chase for his services. The Vikings are 6-1 , but their run game sits at 113.9 yards per game and 4.0 yards per carry, good for 17th and 22nd in the NFL respectively.
Advertisement
Vikings + Jonathan Taylor trade rumors losing steam?
Of course, wanting an elite asset and actually paying for one are two very different things. On Wednesday, Dan Graziano (ESPN) shared what he is hearing about Minnesota's plans at the position.
Minnesota has looked around at running backs, but it doesn't sound as if the Vikings are in position to take on much salary. If they make an addition to help their running game, it might just as easily be an interior offensive lineman or a blocking tight end. And the Packers have checked in on running backs ( Josh Jacobs ' situation remains a major question mark ) as well as offensive linemen. All four teams would occupy playoff spots if the season were to end right now, and I expect them all to be at least somewhat active. In some cases, they'll be competing for the same players.
Money is the first problem. Minnesota has just $5.84 million in cap space, and Taylor is signed through 2028 after a two-year, $44 million extension this offseason. Any deal for him is a multi-year commitment, not a rental.
The asking price is the second. In the same ESPN piece, executives valued Taylor at a second-round pick plus another pick, and the Colts could be holding out for the equivalent of a first.
Advertisement
Other insiders saying mostly the same as Graziano
Graziano isn't the only one questioning whether general manager Nolan Teasley will go that far. Tom Pelissero (The Ringer) reported on Oct. 31 that the Colts already turned down a 2027 second-round pick plus an additional pick.
Pelissero also reported last week on KFAN, like Graziano today at ESPN, that the Vikings are unlikely to splurge for a running back (like Jonathan Taylor). The cost is just too high.
Related: WTF was O'Connell Doing with Vikings RB Rotation vs Lions?
More than likely, Teasley doesn't want to dedicate the cap or the draft pick compensation to get a deal done for Taylor, and the Wilfs probably don't want to spend the cash, which is even more than the cap hits.
Advertisement
On Monday, while The Athletic's Alec Lewis wouldn't rule out a blockbuster running back trade, he too has questions surrounding the fiduciary aspects of what that trade would look like.
"Jonathan Taylor is owed upwards of $16 million if he's on a team's roster in 2027. Then that bumps up to around $17 million if he's on the roster in 2028. Now, you might be saying, 'Well, you could just rent him and cut him,' but you're not going to rent him for a second-round pick plus and then just cut him a year later. That's not serviceable."
Related: MN Vikings Clearing Roster Room for Possible Move?
What the MN Vikings might do at trade deadline instead
If the Vikings stay out of the Taylor sweepstakes, the backfield will keep leaning on an aging Aaron Jones and Jordan Mason, who returned from IR on Oct. 24 but isn't trustworthy in pass protection, which is why DeeJay Dallas got a bunch of snaps in Week 8.
If they avoid adding a running back, they could help themselves with more talent on the interior offensive line or a new blocking tight end to replace the injured Josh Oliver. They could make moves like that for much cheaper than adding a high-end running back.
Advertisement
Passing on Jonathan Taylor would also leave him on the board for the rest of the NFC North. The Green Bay Packers have checked in on running backs and make a ton of sense. Not landing Taylor would be one thing. His landing in Green Bay would be something else.
