Grading the Colts’ trade deadline: Which moves helped the rebuild and which could backfire?

INDIANAPOLIS, IN - MAY 06: Indianapolis Colts Assistant General Manager Ed Dodds watches a drill during the Indianapolis Colts rookie camp practice on May 6, 2023 at the Indiana Farm Bureau Football Center in Indianapolis, IN. (Photo by Zach Bolinger/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images) | Icon Sportswire via Getty Images

The Indianapolis Colts were among the NFL's busiest teams leading up to Tuesday's trade deadline, parting ways with four established players while electing to retain several others who had generated considerable interest around the league. With the team sitting at 2-7 and preparing for a significant rebuilding period following the dismissal of general manager Chris Ballard, the organization made it clear that its priorities have shifted toward the future.

Over the past several weeks, I examined the potential trade values of Jonathan Taylor, DeForest Buckner, Quenton Nelson and Josh Downs, before taking a closer look at which players Indianapolis should actually consider moving. The Colts ultimately traded three of those four players, along with veteran wide receiver Keenan Allen, while deciding to hold onto Taylor despite receiving multiple offers involving significant draft capital.

In total, Indianapolis acquired six draft selections while surrendering one seventh-round pick, leaving the organization with 10 picks in the 2027 NFL Draft and another eight in 2028. That is a substantial amount of ammunition for whoever takes over as general manager, particularly with the Colts still lacking their first-round selection in 2027 following the Sauce Gardner trade.

However, accumulating draft capital does not automatically make every decision a good one. Some of the trades were necessary and provided excellent returns, while others were considerably more difficult to justify given the players involved and the potential impact on the team's next competitive window. The same applies to the veterans Indianapolis decided to keep, especially those whose contracts expire after the season.

With that in mind, here is how I would grade each of the Colts' major trade deadline decisions.

DeForest Buckner

Traded to San Francisco for a 2027 fourth-round pick

Of all the decisions Indianapolis made ahead of the deadline, trading Buckner was probably the easiest to justify. The 32-year-old defensive tackle remained one of the team's most productive players, but with his contract expiring after the season and the Colts potentially several years away from returning to contention, retaining him for another eight games offered very little long-term benefit.

Buckner had also appeared increasingly frustrated with the organization's continued struggles, something that was evident throughout his recent interviews. After spending more than six seasons in Indianapolis without experiencing sustained postseason success, an opportunity to return to San Francisco and compete for another championship made sense for both sides. The Colts were unlikely to retain him on another expensive multiyear deal, while Buckner could potentially spend the final productive years of his career playing meaningful football for a contender.

Perhaps the biggest reason I supported this trade was the emergence of Adetomiwa Adebawore. The former fourth-round pick has developed into an extremely disruptive interior pass rusher this season, and Indianapolis has since rewarded him with a two-year, $35 million extension. His increased opportunities following Buckner's departure should provide the organization with an opportunity to evaluate whether he can become a long-term cornerstone of the defensive line, while also allowing the Colts to begin building around a much younger player.

In my previous article, I projected that Buckner would fetch a 2027 fourth-round pick, which is exactly what Indianapolis received. That is excellent compensation for a 32-year-old defensive tackle approaching free agency, particularly when considering that any potential compensatory selection would not arrive until 2028 and would depend on several factors outside the organization's control.

The Colts secured a guaranteed draft pick, created additional opportunities for a promising young player and allowed a respected veteran to pursue a championship elsewhere. I have very little criticism of this decision.

Final grade: A

Quenton Nelson

Traded to Seattle for a 2027 third-round pick and 2028 fifth-round pick

Nelson's departure is considerably more difficult to evaluate because, unlike Buckner, there is a legitimate argument that he could still have been an important contributor when the Colts eventually return to contention.

At 30 years old, Nelson remains one of the NFL's premier offensive guards and has shown little indication that his performance is beginning to decline. He could reasonably continue playing at a high level for another three or four seasons, meaning he would likely still be a quality starter if Indianapolis manages to build a competitive team by 2028 or 2029. There was also little indication that Nelson wanted to leave, making his departure particularly disappointing for a player who has spent his entire career with the organization.

However, the compensation Indianapolis received was undeniably strong when compared with the historical trade market for guards. Kansas City received only a fourth-round pick for Joe Thuney in 2025, despite the veteran coming off another All-Pro season. Nelson is younger and arguably has more productive years ahead of him, but his expiring contract limited the number of teams likely to surrender significant draft capital.

Getting a third-round selection and a future fifth is therefore an excellent return from a pure trade-value perspective, particularly considering that Nelson was scheduled to become an unrestricted free agent following the season.

My biggest concern is what Indianapolis has actually lost. Nelson was one of the few players capable of consistently dominating his individual matchup, and his presence helped hold together an offensive line that has experienced considerable turnover throughout the past several years. Replacing that level of production will not be easy, and losing him also makes life more difficult for Jonathan Taylor and whoever eventually becomes the Colts' next franchise quarterback.

There is always the possibility that Nelson could return to Indianapolis in free agency, either next offseason or later in his career, although I certainly wouldn't build the organization's plans around that scenario. His attachment to Indianapolis makes the idea worth considering, but there is no guarantee he would be interested in returning after establishing himself in Seattle.

Ultimately, I understand the reasoning behind this move and believe the Colts maximized his current trade value. However, considering his continued elite production, potential longevity and desire to remain with the franchise, there was an argument for extending him and keeping him.

Final grade: B-

Keenan Allen

Traded to San Francisco for a 2027 sixth-round pick

This one is relatively straightforward. Allen was 34 years old, playing on a one-year contract and was never going to factor into the Colts' long-term plans. The veteran receiver provided some reliability and experience to an offense that has struggled considerably this season, but his presence offered little meaningful value to a team that is no longer realistically competing for a playoff spot.

Allen finished his Colts tenure with 40 receptions for 351 yards and one touchdown, demonstrating that he could still contribute as a possession receiver even if he was no longer capable of consistently producing at the level that made him a six-time Pro Bowler. His route running and experience against various defensive coverages remained useful, but Indianapolis had little reason to retain him for the remainder of a lost season when younger receivers could benefit from additional playing time.

Getting a sixth-round pick for an aging receiver on an expiring contract is a perfectly reasonable outcome. The Colts were never going to receive premium compensation for Allen, and a guaranteed draft selection is considerably more valuable to the organization than another eight games of modest production from a player who was unlikely to return next season.

San Francisco receives an experienced receiver capable of helping its playoff push, while Indianapolis gains another asset and creates opportunities for younger players such as Deion Burks. There is really nothing to complain about here.

Final grade: A

Josh Downs

Traded to Kansas City, along with a 2027 seventh-round pick, for 2027 fourth- and fifth-round selections

I was considerably more conflicted about trading Downs when the rumors first emerged, particularly because he is only 25 years old and should be entering the most productive stretch of his career. However, after watching his performances deteriorate over the past several weeks and seeing how he handled his departure from Indianapolis, I have absolutely no problem with the Colts moving on.

Downs is a talented receiver who has demonstrated the ability to create separation and consistently contribute from the slot, but his recent performances were extremely disappointing. Over his final three games with Indianapolis, he managed just nine receptions for 65 yards, while his struggles with drops and inconsistency became increasingly frustrating. The quarterback play certainly did him no favors, but Downs was not doing enough individually to justify the level of confidence that some had placed in him as one of the team's most dependable receiving options.

His attitude throughout the trade speculation was equally concerning. Downs appeared increasingly unhappy during his recent media appearances, and while I can understand the frustration of playing for a struggling organization, there is still a level of professionalism expected from someone being paid to represent an NFL franchise.

His reaction after being traded to Kansas City was particularly distasteful.

pic.twitter.com/SWGjirDe9N

- JD (@JoshDowns) November 10, 2026

Shortly after the deal was announced, Downs posted a celebratory GIF on social media that certainly gave the impression he was thrilled to be leaving Indianapolis. He later expressed gratitude toward the organization, but I found the timing and nature of his initial reaction disrespectful to the team and its supporters. There is nothing wrong with wanting to play for a contender, especially when the Colts are heading toward another rebuild, but celebrating your departure so publicly after several disappointing performances is not a particularly good look.

From a football perspective, Indianapolis also received excellent compensation given the circumstances. Downs was playing out the final year of his rookie contract, had reportedly requested a trade and was unlikely to sign an extension with the Colts. In my previous trade-value analysis, I projected a fourth-round pick and a future fifth, and Indianapolis essentially matched that return while acquiring both selections in 2027 and surrendering an additional seventh-rounder.

The Colts would ordinarily be reluctant to move a talented 25-year-old receiver during a rebuild, but there is little benefit in retaining someone who no longer wants to be part of the organization. Getting two useful draft selections for a player with an expiring contract and an uncertain future is an excellent outcome.

Good riddance, and hopefully the additional picks help Indianapolis find players who genuinely want to contribute to the organization's future.

Final grade: A

Jonathan Taylor

Retained despite reported offers involving second-round selections

Taylor might be the most difficult decision to grade because there are strong arguments on both sides, and we may not know whether Indianapolis made the correct choice for another year or two.

According to reports, the New York Giants offered a second- and fifth-round selection for Taylor earlier in the trade process, while other organizations were reportedly willing to surrender similar packages. Indianapolis ultimately held firm on its asking price, apparently seeking a first-round pick or compensation comparable to what Carolina received for Christian McCaffrey in 2022.

I understand that approach. Taylor is still one of the NFL's premier running backs, remains under contract through 2028 and is capable of immediately improving a contender's offense. The Colts were under no obligation to trade him, particularly when interested teams were unwilling to meet their valuation. There is a reasonable argument that Taylor is worth a first-round selection, and I certainly wouldn't criticize Indianapolis for attempting to maximize the return on one of its few remaining elite players.

However, the bigger question is whether keeping him actually benefits the Colts over the next several seasons.

I believe 2029 is the first realistic target for Indianapolis to become a genuinely competitive team again. The organization is unlikely to accomplish much in 2027 without a first-round pick and with so many holes across the roster, while 2028 could realistically be the first season of a new quarterback-led rebuild. Expecting that quarterback to immediately lead the Colts into contention would be optimistic, leaving 2029 as a more sensible target for sustained success.

Taylor will be 30 years old by then, with an enormous amount of mileage accumulated throughout his college and professional career. While he could certainly remain productive, there is a legitimate possibility that his best football will already be behind him, making his expensive contract increasingly difficult to justify on a team attempting to develop a younger offensive core.

That is why I would have seriously considered accepting a second- and fifth-round pick. It may not represent full market value for a player of Taylor's caliber, but the Colts are not necessarily in a position where they can afford to ignore meaningful draft capital simply because they believe a player is worth more.

At the same time, retaining Taylor preserves the possibility of receiving better compensation during the offseason. Injuries, free-agent departures and changing roster needs could create additional interest from teams looking for an established running back, particularly if Taylor remains healthy and productive over the final eight games.

If that is the plan, I would strongly consider reducing his workload over the remainder of the season. Indianapolis has little to gain from giving Taylor 25 carries every week in games that are unlikely to have meaningful playoff implications, especially when the organization has a promising young back in Seth McGowan who could benefit from more opportunities.

Protecting Taylor's health while continuing to demonstrate his value would give the next general manager greater flexibility when deciding whether to keep him or revisit trade discussions during the offseason.

I don't hate the decision to retain Taylor, but I also struggle to understand the long-term vision unless Indianapolis genuinely believes it can return to contention much sooner than I anticipate. If the Colts eventually receive a first-round pick for him, this decision could look excellent. If his value declines and they are forced to accept less next offseason, passing on the reported second- and fifth-round package will become much harder to defend.

Final grade: B-

Grover Stewart

Retained despite reported interest involving a fourth-round pick

Stewart was another veteran whose future appeared uncertain leading up to the deadline, particularly with his contract expiring after the season. According to NFL insider Jordan Schultz, Indianapolis reportedly received an offer involving a fourth-round pick and another late-round selection, but waited to make a decision before the offer was eventually withdrawn. The exact terms of the proposal remain somewhat unclear, making it difficult to determine precisely what the Colts turned down.

Unlike Buckner, however, Stewart is not someone Indianapolis can easily replace.

The 33-year-old defensive tackle remains an effective run defender, capable of occupying blockers and controlling the interior of the defensive line. His importance becomes even greater when considering the Colts' relatively weak linebacker group, which has struggled to consistently fill gaps and prevent opposing running backs from reaching the second level.

Jerry Tillery is a significant downgrade at nose tackle, and the Colts do not currently have an obvious young replacement capable of providing the same level of production. Moving Stewart would have created another major hole along the defensive line, something Indianapolis would almost certainly have needed to address during the offseason.

There is also a reasonable argument that Stewart could remain productive for another two or three seasons. His position relies heavily on strength, leverage and technique, and while age-related decline is always a concern, he has not shown enough deterioration to suggest that he is approaching the end of his career.

That makes retaining him understandable, particularly if the Colts intend to offer him another contract after the season. A reasonably priced two-year deal could allow Stewart to provide leadership and stability while Indianapolis develops a younger long-term replacement.

However, there is one major condition attached to this grade.

If Stewart walks in free agency and the Colts receive nothing beyond the possibility of a compensatory selection, passing on a reported fourth-round offer will have been a significant mistake. Indianapolis cannot afford to allow productive veterans on expiring contracts to leave without securing compensation when rebuilding the roster is supposed to be the organization's primary objective.

I have to believe the decision to retain Stewart reflects a genuine intention to bring him back next season. If that is the case, I am comfortable with the move, especially considering how important he remains to the defensive front.

If he leaves in March, however, this grade immediately drops to an F.

Final grade: B+ (F if he leaves in free agency without a meaningful return)

Charvarius Ward - No grade

Retained

There is very little to analyze here because the market for Ward was always going to be extremely limited. Ward said it best:

If you're a good player and you feel like you got a little value ... teams might be interested in you. If a team needs a corner, I don't know if they're gonna look for Mooney. Mooney making $20 million a year."

Final grade: N/A

Daniel Jones - No grade

Retained

Jones was another player whose name surfaced in trade speculation, although the market for him never appeared particularly strong.

Minnesota was viewed as one of the most logical destinations, given its quarterback situation and Jones' previous connection with the organization. Baltimore also reportedly inquired before ultimately acquiring Jacoby Brissett, while the Vikings eventually reunited with Kirk Cousins in a separate trade with Las Vegas.

I can't particularly blame either team for looking elsewhere.

Jones has struggled considerably this season, and his contract creates additional complications for any organization considering acquiring him. He is scheduled to earn $38 million in 2027, although only approximately $10.5 million is currently guaranteed for injury before additional guarantees become relevant in March. That gives Indianapolis' next general manager some flexibility, but it also makes Jones a difficult player to trade during the season without a team being particularly desperate for quarterback help.

According to Tom Pelissero, the Colts informed Jones before the deadline that he would not be traded, despite receiving inquiries from other organizations. While Indianapolis listened to calls, there was apparently little intention of actually completing a deal.

I would have welcomed an opportunity to move Jones and allow the next general manager to begin with a clean slate at quarterback, but the Colts cannot force another team to acquire him. At least they explored the market, and whoever takes over the organization will have another opportunity to evaluate his future during the offseason.

Final grade: N/A

Overall assessment - B+

When evaluating the trade deadline as a whole, I believe Indianapolis did considerably more good than bad, even if there are a few decisions that could become problematic over the next several seasons.

Trading Buckner, Allen and Downs made plenty of sense, particularly given their expiring contracts and the organization's uncertain future. The compensation received for each player was strong relative to the market, and those decisions allow the Colts to begin accumulating assets without unnecessarily sacrificing players who were likely to contribute to the team's next competitive window.

Nelson's departure was a tricky one. While I, and most fans, had a strong emotional attachment to such an incredible, loyal and consistent player, the Colts got top dollar for him and the possibility of a reunion in the future is not out of the question. While my heart wanted him to stay, my brain agrees with the trade.

Taylor and Stewart represent the two biggest unresolved questions. Both could still provide meaningful contributions over the next few seasons, but their long-term futures need to be evaluated against a realistic timeline for returning to contention. Retaining them only makes sense if the Colts have a clear plan for how they fit into the next competitive roster or believe they can eventually receive better compensation.

The Colts now possess additional draft capital and have already demonstrated a willingness to make difficult decisions about established veterans. However, those selections are only valuable if the next general manager can turn them into productive players, something this organization has struggled to do consistently throughout the past several years.

I believe the Colts approached the deadline correctly by becoming sellers without completely dismantling the roster. There are still important decisions ahead, particularly involving Taylor, Stewart and the quarterback position, but Indianapolis has at least begun laying the groundwork for a new direction.

Whether those decisions ultimately translate into a competitive team by 2029 will depend far more on what the organization does next than what it accomplished at the deadline.