Are we getting to the point to start to trade Peyton Manning? (1 Viewer)

[gianmarco]

So, I'm sure many of you think this is quite premature to consider this. Or is it?

Peyton has just turned 32 this year. Yes, this is still young by QB standards and I'm quite sure he's definitely got a few years left. This isn't a matter of trying to guess whether it's going to be 4, 5, or 6 more years but more about trade value.

In just 2 short years, Manning will be 34 to start the year (and turning 35 that following March). At that point, Manning may start to lose considerable value as most will be well aware of his age at that point and not many are going to pay a premium price for a 35 year old QB no matter how good he is. Think of Favre who was only 38 this past year. His value took a serious hit over his last 3 yrs. Peyton will be in that same spot in just 2 short years.

So, the point of this discussion is when is the best time to trade him? I think this year he still has maximal trade value as he's still going relatively high in startup drafts. But I would argue in 2 yrs, when he's 34, is when that value will start to go down. It's similar to the LT discussion that gained momentum last year. At age 28, he was still the #1 RB but there were talks that it was the last chance to trade him to get top value. Turns out that it was true as this year he seems to be getting less in return. I truly think Manning will see that in just 2 short years, which mean this year and probably next will be the last chance to get top dollar in return. And while Manning is still at the top, there are some guys that have joined him near the top that should produce almost at the same level. A trade for one of these guys using Manning could net you a little something in return.

Just some food for thought as it may be too late in 2 short years.

 

[MAC_32]

In season 2009, but it depends on your roster. If you don't have the QB depth to support dealing Manning you have to ride it out until you do, if it takes you until he's 36 to get that depth then so be it - deal him then. I'd begin to explore QB2 and QB3 options this season setting yourself up for a potential move.

 

[gianmarco]

In season 2009, but it depends on your roster. If you don't have the QB depth to support dealing Manning you have to ride it out until you do, if it takes you until he's 36 to get that depth then so be it - deal him then. I'd begin to explore QB2 and QB3 options this season setting yourself up for a potential move.

Yeah, it absolutely depends on your roster. And I'm not trying to imply that it's time to bail on him as he's still the #1 fantasy QB, IMO (or at least tied with Brady now) and a very good commodity. But, as you pointed out, you may want to start working on acquiring depth so that you can trade him off. If you let this year come and go, then next year might be the last chance to move him for maximum value and without your roster set up to move him, you may miss out. This year is probably when you want to at least start preparations for moving him late this year or next year.

 

[renesauz]

Y'all are nuts...unless someone offers you the deal of a lifetime, you ride your stud into the ground. Certain players are simply too good to deal until you're dead certain they're losing it. Then there will always be one fool around who believes they'll reclaim their former glory.

 

[MAC_32]

Y'all are nuts...unless someone offers you the deal of a lifetime, you ride your stud into the ground. Certain players are simply too good to deal until you're dead certain they're losing it. Then there will always be one fool around who believes they'll reclaim their former glory.

I strongly disagree with that. To each their own on team management, in most cases I'd rather sell my investment at the point when the stock has peaked and is ready to dive than just ride it out until there's nothing left. Sets myself up better for the future, the key is to set yourself up so the short term hit is minimal if any.

 

[Tecmo]

an old Peyton will still have a better arm than half the QBs in the league. His game limits his hits, his decision making is lightning quick. he's a good bet to play in his late 30s. I wouldn't trade him

 

[massraider]

Looking further than 2 years in dynasty is a fools errand, IMO. Manning is as sure a thing as there is, and while I think it is possible the wheels fall off soon, I think it is more likely that he is putting up top 10 numbers for the next 5 years. That's a long time.

 

[renesauz]

Y'all are nuts...unless someone offers you the deal of a lifetime, you ride your stud into the ground. Certain players are simply too good to deal until you're dead certain they're losing it. Then there will always be one fool around who believes they'll reclaim their former glory.

I strongly disagree with that. To each their own on team management, in most cases I'd rather sell my investment at the point when the stock has peaked and is ready to dive than just ride it out until there's nothing left. Sets myself up better for the future, the key is to set yourself up so the short term hit is minimal if any.

Not arguing with that idea..but it's a very difficult idea to implement. Sell too early (when the "value is highest")and lose out on a couple of seasons of elite performance, and you do yourself a much greater dis-service then had you kept him a season PAST HIS PRIME. That's especially true for a QB, as they can be effective, and valuable for several seasons past that prime. The bottom line is this: Getting peak "sell value" is nice, but the goal is to win championships, and those are won by having those elite players on your team, not by selling them away for fear they will be worth less in a year or two.

Sell the Claytons and the Hasslebecks of the world at their peaks, ride the Tomlinsons, Brady's and Peyton Manning's to championships, and then still get value out of them past the peak from the fools hoping for a Favre-like resurgance.

 

[Phlash]

Looking further than 2 years in dynasty is a fools errand, IMO. Manning is as sure a thing as there is, and while I think it is possible the wheels fall off soon, I think it is more likely that he is putting up top 10 numbers for the next 5 years. That's a long time.

Gotta agree wholeheartedly with this post. Peyton Manning isn't just "another" QB. He's probably one of the top 5 QBs of all time. The guy has put up some sick numbers throughout his career and from the way he plays (quick release, avoids hits with great pocket presence, talented receivers) you should expect some awesome numbers for the next 5 years. THEN I would start to worry.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

No, not even close. This is his first year that he's now going to be cutting into all of those records Farve has earned.

I'd repost this thread in maybe another 5 years.

 

[Dirty Weasel]

Peyton has been no lower than QB5 in my league for 9 straight years. He finished 1st three times and 3rd two times in the last 5 years. He is arguably the most consistent scorer in all of FF. And he just isn't consistent... he is a consistent top stud! You don't trade away a 32-yr old QB like Peyton. I expect at least 5 more years of top FF production out of him. The Colts show no signs of slowing their passing game down in the next few years.

 

[ADP]

Way to early for this thread......Your reading way to much into his age. You have to look at the whole picture. He still has 5 more years of top 5 QB numbers. Trading him now would be a mistake.

 

[-OZ-]

The bottom line is this: Getting peak "sell value" is nice, but the goal is to win championships, and those are won by having those elite players on your team, not by selling them away for fear they will be worth less in a year or two.Sell the Claytons and the Hasslebecks of the world at their peaks, ride the Tomlinsons, Brady's and Peyton Manning's to championships, and then still get value out of them past the peak from the fools hoping for a Favre-like resurgance.

Same logic applies to TO, LT, and a few others. I know many will disagree, but I'd rather have 2-4 years of these guys on my roster than what you'd probably get in trade for them. Give me 2-4 years of elite production instead of 8 years of lower production. The "next great" player is always around the corner, the great thing about dynasty leagues is there's always new players coming into the league and rebuilding isn't that difficult. Let others trade their elites for 2nd tier players, I'll ride mine into the ground and then enjoy rebuilding - or just trading the next batch of prospects for high performing "old" players. Heck, I was the guy trading for Tiki Barber early in 2006, that trade got me into the championship game and the picks I traded for him hasn't yielded a stud - Tony Hunt, Anthony Waters, and Jarvis Moss. If you see a drop in production coming, trade them, but I personally do not see it with Peyton (or TO, LT, Westbrook, and a couple others). I'd rather be wrong keeping these guys than wrong and hand someone else a championship. That all goes to philosophy, as for Peyton, it obviously depends on what you can get. He's a top 10 player IMO, I suppose if you can get Ben/Brees/Romo + a high 1st, or a player like Lynch or Portis, it might be worthwhile to deal him depending on your team. Besides, there's no real proof that the young bucks will stay around longer than the old dudes, just as an example, I traded Marvin Harrison a couple years back for Kevin Jones, a classic "sell an old guy high for a young buck" that didn't do anything for me. My current thinking might be swayed by that experience.

 

[King of the Jungle]

Most of the time I try to get rid of guys before they bottom out age-wise. Peyton's game relies on football smarts/awareness as well as great footwork IN the pocket. He will be able to ride those skills until he is 40. Keep him.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

Until Indy starts drafting his replacement, I wouldn't be thinking of trading Manning. Favre lost value because of the retirement game he played every off season. I don't think Manning will do the same thing.

 

[gianmarco]

The bottom line is this: Getting peak "sell value" is nice, but the goal is to win championships, and those are won by having those elite players on your team, not by selling them away for fear they will be worth less in a year or two.Sell the Claytons and the Hasslebecks of the world at their peaks, ride the Tomlinsons, Brady's and Peyton Manning's to championships, and then still get value out of them past the peak from the fools hoping for a Favre-like resurgance.

Same logic applies to TO, LT, and a few others. I know many will disagree, but I'd rather have 2-4 years of these guys on my roster than what you'd probably get in trade for them. Give me 2-4 years of elite production instead of 8 years of lower production. The "next great" player is always around the corner, the great thing about dynasty leagues is there's always new players coming into the league and rebuilding isn't that difficult. Let others trade their elites for 2nd tier players, I'll ride mine into the ground and then enjoy rebuilding - or just trading the next batch of prospects for high performing "old" players. Heck, I was the guy trading for Tiki Barber early in 2006, that trade got me into the championship game and the picks I traded for him hasn't yielded a stud - Tony Hunt, Anthony Waters, and Jarvis Moss. If you see a drop in production coming, trade them, but I personally do not see it with Peyton (or TO, LT, Westbrook, and a couple others). I'd rather be wrong keeping these guys than wrong and hand someone else a championship. That all goes to philosophy, as for Peyton, it obviously depends on what you can get. He's a top 10 player IMO, I suppose if you can get Ben/Brees/Romo + a high 1st, or a player like Lynch or Portis, it might be worthwhile to deal him depending on your team. Besides, there's no real proof that the young bucks will stay around longer than the old dudes, just as an example, I traded Marvin Harrison a couple years back for Kevin Jones, a classic "sell an old guy high for a young buck" that didn't do anything for me. My current thinking might be swayed by that experience.

To be honest, that's my philosophy as well. I'm also one that would prefer keeping elite players until they stop producing rather than giving them up for lesser, younger talent. However, it seems the common sentiment is to get maximal trade value and give these guys up. As for those of you arguing that Peyton will have 5 more years of elite production, I think you missed the point of the thread. I admitted in the OP that this isn't a matter of whether or not he has 4, 5, or 6+ yrs of elite level #'s. I'm quite sure he will have that. The point is for those of you that like to maximize trade value, Peyton at the age of 34/35 is going to be considerably more difficult to trade than he will be this year or next year when he's 32 and 33. For example, if you owned a 28 year old Big Ben, would you trade him for a 34/35 yo Manning? I'm not suggesting to just give him away, but if you can get a Romo or Big Ben for him + another player or pick, then this is probably the time to do it. I don't think that will happen 2 yrs from now.

 

[Cookiemonster]

Sell high, IMO applies to the guys w/o staying power and unknowns like rookies and to some extent, Lamont Jordans and Michael Turners. The guys like Manning, you want to buy cheap. I'll buy him from you in a couple years for a late 1st rounder. Examples of what I've done this year; Trade Turner for a 1.05 (I have the 1.04 already) and a future 1st (should be close to a 1.05 again). Trade an '09 1st (likely around 10th overall) for T.O. and two 2nds. Trade Winslow (had Sheffler) for Ward and move from the bottom of the 2nd to the top. People see Sweed and get scared of Hines, but he'll hold that starting job for at least another two years (he's 32), if not longer. They see T.O. as a 35 year old, and I see the best WR in the NFL who's in outstanding condition and plays through a ton of pain. Likewise, I see Manning as QB 1b for 3 or 4 more years, and a top 10 QB for another 3 or 4 after that. 6-8 years of a starting QB, 1/2 of that being stud years and you want to sell?!

 

[jurb26]

People see Sweed and get scared of Hines, but he'll hold that starting job for at least another two years (he's 32), if not longer.

Not to highjack the thread, but in regards to Ward. He has been injured in each of the last 3 seasons and has greatly underperformed in his last 2 from a fantasy perspective. I think people should be scared of Ward regardless of Sweed.

 

[Cookiemonster]

The bottom line is this: Getting peak "sell value" is nice, but the goal is to win championships, and those are won by having those elite players on your team, not by selling them away for fear they will be worth less in a year or two.Sell the Claytons and the Hasslebecks of the world at their peaks, ride the Tomlinsons, Brady's and Peyton Manning's to championships, and then still get value out of them past the peak from the fools hoping for a Favre-like resurgance.

Same logic applies to TO, LT, and a few others. I know many will disagree, but I'd rather have 2-4 years of these guys on my roster than what you'd probably get in trade for them. Give me 2-4 years of elite production instead of 8 years of lower production. The "next great" player is always around the corner, the great thing about dynasty leagues is there's always new players coming into the league and rebuilding isn't that difficult. Let others trade their elites for 2nd tier players, I'll ride mine into the ground and then enjoy rebuilding - or just trading the next batch of prospects for high performing "old" players. Heck, I was the guy trading for Tiki Barber early in 2006, that trade got me into the championship game and the picks I traded for him hasn't yielded a stud - Tony Hunt, Anthony Waters, and Jarvis Moss. If you see a drop in production coming, trade them, but I personally do not see it with Peyton (or TO, LT, Westbrook, and a couple others). I'd rather be wrong keeping these guys than wrong and hand someone else a championship. That all goes to philosophy, as for Peyton, it obviously depends on what you can get. He's a top 10 player IMO, I suppose if you can get Ben/Brees/Romo + a high 1st, or a player like Lynch or Portis, it might be worthwhile to deal him depending on your team. Besides, there's no real proof that the young bucks will stay around longer than the old dudes, just as an example, I traded Marvin Harrison a couple years back for Kevin Jones, a classic "sell an old guy high for a young buck" that didn't do anything for me. My current thinking might be swayed by that experience.

To be honest, that's my philosophy as well. I'm also one that would prefer keeping elite players until they stop producing rather than giving them up for lesser, younger talent. However, it seems the common sentiment is to get maximal trade value and give these guys up. As for those of you arguing that Peyton will have 5 more years of elite production, I think you missed the point of the thread. I admitted in the OP that this isn't a matter of whether or not he has 4, 5, or 6+ yrs of elite level #'s. I'm quite sure he will have that. The point is for those of you that like to maximize trade value, Peyton at the age of 34/35 is going to be considerably more difficult to trade than he will be this year or next year when he's 32 and 33. For example, if you owned a 28 year old Big Ben, would you trade him for a 34/35 yo Manning? I'm not suggesting to just give him away, but if you can get a Romo or Big Ben for him + another player or pick, then this is probably the time to do it. I don't think that will happen 2 yrs from now.

I'd be selling the Romo or Ben if I had them teamed w/ Peyton and scooping up a J.Campbell or Leinart. Romo and Ben haven't proved that they have the staying power. They are sell high, IMO (what's Romo after T.O.? Do you really think the Steelers took a RB in the 1st so Ben can get sacked 50+ times and throw for 30 TDs?).

 

[redman]

The bottom line is this: Getting peak "sell value" is nice, but the goal is to win championships, and those are won by having those elite players on your team, not by selling them away for fear they will be worth less in a year or two.Sell the Claytons and the Hasslebecks of the world at their peaks, ride the Tomlinsons, Brady's and Peyton Manning's to championships, and then still get value out of them past the peak from the fools hoping for a Favre-like resurgance.

Same logic applies to TO, LT, and a few others. I know many will disagree, but I'd rather have 2-4 years of these guys on my roster than what you'd probably get in trade for them. Give me 2-4 years of elite production instead of 8 years of lower production. The "next great" player is always around the corner, the great thing about dynasty leagues is there's always new players coming into the league and rebuilding isn't that difficult. Let others trade their elites for 2nd tier players, I'll ride mine into the ground and then enjoy rebuilding - or just trading the next batch of prospects for high performing "old" players. Heck, I was the guy trading for Tiki Barber early in 2006, that trade got me into the championship game and the picks I traded for him hasn't yielded a stud - Tony Hunt, Anthony Waters, and Jarvis Moss. If you see a drop in production coming, trade them, but I personally do not see it with Peyton (or TO, LT, Westbrook, and a couple others). I'd rather be wrong keeping these guys than wrong and hand someone else a championship. That all goes to philosophy, as for Peyton, it obviously depends on what you can get. He's a top 10 player IMO, I suppose if you can get Ben/Brees/Romo + a high 1st, or a player like Lynch or Portis, it might be worthwhile to deal him depending on your team. Besides, there's no real proof that the young bucks will stay around longer than the old dudes, just as an example, I traded Marvin Harrison a couple years back for Kevin Jones, a classic "sell an old guy high for a young buck" that didn't do anything for me. My current thinking might be swayed by that experience.

To be honest, that's my philosophy as well. I'm also one that would prefer keeping elite players until they stop producing rather than giving them up for lesser, younger talent. However, it seems the common sentiment is to get maximal trade value and give these guys up. As for those of you arguing that Peyton will have 5 more years of elite production, I think you missed the point of the thread. I admitted in the OP that this isn't a matter of whether or not he has 4, 5, or 6+ yrs of elite level #'s. I'm quite sure he will have that. The point is for those of you that like to maximize trade value, Peyton at the age of 34/35 is going to be considerably more difficult to trade than he will be this year or next year when he's 32 and 33. For example, if you owned a 28 year old Big Ben, would you trade him for a 34/35 yo Manning? I'm not suggesting to just give him away, but if you can get a Romo or Big Ben for him + another player or pick, then this is probably the time to do it. I don't think that will happen 2 yrs from now.

Elite fantasy players, and by that I'm talking about the top 3 or so at a given position, are notoriously hard to trade away and come out feeling like you got equal value. You never like to trade quality for quantity, and it's rare when another team is willing to swap studs, as it were, even at a given position. Elite players are elite precisely because they effectively produce the fantasy points of more than one average starting player while only occupying a single position in your starting lineup. Why fragment that? Manning's easily got five good years left, and that offense doesn't figure to decline with him there. The guy is practically never hit, and has as little wear on his body as you could have as a 10-year NFL QB who has never missed a game. Honestly, what are you looking for in trade for Manning? The only straight up trade that would make any sense is Brady, but even if you think they're equivalent (and I don't - Brady's career production has fluctuated more than Manning's overall) why bother? What draft pick would you accept that would make up for the fact that you've also accepted a lesser QB in trade for Manning? If you picked up LT in trade, do you have more faith in LT remaining productive for longer than Manning? How many teams are even in a position to trade away Randy Moss, even for a guy like LT? "Sell high" applies to everyone except for elite players, the only exception being you get the rare blockbuster offer that "Wow's" you. You just can't expect to get equal value in trade.

 

[jurb26]

I'd be selling the Romo or Ben if I had them teamed w/ Peyton and scooping up a J.Campbell or Leinart. Romo and Ben haven't proved that they have the staying power. They are sell high, IMO (what's Romo after T.O.? Do you really think the Steelers took a RB in the 1st so Ben can get sacked 50+ times and throw for 30 TDs?).

The Steelers took a RB in the 1st because he was the BPA and all the Olinemen had been scooped up. Parker is an overrated talent (I've thought this for years) and not a strong between the tackles RB. All teams need a between the tackles RB. Furthermore, Parker himself had spoke about how he thought he would be more effective with less of a workload.... insert Mendenhall. Something you left out of your post that is rather important is that Ben requested a big WR. Pitt responded by drafting Sweed. I'd say the concern for Ben at this point is that the Oline will likely be a mess. Then again, that will impact the running game just as much.

 

[Cookiemonster]

I'd be selling the Romo or Ben if I had them teamed w/ Peyton and scooping up a J.Campbell or Leinart. Romo and Ben haven't proved that they have the staying power. They are sell high, IMO (what's Romo after T.O.? Do you really think the Steelers took a RB in the 1st so Ben can get sacked 50+ times and throw for 30 TDs?).

The Steelers took a RB in the 1st because he was the BPA and all the Olinemen had been scooped up. Parker is an overrated talent (I've thought this for years) and not a strong between the tackles RB. All teams need a between the tackles RB. Furthermore, Parker himself had spoke about how he thought he would be more effective with less of a workload.... insert Mendenhall. Something you left out of your post that is rather important is that Ben requested a big WR. Pitt responded by drafting Sweed. I'd say the concern for Ben at this point is that the Oline will likely be a mess. Then again, that will impact the running game just as much.

Bump this at the end of the year if you'd like, but for now, we're talking about selling a stud for maximum value, not throwing sucker punches at Steeler fans.

 

[jurb26]

I'd be selling the Romo or Ben if I had them teamed w/ Peyton and scooping up a J.Campbell or Leinart. Romo and Ben haven't proved that they have the staying power. They are sell high, IMO (what's Romo after T.O.? Do you really think the Steelers took a RB in the 1st so Ben can get sacked 50+ times and throw for 30 TDs?).

The Steelers took a RB in the 1st because he was the BPA and all the Olinemen had been scooped up. Parker is an overrated talent (I've thought this for years) and not a strong between the tackles RB. All teams need a between the tackles RB. Furthermore, Parker himself had spoke about how he thought he would be more effective with less of a workload.... insert Mendenhall. Something you left out of your post that is rather important is that Ben requested a big WR. Pitt responded by drafting Sweed. I'd say the concern for Ben at this point is that the Oline will likely be a mess. Then again, that will impact the running game just as much.

Bump this at the end of the year if you'd like, but for now, we're talking about selling a stud for maximum value, not throwing sucker punches at Steeler fans.

 

[twitch]

I think Id ride him into the ground.

 

[MAC_32]

Until Indy starts drafting his replacement, I wouldn't be thinking of trading Manning. Favre lost value because of the retirement game he played every off season. I don't think Manning will do the same thing.

Manning's dyno value will take a big hit when his replacement is drafted, just like Favre's did when Rodgers was drafted.

 

[MAC_32]

Sell high, IMO applies to the guys w/o staying power and unknowns like rookies and to some extent, Lamont Jordans and Michael Turners. The guys like Manning, you want to buy cheap. I'll buy him from you in a couple years for a late 1st rounder. Examples of what I've done this year; Trade Turner for a 1.05 (I have the 1.04 already) and a future 1st (should be close to a 1.05 again). Trade an '09 1st (likely around 10th overall) for T.O. and two 2nds. Trade Winslow (had Sheffler) for Ward and move from the bottom of the 2nd to the top. People see Sweed and get scared of Hines, but he'll hold that starting job for at least another two years (he's 32), if not longer. They see T.O. as a 35 year old, and I see the best WR in the NFL who's in outstanding condition and plays through a ton of pain. Likewise, I see Manning as QB 1b for 3 or 4 more years, and a top 10 QB for another 3 or 4 after that. 6-8 years of a starting QB, 1/2 of that being stud years and you want to sell?!

I will not be selling him to you for that, anybody who did would be mental barring something unforseen happening in the next few years. I'm selling him to get younger at QB and upgrading other positions.

 

[Cookiemonster]

Sell high, IMO applies to the guys w/o staying power and unknowns like rookies and to some extent, Lamont Jordans and Michael Turners. The guys like Manning, you want to buy cheap. I'll buy him from you in a couple years for a late 1st rounder. Examples of what I've done this year; Trade Turner for a 1.05 (I have the 1.04 already) and a future 1st (should be close to a 1.05 again). Trade an '09 1st (likely around 10th overall) for T.O. and two 2nds. Trade Winslow (had Sheffler) for Ward and move from the bottom of the 2nd to the top. People see Sweed and get scared of Hines, but he'll hold that starting job for at least another two years (he's 32), if not longer. They see T.O. as a 35 year old, and I see the best WR in the NFL who's in outstanding condition and plays through a ton of pain. Likewise, I see Manning as QB 1b for 3 or 4 more years, and a top 10 QB for another 3 or 4 after that. 6-8 years of a starting QB, 1/2 of that being stud years and you want to sell?!

I will not be selling him to you for that, anybody who did would be mental barring something unforseen happening in the next few years. I'm selling him to get younger at QB and upgrading other positions.

I hope you're smarter than that, but I'm sure he'll go for a 1.07 in quite a few leagues when he turns 35 and spends a few weeks in the trainers' room.

 

[gianmarco]

For clarification's sake:

1. I do NOT own Manning in any leagues.

2. I am NOT a fan of selling-high. In fact, I am the one that targets older elite players and buys them cheap.

That being said, this thread was meant as a discussion as I've seen an overriding theme of not losing value (even on elite players) when they get to a certain point. I'm actually glad that the majority wants to keep Manning. The only thing I will caution is:

1. TO is/was an elite player and he has lost considerable value.

2. Harrison is/was an elite player and has lost considerable value.

3. Holt is/was an elite player and has lost considerable value.

4. Favre was an elite player and lost considerable value near the end of his career.

Inevitably, Manning WILL lose value. Now, whether or not you choose to keep him until his very last day or you want to trade him, that's up to you. But, not every team that owns Manning right now is a contender. There are teams that are in rebuild mode as well that own Manning. In 2-3 yrs, when they become contenders again (if that happens), Manning will be 35 yrs old. Yes, he will still probably be performing at an elite level, but at that point, things are completely different.

The other thing I will argue about Manning is that he's not a monster-force at the QB position like LT has been at the RB position where he outperforms other QB's by a large margin. What Manning is is consistent. Consistently top 3 without fail. But, there are other QB's that perform close to or higher than his level every year. He is more replaceable in terms of point production in a lineup than a guy like LT is.

I personally would not be looking to trade him if I owned him because that's not my style. Others are constantly trying to stay young and this was simply meant to be a discussion that the time is actually coming where we might be seeing a decline in his value. If you're like me, it will be a great time to buy him.

 

[redman]

For clarification's sake:

1. I do NOT own Manning in any leagues.

2. I am NOT a fan of selling-high. In fact, I am the one that targets older elite players and buys them cheap.

That being said, this thread was meant as a discussion as I've seen an overriding theme of not losing value (even on elite players) when they get to a certain point. I'm actually glad that the majority wants to keep Manning. The only thing I will caution is:

1. TO is/was an elite player and he has lost considerable value.

2. Harrison is/was an elite player and has lost considerable value.

3. Holt is/was an elite player and has lost considerable value.

4. Favre was an elite player and lost considerable value near the end of his career.

Inevitably, Manning WILL lose value. Now, whether or not you choose to keep him until his very last day or you want to trade him, that's up to you. But, not every team that owns Manning right now is a contender. There are teams that are in rebuild mode as well that own Manning. In 2-3 yrs, when they become contenders again (if that happens), Manning will be 35 yrs old. Yes, he will still probably be performing at an elite level, but at that point, things are completely different.

The other thing I will argue about Manning is that he's not a monster-force at the QB position like LT has been at the RB position where he outperforms other QB's by a large margin. What Manning is is consistent. Consistently top 3 without fail. But, there are other QB's that perform close to or higher than his level every year. He is more replaceable in terms of point production in a lineup than a guy like LT is.

I personally would not be looking to trade him if I owned him because that's not my style. Others are constantly trying to stay young and this was simply meant to be a discussion that the time is actually coming where we might be seeing a decline in his value. If you're like me, it will be a great time to buy him.

I would agree that if your team has an aging stud, and little else on the roster, then it does make more sense to trade the stud. For such teams, the prospect of a couple of developing but lesser (so far) players and high draft picks is more attractive. While less vulnerable to it, though, you still have to make sure that you're not falling into the quantity-for-quality trade trap. Every player you get should be both younger and an upgrade over what you already have for the position he plays. These players should also have a higher ceiling than they've demonstrated to date. VBD analysis is your friend in weighing such trades.

 

[Caveman_Nick]

A few things make me think that the answer here is no.

The first is that Manning has continued to get better as he has gone along in his career. He may not ever throw 49 TDs again, but throwing TDs isn;t the only measure of "Better"

Second, there is really not a lot of risk in him losing arm strength. So long as he continues to condition himself, a man will tend to continue to build strength through his 30's, not lose it.

Third, QBs don't require the same types of athleticism as other positions. more the require great mental skills, and Peyton keeps improving his.

And last, you have to consider that he does not get hit a lot. By NFL standards, the beating he has taken over his career has been minimal compared to the number of snaps he has played.

I could see Peyton playing at a high level until he approaches 40.

 

[twitch]

For clarification's sake:

1. I do NOT own Manning in any leagues.

2. I am NOT a fan of selling-high. In fact, I am the one that targets older elite players and buys them cheap.

That being said, this thread was meant as a discussion as I've seen an overriding theme of not losing value (even on elite players) when they get to a certain point. I'm actually glad that the majority wants to keep Manning. The only thing I will caution is:

1. TO is/was an elite player and he has lost considerable value.

2. Harrison is/was an elite player and has lost considerable value.

3. Holt is/was an elite player and has lost considerable value.

4. Favre was an elite player and lost considerable value near the end of his career.

Inevitably, Manning WILL lose value. Now, whether or not you choose to keep him until his very last day or you want to trade him, that's up to you. But, not every team that owns Manning right now is a contender. There are teams that are in rebuild mode as well that own Manning. In 2-3 yrs, when they become contenders again (if that happens), Manning will be 35 yrs old. Yes, he will still probably be performing at an elite level, but at that point, things are completely different.

The other thing I will argue about Manning is that he's not a monster-force at the QB position like LT has been at the RB position where he outperforms other QB's by a large margin. What Manning is is consistent. Consistently top 3 without fail. But, there are other QB's that perform close to or higher than his level every year. He is more replaceable in terms of point production in a lineup than a guy like LT is.

I personally would not be looking to trade him if I owned him because that's not my style. Others are constantly trying to stay young and this was simply meant to be a discussion that the time is actually coming where we might be seeing a decline in his value. If you're like me, it will be a great time to buy him.

Manning is kindof that rare exception to an otherwise sensible rule. In a lot of ways. And in this case, youve just gotta measure the actual production vs the perceived loss in value. Im all about value, but often times we just out think ourselves looking for that next great stud. But my general rule is, if you find a stud, you keep him. If you find a truly special stud, you throw all other rules out the window and follow an entirely different set of rules.

 

[The Man With No Name]

I drafted him his rookie year and still have him. At some point years down the road I may trade him, but at this point I can't say one way or the other.

It's been so easy not having to decide which qb to play every week over the past 10 years.

 

[Capella]

I drafted him his rookie year and still have him. At some point years down the road I may trade him, but at this point I can't say one way or the other.It's been so easy not having to decide which qb to play every week over the past 10 years.

Seriously. Had him in my league since it started. Makes FF life so much easier. Only time I've ever had to make a QB decision is when he is on a bye.GB Peyton Manning

 

[BuckeyeArt]

Until Indy starts drafting his replacement, I wouldn't be thinking of trading Manning. Favre lost value because of the retirement game he played every off season. I don't think Manning will do the same thing.

Manning's dyno value will take a big hit when his replacement is drafted, just like Favre's did when Rodgers was drafted.

I don't agree. Favre's did not take a hit because of drafting Rodgers. Favre's value took a hit when he started contemplating retirement every year.

 

[Slider]

There is 4 years before you even think of trading Manning.

 

[DoubleG]

For clarification's sake:

1. I do NOT own Manning in any leagues.

2. I am NOT a fan of selling-high. In fact, I am the one that targets older elite players and buys them cheap.

That being said, this thread was meant as a discussion as I've seen an overriding theme of not losing value (even on elite players) when they get to a certain point. I'm actually glad that the majority wants to keep Manning. The only thing I will caution is:

1. TO is/was an elite player and he has lost considerable value.

2. Harrison is/was an elite player and has lost considerable value.

3. Holt is/was an elite player and has lost considerable value.

4. Favre was an elite player and lost considerable value near the end of his career.

Inevitably, Manning WILL lose value. Now, whether or not you choose to keep him until his very last day or you want to trade him, that's up to you. But, not every team that owns Manning right now is a contender. There are teams that are in rebuild mode as well that own Manning. In 2-3 yrs, when they become contenders again (if that happens), Manning will be 35 yrs old. Yes, he will still probably be performing at an elite level, but at that point, things are completely different.

The other thing I will argue about Manning is that he's not a monster-force at the QB position like LT has been at the RB position where he outperforms other QB's by a large margin. What Manning is is consistent. Consistently top 3 without fail. But, there are other QB's that perform close to or higher than his level every year. He is more replaceable in terms of point production in a lineup than a guy like LT is.

First off, the Favre comparison is really the only valid one of the 4. Comparing him to a WR is tough becuase Harrison's issues have been due to nagging injuries and he plays a position that requires a different skill set than that of QB (namely, speed). TO has not lost considerable value - he's still considered a top WR - and any loss in value has to do with his occasional insanity. Holt's issue was mainly the injury of Bulger. In general WR's values vary more based on a great many factors - some of which have nothing to do with them. A QB touches the ball every down, as such, unless his offensive line is absolutely awful, he is largely the only player on the football field who in large part determines his own success. Couple that with the fact that Manning calls many of his own plays and you have a recipe for long term succss at the QB position.Most of Favre's hit in value came as result of the constant retirement talk - certainly NOT as a result of the drafting of Rodgers. In the last three years (at ages 37, 38, and 39) Favre has finished as the QB7, QB8 and QB6 last year - at age 39. If Favre has had a decrease in value, it is due to perception, not production. And Favre and Manning are very different QBs when it comes to style and where they play the majority of their games. In comparison to Favre, Manning could easily play just as long, plays indoors, is not as reliant on a "gunslinger" mentality as Favre's game and is only 32.

You could easily get 5 more years of top 3 or top 5 QB production out of Manning. An someone posted he's "just" consistant. While that may be true (he has been top 3 in our dynasty league for at least the last 7 years), he has also been #1 3 of the 7 - so he's not just consistant, he's consistantly the best. As an example, in 2007, Brady was QB1 (Manning QB3), in 2006 (in our scoring) Manning was QB1, while Brady was QB7 behind guys like Vick and Kitna. You can go back and look at the stats, but my point is that many of the names around Manning change in the top 3 over the past seven years - but his stays consistant.

Will I trade Manning in my dynasty league? To complete the Favre analogy, would you have traded Favre 7 years ago? Me either. Maybe I'll trade Manning in 5 or 6 years, when he only has a couple years left, but I think this is way too early to begin the conversation on a QB who could be a top 3 QB for the next 4-5 years.

 

[Pygmy Marmoset]

Obviously, it depends on your team. Are you 1 or 2 players away from a championship? Keep him. Are you starting a rebuilding process? If so, draft for need this year and make sure you get a good young QB, then start working that rebuild. You should have a QB ready to take the reins in 2 years, trade him then if you're still rebuilding heavily and get lots of picks and players for him.

 

[brock]

if my team is a contender now there is no way i'd trade a stud like manning. i'd only trade him if my team stunk and i didn't see a chance to be a contender within the next 3 or 4 years and needed the extra picks to build. but you gotta make sure to get a lot of early picks in multiple years to make it worth it.

 

[Iron_Far]

Jamal over Peyton in BB3.

 

[KellysHeroes]

Ride Peyton unless u get an awesome deal. I image atleast 6 more yrs of top 5 QBing... his career will be similar to Farve where he will always put up the #s until his very late 30s.

 

[-OZ-]

Obviously, it depends on your team. Are you 1 or 2 players away from a championship? Keep him. Are you starting a rebuilding process? If so, draft for need this year and make sure you get a good young QB, then start working that rebuild. You should have a QB ready to take the reins in 2 years, trade him then if you're still rebuilding heavily and get lots of picks and players for him.

um, no. If you're rebuilding, you draft best player, not for need. Otherwise, your plan is solid.

 

[redman]

Obviously, it depends on your team. Are you 1 or 2 players away from a championship? Keep him. Are you starting a rebuilding process? If so, draft for need this year and make sure you get a good young QB, then start working that rebuild. You should have a QB ready to take the reins in 2 years, trade him then if you're still rebuilding heavily and get lots of picks and players for him.

um, no. If you're rebuilding, you draft best player, not for need. Otherwise, your plan is solid.

 

[Koya]

The guy is great for 3 seasons almost without question (health cooperating), and seems pretty good for a couple more than that, conservatively.

While he has a good arm, it is not as if his strength is physicality or a huge arm - don't see why his skills wouldnt translate to at least 5 more good years, conservatively speaking.

Now, how many other players, at ANY position, can you say that about? For RBs its zero, without question. WRs... good luck. And what other QB are you going to want over the long haul, save one or two that are arguable, than Manning?

 

[mdog1967]

A great Topic gianmarco. I don't know if its time, Peyton is a Fantasy Stud even when he's having a sub par year. That said I always like to get the most value possible for a player. I'm thinking at least one more year before I go trading him in. I still think the guy is good for 30 TD's and 4000 plus passing yards for a couple of more years.

 

[Tanner9919]

In season 2009, but it depends on your roster. If you don't have the QB depth to support dealing Manning you have to ride it out until you do, if it takes you until he's 36 to get that depth then so be it - deal him then. I'd begin to explore QB2 and QB3 options this season setting yourself up for a potential move.

I'm more worried about Manning's performance down the stretch than I am about his age. The Colts seem to hit a wall every December, right around fantasy playoff time..they're either up by 5+ games in the Division and are coasting to the finish line, or they've secured a playoff spot that will not change, win or lose..Manning can get you to the fantasy playoffs, but you better have a solid #2 to use in weeks 13-16 as Manning sits or plays half-games....

 

[Pygmy Marmoset]

Obviously, it depends on your team. Are you 1 or 2 players away from a championship? Keep him. Are you starting a rebuilding process? If so, draft for need this year and make sure you get a good young QB, then start working that rebuild. You should have a QB ready to take the reins in 2 years, trade him then if you're still rebuilding heavily and get lots of picks and players for him.

um, no. If you're rebuilding, you draft best player, not for need. Otherwise, your plan is solid.

If you're rebuilding and thinking of trading Manning, you need to draft a QB. Period. In all likelihood he's the only halfway decent QB on your roster, so you'll need someone young to build around. QBs in dynasty are different from most positions in that rookies simply don't contribute - if you're thinking of trading away a top-5 QB, you need to groom one. Just like in the NFL.

 

[gianmarco]

Only 1 year later but I wanted to give this a bump. While not an "officially" recognized trend, it already seems to me that Peyton isn't carrying the same value he used to. I've seen more trades involving him recently than I ever did in the past. He's no longer one of the top 2 QB's off the board in most dynasty leagues I've seen (in fact, he went #3 and #5 in a recent startup of mine).

It seems that his value, while still high, has already started to tail off a bit and I'm getting the feeling that many owners might be looking to move him soon. I've already seen some posts in leagues advertising he is now available.

So most thought I was crazy for bringing this up last year, but now is it crazy? Do you think he's already lost a little value? Who do YOU have ahead of him in terms of dynasty?

Personally, I would take Brees and Brady over him right now and probably Rodgers as well. I don't think it will be long until Cutler, Rivers, and Ryan pass him too (if they haven't already according to some).

 

[fruity pebbles]

I agree with you. I traded cutler pretty much straight up for him last week. Brees is now the one who's almost impossible to get.

 

[gianmarco]

The thing to me is this. Even if you still have Peyton ranked pretty high, at this point you're very unlikely to get a bump for guys like Rodgers, Cutler, Rivers, or Brady. I think you'd even have to add to Peyton to get Brees.

Last year, you could have gotten any of those guys + some extra value back. This is NOT saying Peyton is done as a fantasy QB. As I stated above several times, I expect him to have at least 3-4 more elite years. But, while his production won't fall off, his trade value will (and seems to already have). Next year, I doubt you get any of those guys I listed and maybe a few more even straight up for him.

 

[gianmarco]

Y'all are nuts...unless someone offers you the deal of a lifetime, you ride your stud into the ground. Certain players are simply too good to deal until you're dead certain they're losing it. Then there will always be one fool around who believes they'll reclaim their former glory.

I strongly disagree with that. To each their own on team management, in most cases I'd rather sell my investment at the point when the stock has peaked and is ready to dive than just ride it out until there's nothing left. Sets myself up better for the future, the key is to set yourself up so the short term hit is minimal if any.

I understand the philosophy...but since when do QB's "nosedive"? RB's do, WR's occassionally do...QB's? Generally...you have enough warning on a QB.

Production doesn't have to nosedive for value to nosedive. See LT. His production didn't nosedive at all. His trade value certainly did. Manning's trade value will nosedive in the not-so-distant future. 2-3 years tops, IMO.