In early February, Browns defensive end Myles Garrett demanded a trade. The Browns eventually threw enough money at Garrett to get him to accept his circumstances.
Fast forward to late October. After racking up a career-high five sacks in yet another decisive loss, Garrett is once again frustrated.
Could the Browns trade him to a new, and far better, team by next Tuesday? Yes, they could. It seems highly unlikely that they would.
The better question is whether they should. On one hand, the dead-cap charge for 2026 would be $68 million. On the other hand, the Browns would avoid the balance of the new contract he received in March — and they would add multiple first-round draft picks and possibly more. Those picks can become high-level players who have low relative costs for the first four or five years of their NFL careers.
Given the many issues the Browns currently face from a roster standpoint, it’s unlikely they’ll turn the corner during the remainder of Garrett’s prime seasons. They’ll be better sooner if they can spark a competition among multiple contenders who are desperate for a high-level pass-rusher.
Of course, if the Browns were going to trade Garrett, they should have done it before they paid him. Given the lingering cap consequences of the Deshaun Watson contract (which, coupled with the trade terms, was the worst single transaction in NFL history), it will be very hard to justify moving on from Garrett before the trade deadline.
Then there’s the fact that, no matter how bad they are with him, they’d be much worse without him. A trade would be tantamount to a full-blown tank.
The Browns are no strangers to strategic tanking. Their embrace of analytics included, in the early days, financial incentives for stockpiling draft picks and cap space. While a Garrett trade would, in the short term, sabotage their cap situation, he’d be off the books in 2027.
The alternative will be to keep him on the team past the point at which maximum compensation could be secured for the balance of his contract. How will that help the Browns become anything more than a periodic postseason contender?
The Browns’ stubborn resistance to trading Garrett seems odd, given the team’s overall obsession with objectivity. As to their most valuable asset, they’re willing to let him continue to be the best player on a bad team, in lieu of going all in on being bad and getting the best possible return for a player who could be parlayed into a Micah Parsons-style package — or even more, if the Browns were to throw the doors open and let the various 2025 Super Bowl contenders start the bidding.
Read the full article here
