Miles Garrett is a legit possibility

[VrabelJr]

Threads like this are the only evidence I need to know that the Patriots are so friggin’ back!

 

[TommyD4207]

And why would the browns do this? It would take like 4 firsts if not more

This is why.

Also it wouldn't take 4 firsts.

 

[TommyD4207]

He should be worth a lot more than Micah Parsons. If I'm the browns I keep him until the draft and I know what the first rounder is and who I'm going to get. I'd only trade him now if he's a malcontent. The browns need a QB. You don't need to get rid of your best player right now. Look at what the colts are doing

Micah Parsons was 26 on an expiring contract.
Myles Garrett is 29 and in the first year of a 4-year contract.

It's not the same.

They have to pay Deshaun Watson for another year before they can even consider trading him. Getting Garrett off their books gives them a ton of flexibility.

They should have traded him in the offseason, but they're the Browns.

 

[TommyD4207]

Multiple sources (CBS, PFT, BSPN) have the Browns cap hit of a Garrett trade at $68M in dead money.

It's still less than Watson's dead money hit.

 

[rkarp1]

Micah Parsons was 26 on an expiring contract.
Myles Garrett is 29 and in the first year of a 4-year contract.

It's not the same.

They have to pay Deshaun Watson for another year before they can even consider trading him. Getting Garrett off their books gives them a ton of flexibility.

They should have traded him in the offseason, but they're the Browns.

Browns were angling for public funding on a new stadium. perhaps they thought trading him would have brought negative press?
now that they have secured the funding, perhaps they have a different mind set?

 

[Vindicate]

I tend to doubt that a DE, even a future HOFer like Garrett, puts people in the seats. And with revenue sharing, ticket sales and concessions aren't remotely close to the biggest share of revenue each team makes. Revenue generation is the biggest reason for keeping Garrett.

But they could get two firsts and maybe a second for Garrett. Along with the Jags' first from the trade they made to trade up to get Hunter, the Browns could generate far more fan interest with drafting three first round picks next year and two first round picks in 2027. That would most likely generate more fan interest than Myles Garrett could do alone.

This kinda makes my point, but, regardless of the reason for his high cost, my point still stands: we shouldn't fork over so much draft capital for him. That's all I'm getting at. Most posts were just looking at his contract and what a team would take on in trading for him, but what we'd also have to trade picks in the process would be toooo much I imagine.

Although wtf do I know, he could be traded for a 7th or some ******** for all I know lmao.

 

[TommyD4207]

This kinda makes my point, but, regardless of the reason for his high cost, my point still stands: we shouldn't fork over so much draft capital for him. That's all I'm getting at. Most posts were just looking at his contract and what a team would take on in trading for him, but what we'd also have to trade picks in the process would be toooo much I imagine.

Although wtf do I know, he could be traded for a 7th or some ******** for all I know lmao.

People seem fixated on multiple first round picks because that's what Micah Parsons got.

I think it's more like, one first round pick. Or maybe a package of a bunch of lower picks.

 

[Zoomnbyu]

Can only imagine they sold him on a plan.
“We have a plan for QB”….etc.
Obv the money is a big part of it, but one would imagine they gave him a good sales job.

"We've got 5 plans at QB so you should stay."

 

[Dec54]

People seem fixated on multiple first round picks because that's what Micah Parsons got.

I think it's more like, one first round pick. Or maybe a package of a bunch of lower picks.

I could live with that, but I think it would take a lot more. Fantastic player, but we are in a re-build and selling your soul at this time for one player, is not what a re-build is about.

 

[TommyD4207]

I could live with that, but I think it would take a lot more. Fantastic player, but we are in a re-build and selling your soul at this time for one player, is not what a re-build is about.

That's the trade-off.
The ONLY reason I'd consider it is because he's Myles Garrett. He's one of one.

This isn't AJ Brown or Trey Hendrickson. This is a guy who's Canton bust is already being chiseled. And he's only 29.

 

[DoubleDeluxe]

"We've got 5 plans at QB so you should stay."

Haha.
so true, and each plan is equally as bad.

 

[maust]

It's still less than Watson's dead money hit.

Okay... but no one is trading anything for Wat$on. Although from what I've seen the derisive laughter in Jimmy Haslam's direction is still free and flowing quite abundantly at that

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Two things:

Why am I reading consistently that NE is already OVER the cap for 2026?

They are/were over the cap for 2026 because of the contracts they've handed out. The rollover will pull them under the cap.

And teams don't have to be under the cap for future seasons, as long as they're under when the season begins. Just ask the Saints.

 

[ViperGTS]

Garrett on the Pats as I have said before is my wet dream. Can you imagine how much feasting that D line would be able to do?

Can you imagine his reaction if he sacked Mahomie for a 10 yard loss and they had to punt then Maye tosses a bomb to Boutte for a TD. Like to see his reaction on the sideline to THAT.

 

[PYPER]

While I'd love to have MG, I wouldn't want to trade the farm for him. Our DLine is one of our strengths. We need to address our weaknesses. The draft capital it would take to land MG would set up back in the long term. This is a front office that doesn't do too well drafting outside of the first round.

 

[DaBruinz]

So, actually, digging into it, it's actually a very tradeable contract.

Almost all of the big money, while mostly guaranteed, is tied up into option bonuses, which are unique because unlike signing bonuses, they can be traded to other teams. So it looks like this:

Option A - traditional:
- $100M signing bonus on a 5 year deal
- $20M signing bonus pro-ration on each year's cap
- Player is traded after 2 years
- Remaining $60M in signing bonus pro-rations accelerates and hits the cap in the 3rd year as dead money - that's bad!

Option B - option bonuses (what Garrett mostly has):
- $100M "guaranteed" but it's separated into annual $20M option bonuses
- $20M option bonuses is paid out at start of each league year
- Player is traded after 2 years
- Instead of having any dead money, the future option bonuses that need to be paid become the responsibility of the new team to pay - wow! No dead money!

Garrett has option bonuses of:
2026: $29M
2027: $39M
2028: $21M
These would all be transferred to NE and Cleveland would get out of paying them completely.

Garrett has a vet minimum salary through end of 2028 as well. If anything, if Garrett wants out, they are incentivized to trade him now and get out of these bonuses while they can. BTW, the same sort of situation applies to AJ Brown.

FWIW, Myles Garrett also has a full no-trade clause, so he would need to sign off on any destination first.

I think he'd be worth the 2 = 1st rounders.

Not only that, the Pats could Re-do the contract to a 4yr/100MI contract and he'd be getting an extra $10M. You could guarantee the 1st 3 years of the contract and still come out ahead.

 

[XLIX]

They have to pay Deshaun Watson for another year before they can even consider trading him. Getting Garrett off their books gives them a ton of flexibility.

They already have a ton of flexibility with Garrett. They lose flexibility by trading him because the cap hit all comes due right now.

Looking purely from a salary cap standpoint, the last thing Cleveland should do is trade Garrett in the next 2 years because they don't want his big cap hit to coincide with Watson's cap hits. If they trade Garrett, they'd have $100 million tied up in 2 players next year (probably with neither of them playing).

 

[XLIX]

Okay... but no one is trading anything for Wat$on.

The Browns could offer Watson for free and no one would take him. They would have to do the move where they throw in extra (probably in the form of draft picks) to a team with a lot of cap space to get him off their hands.

For example, a team with a lot of cap space might trade a 7th for Watson plus a 1st.

 

[maust]

The Browns could offer Watson for free and no one would take him.

Kinda my point, in so far as I had one beyond still being confused why @TommyD4207 quoted me and brought him up in the first place. But then I'm old and being confused doesn't bug me all that much anymore

 

[PancakeBlockPaul]

If he could play like he did for us for oh the next year and a half, go for it. Dudes a monster. We are lucky that the Browns O is terrible because that games outcome would’ve probably been a bit different if they were better.