Hypothetical: Trade for Deshaun Watson to get a 1st round pick and then dump Watson? (edited)

[Sicilian]

Should have just been asked like that from the beginning.

The premise is: if you have cap space and the available FAs are unattractive or unwilling to sign with you, would you trade some of that cap room for picks, including a top 5 pick?

Then it's a matter of equating draft value to cap value.

But yeah. In this case, gimme two firsts and it's a deal.

Agreed. I think most people are thinking of OP's hypothetical as trading for Watson in the traditional sense. This is basically the Brock Osweiler trade multiplied by 10 and ironically enough involving the same two teams as the Watson trade. One team is basically buying picks and the other team is selling assets to get out of a bad deal and gain cap space.

I won't lie... with as much cap space as they have next year, the idea of potentially having two top 5 picks next year is tempting. You get two of your three biggest team needs almost guaranteed: A top flight LT, a true weapon at WR, and/or an elite pass rusher. Or you trade down with one of them and load up. The idea has more merit than I thought at first glance.

 

[Wozzy]

It isn't trading for Watson to ever play him. It is basically paying $92 million to buy a top 5 draft pick and more. Watson is just the toxic asset that the Browns would be getting off their books. If anyone does this deal is unlikely to ever play Watson. If someone like the Panthers does it, they might let him compete in camp. But they would not be trading to get a QB.

Nobody is trading for that poison pill of a contract. The guaranteed money is what teams are actively avoiding.

 

[signbabybrady]

 

[XLIX]

That’s way too much money for a draft pick - even a top 5 one. That $90 million would go a long way towards fixing the o-line - the entire o-line - instead of grabbing just one, maybe 2, players.

You’re basically saying you’d be willing to pay $45 million per year for the next two years for a rookie or two (in addition to the $10 million or so the high draft pick gets). Too much.

 

[Ross12]

This is actually a very interesting question.

Spending a huge amount of cash to get a high pick this year, maybe an extra 2nd, another future first and perhaps a quality offense lineman? You would use their high pick on your new left tackle and your own high pick (top 15 for Pats?) on a WR1. Then your two 2nds on something like a high end LB or DB. Then, you still have two 1sts next year.

Obviously you lose a lot of cash, but you also get these players for cheap while they’re young. And a top of the draft LT is better than anything you’re probably going to buy in free agency anyway.

It still seems like too much money, but it’s worth thinking about.

 

[Thelonious]

Utter nonsense.

 

[TomPatriot]

Cleveland needs to get rid of Watson, but can only do it through trade. Their cap hit for Watson is each of 2025 and 2026 is $73 million. That is like 20% of next year's cap. No one wants Watson because he is guaranteed $92 million in base salary over those two years. The only way they are going to get rid of Watson is by giving a boatload for a team with tons of cap space to take him off their hands. So I think they would gladly give up draft picks for someone to take them off their hands. The question is how much.

But I agree that Kraft would never do it.

Well said and I understand all that. But I don’t see Cleveland, having given the Texans the draft haul you described, doing it again. I guess I’m saying that if I’m Haslam I’d rather pay Watson to sit than give up the picks.

 

[Rob0729]

That’s way too much money for a draft pick - even a top 5 one. That $90 million would go a long way towards fixing the o-line - the entire o-line - instead of grabbing just one player.

You’re basically saying you’d be willing to pay $45 million per year for the next two years for a rookie or two (in addition to the $10 million or so the high draft pick gets). Too much.

It really depends though. What is available for free agency and what are the Browns willing to give up to get Watson off the books. I doubt there is enough to give up for Kraft to make the trade especially with Watson's off the field history (even if the Pats are just going to cut him after they trade for him), but some for some team the bounty may be big enough.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Interesting thought but it depends what free agency looks like.

If alaric jackson or cam robinson hit fa i might be interested in throwing some cash their way.

Theres a few good cb’s and i might be warming up more to the edge guys coming out there. If we can afford to take this on while signing 4-5 good players along both lines and cb i may be down for it. But id lean towards just spending our own money on players unless alot of the fa class starts to get locked up

 

[XLIX]

It really depends though. What is available for free agency and what are the Browns willing to give up to get Watson off the books. I doubt there is enough to give up for Kraft to make the trade especially with Watson's off the field history (even if the Pats are just going to cut him after they trade for him), but some for some team the bounty may be big enough.

Giving up too much in terms of draft capital wouldn’t make sense from the Browns point of view. They’re not going to give up first rounders to get rid of the guy.

 

[Rob0729]

Well said and I understand all that. But I don’t see Cleveland, having given the Texans the draft haul you described, doing it again. I guess I’m saying that if I’m Haslam I’d rather pay Watson to sit than give up the picks.

The problem for the Browns though is they are already over the 2025 projected cap and Watson, Cooper, Garrett, Ward, Conklin account for about half their 2025 cap. The only one they can cut to get more cap space is Conklin. Watson, Garrett, and Ward would increase the cap number and Cooper would have no affect on the cap. They need to get money from somewhere just to sign draft picks.

 

[PatsFan2]

Hell No!! Watson putting up Jacoby type numbers with those skilled Players is very troubling. I would take A Cooper off their hands for a Third in 25 though.

 

[Rob0729]

Giving up too much in terms of draft capital wouldn’t make sense from the Browns point of view. They’re not going to give up first rounders to get rid of the guy.

The problem is they are over the 2025 cap by like $5 million without a lot ways to cut the cap. Cutting Jack Conklin is the only way they can get under the cap by cutting a single player. But do you want to cut your LT and better players on your team? The Watson trade and several other free agent signings have really put the Browns in a bind.

 

[203Pat]

I won't lie... with as much cap space as they have next year, the idea of potentially having two top 5 picks next year is tempting. You get two of your three biggest team needs almost guaranteed: A top flight LT, a true weapon at WR, and/or an elite pass rusher. Or you trade down with one of them and load up. The idea has more merit than I thought at first glance.

I don’t think it would ever happen but if I were rich enough and willing to ignore a temporary PR storm I would do it. These owners are all businessmen in the end of the day. If you look at eating that $90 mill as an investment with the potential return being "the guy" at quarterback then that $90 million could be a drop in the bucket compared to what value a Patrick Mahomes, Peyton Manning, or Tom Brady would bring your franchise.

 

[XLIX]

The problem is they are over the 2025 cap by like $5 million without a lot ways to cut the cap.

They can restructure Watson and get roughly $35 million off their 2025 cap number right away. I imagine they could do the same with others as well.

 

[NFL Mystique]

This makes no sense for Cleveland. Without Watson, they still have issues. No franchise QB. No competent owner. Getting rid of Watson won't improve them to SB caliber. Add on the fact they go without even more picks.

They are better off just benching him or telling him to stay home. They have to pay him the money. But they don't have to play him. They can cut him without penalty in 2026.

Eventually he will be benched due to the hostility at home games and pressure by fans.

It's been covered why NE doesn't do it.

 

[XLIX]

I don’t think it would ever happen but if I were rich enough and willing to ignore a temporary PR storm I would do it. These owners are all businessmen in the end of the day. If you look at eating that $90 mill as an investment with the potential return being "the guy" at quarterback then that $90 million could be a drop in the bucket compared to what value a Patrick Mahomes, Peyton Manning, or Tom Brady would bring your franchise.

Those guys come around once every 10 years or so. If you make the trade with the assumption you’re going to get the next Mahomes, Manning or Brady (ignoring the fact that, you know, we just drafted a QB with the #3 overall) then good luck with that.

 

[Rob0729]

They can restructure Watson and get roughly $35 million off their 2025 cap number right away. I imagine they could do the same with others as well.

I am not sure they can. He would have to agree to it and with his total salary fully guaranteed and the fact he has already received over $140 million by the offseason, he has no incentive to restructure unless they give him more money. The only thing that might make him willing to convert his base salary to bonuses is if the Browns' away games aggregated tax rates are worse than Ohio's tax.

But my guess is that Watson is going to want out of Cleveland and not do the Browns any favors to keep him. He would love to force a trade even if it is to a team that is just going to cut him (maybe even more so).

 

[Hugepatsfan]

Many are missing the OP's question. He's implying CLE would give us a top 5 pick and potentially more to take on the money. We aren't playing Watson. Instead of using our cap space to sign players, we use it to buy a top 5 pick (plus more, potentially).

It's always discussed how adding through the draft is essential for building a good teams. A big part of that is the cheapness of rookie contracts. Even if the guy we take with this top 5 pick becomes a monster of a player, we aren't getting any rookie contract benefit because the savings are smothers by Watson's dead money on our books.

It's just very hard for me to believe that $50M/year for a couple of seasons couldn't be spend on some combo of players better than the draft pick or picks we'd be getting here.

 

[libra957]

I'm not even sure if Deshaun is good at football anymore. You could possibly get 3 good players for the price of one bad Deshaun.