\n<\/p>\n
Cleveland Browns defensive end Myles Garrett is a game-changing, weather-changing force who set the NFL single-season sack record<\/a> in 2025 with 23. Headed to his 10th season, Garrett is at the peak of his football powers and can affect plays \u2014 and opposing players and play callers \u2014 even when he\u2019s not recording sacks.<\/p>\n But Garrett, 30, has played on just two playoff teams in his nine-year career. The Browns have won a total of eight games over the past two seasons and again are trying to remake and resuscitate their offense. Garrett took a trade demand public in early 2025 before deciding to sign a rich new extension<\/a> to stay, but a contract modification in March and Garrett\u2019s decision to stay away from the team this spring and stay publicly quiet about his feelings on the state of the team have sparked discussion about a possible Browns decision to trade Garrett at some point either before or during the 2026 season.<\/p>\n Now that it\u2019s June, a trade is possible under the team\u2019s salary-cap parameters. And unless Garrett shows up for mandatory minicamp June 9 and publicly reaffirms his commitment to stay in Cleveland for the foreseeable future, the speculation will continue until the Browns become serious playoff contenders.<\/p>\n Maybe this latest round of Garrett-related uncertainty is much ado about almost nothing; Garrett has never fully participated in the team\u2019s voluntary offseason program in recent years. But maybe something really could be up, and maybe with that contract modification came an acknowledgement from both sides that the Browns\u2019 current timeline might not match Garrett\u2019s. A year and a half after saying he needed to move on and chase championships, might Garrett be having those thoughts again? Let\u2019s explore the situation.<\/p>\n If the Browns wanted to trade Garrett and found a partner willing to pay an exorbitant price to acquire him, Cleveland could do it now. After June 1, the Browns could split the approximately $41 million in dead money they\u2019d incur from a Garrett trade over two seasons on their salary cap. If a trade occurred at any point after Monday, the Browns would carry $15.53 million of dead money on their 2026 salary cap and take on the remaining $25.56 million of dead money in 2027.<\/p>\n All salary numbers here come from Over the Cap, which lists the Browns<\/a> with about $17 million in available cap space. Garrett\u2019s 2026 cap number<\/a> is set to be $23.8 million, so a trade would create around $8 million in 2026 cap space. Garrett\u2019s cap number rises to almost $28 million in 2027 and almost $30 million in 2028.<\/p>\n The numbers matter, and they clearly mattered when the Browns got Garrett to sign an extension that included more than $122 million in new guarantees after his 2025 trade demand. But it\u2019s what happened with that contract recently that\u2019s made a potential trade at least somewhat realistic.<\/p>\n In March, the team and Garrett agreed to a contract modification that deferred a total of $29 million in bonus payments due to Garrett over the next three years. The modification created no immediate salary-cap space for the Browns and pushed around $10 million in guaranteed money for Garrett from March to a week before the start of the regular season in September. This means the only real explanation for the modification is that both sides were at least opening a trade window. The Browns weren\u2019t going to pay him more, again, and then trade him.<\/p>\n And though that modification doesn\u2019t mean the Browns will trade Garrett now, the same deferral window applies to the next two seasons. It\u2019s essentially an escape clause for the Browns and potentially for Garrett, who has a no-trade clause that gives him some level of authority on where he\u2019d play next if the Browns decided to move him.<\/p>\n Garrett hasn\u2019t had a public availability with Cleveland reporters since last season ended in early January. Garrett had a strong relationship with former Browns defensive coordinator Jim Schwartz, who was a finalist for the head-coaching job after the Browns fired Kevin Stefanski. But the Browns hired Todd Monken, which led Schwartz to resign<\/a> and has fueled some of the speculation about Garrett\u2019s being open to a move.<\/p>\n Monken has been asked multiple times over the last several months whether he\u2019s talked with Garrett in person, and Monken has said he has not. Last week, new Browns defensive coordinator Mike Rutenberg said he\u2019s spoken with Garrett but would not share details. Garrett would be subject to fines if he doesn\u2019t attend the team\u2019s mandatory minicamp.<\/p>\n The late-March contract modification came just before the start of the NFL\u2019s annual meeting, where the Browns submitted a rule-change proposal<\/a> asking owners to allow teams to trade draft picks up to five years into the future. Though that rule change was withdrawn<\/a> after it was clear it would not pass, meaning draft picks can still only be traded up to three years ahead, the timing of the Browns\u2019 proposal and the opening of the Garrett trade window via the contract modification did not seem coincidental.<\/p>\n In early 2025, the Browns publicly and privately rebuffed almost any discussion of trading Garrett. At this year\u2019s annual meeting, Browns general manager Andrew Berry was asked whether he could \u201cunequivocally\u201d say the team would not trade Garrett.<\/p>\n \u201cMyles is a career Brown,\u201d Berry said<\/a>. \u201cHe is one of the faces of our organization. I think we\u2019ve been very clear both past and present in terms of our goals. I understand all the questions. I\u2019ll be honest, I don\u2019t really want to waste a ton more breath on the topic.\u201d<\/p>\n If the Browns believe they\u2019re close to turning things around, they won\u2019t trade Garrett and will continue to let opposing coaches lose sleep over the thought of trying to block him. If the Browns think they\u2019re still in the early stages of an offensive rebuild and need to fully embrace a future-based plan of attack, they could ask for multiple premium draft picks in return and seriously consider trade offers.<\/p>\n It\u2019s a bad trade of their own that explains the last two seasons\u2019 offensive failures. After giving up their first-round picks from 2022 through 2024 in a 2022 trade that\u2019s thus far resulted in quarterback Deshaun Watson\u2019s winning nine starts in a Cleveland uniform, the Browns initiated a youth movement in 2025 by carrying 14 rookies on their active roster for much of the season.<\/p>\n Now the Browns have a new coach and have moved on from four longtime offensive linemen. Cleveland added 10 rookies<\/a> via the draft in April, four in the first two rounds. Watson is still under contract for one more season \u2014 and the Browns still have around $80 million in salary-cap commitments to him after this season.<\/p>\nWhy is this discussion happening (again) now?<\/h2>\n
What has been said about a potential trade?<\/h2>\n
Since that wasn\u2019t a firm \u2018no\u2019 from Berry, where do the Browns stand?<\/h2>\n