Schefter: Myles Garrett Requests Trade

For all non-Bears happenings in the National Football League

Moderator: wab

User avatar
Arkansasbear
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6056
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 10:41 am
Has thanked: 616 times
Been thanked: 1055 times

wab wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 1:24 pm
Arkansasbear wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 1:08 pm

It's worse than that isn't it?

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2025-nfl-s ... ap%20space.
This shows then already $30M over and another $36M puts them $66M over. I may hope on the 100% chance he isn't traded bandwagon (I'll go 99.999%)
OTC has them at 30mil over. His contract is weird though and according to OTC it adds 16,494,100 to that number. That's where I got the 46mil.

https://overthecap.com/calculator/cleveland-browns
Gotcha I was going with teh $30M they currently have the $36M in dead cap that Magilla_Gorilla had posted.
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 32164
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 258 times
Been thanked: 3378 times

Arkansasbear wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 4:14 pm
wab wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 1:24 pm

OTC has them at 30mil over. His contract is weird though and according to OTC it adds 16,494,100 to that number. That's where I got the 46mil.

https://overthecap.com/calculator/cleveland-browns
Gotcha I was going with teh $30M they currently have the $36M in dead cap that Magilla_Gorilla had posted.
I still don't know how they trade him unless the receiving team is allowed to get creative with the accounting.
User avatar
Z Bear
MVP
Posts: 1961
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:45 am
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 294 times

There is a $36M dead cap hit if traded or cut pre June 1st, he has a $20M cap hit if he plays. So you are both right, lol! $36M is the total, but it only adds $16M to what is already is projected for him.

Also going to add his base salary is only $1.255M for 2025 and $1.3M for 2026, that is all you would have to pay him unless you redo his contract.
Ditka’s dictaphone
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5545
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2021 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 1266 times
Been thanked: 1313 times

Definitely an opportunity for Poles to explore.
He’s producing these numbers in a trash team. Pair him with Sweat and they will both improve.

It would be silly not to give Cleveland a call
Taking a break from screen time for Lent. Wish me luck. :thumbsup:
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 32164
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 258 times
Been thanked: 3378 times

Z Bear wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 4:42 pm There is a $36M dead cap hit if traded or cut pre June 1st, he has a $20M cap hit if he plays. So you are both right, lol! $36M is the total, but it only adds $16M to what is already is projected for him.

Also going to add his base salary is only $1.255M for 2025 and $1.3M for 2026, that is all you would have to pay him unless you redo his contract.
And he is absolutely going to want a new deal.
User avatar
Heinz D.
MVP
Posts: 1564
Joined: Fri May 06, 2022 4:29 pm
Location: Tri-State area
Has thanked: 1630 times
Been thanked: 290 times

Apparently there are four different teams that Garrett is looking at who also have interest in him.

The Bears are one of them.

I say we give them DomRob and Va-Jay-Jay for Garrett and Cleveland's first rounder next year.

You all know how desperate I am for a quality bookend to Sweat (as I don't think Sweat can perform as he should without one)...but that would be a HELLUVA LOTTA money tied up at DE. And honestly? I'd rather grab a rookie DE at #10 than do a Garrett trade. If Poles can swing it using ONLY '26 and '27 draft picks, then I might be willing to listen. It's time to make this team right, and acquiring Garrett doesn't do that on its own. It also, most likely, destroys our chance of getting Trey Smith--which is a move that, IMHO, makes more sense.
Last edited by Heinz D. on Mon Feb 03, 2025 5:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
My mother's love was inexplicably linked to kickball.
Ditka’s dictaphone
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5545
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2021 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 1266 times
Been thanked: 1313 times

Heinz D. wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 5:25 pm Apparently they are four different teams that Garrett is looking at who also have interest in him.

The Bears are one of them.

I say we give them DomRob and Va-Jay-Jay for Garrett and Cleveland's first rounder next year.

You all know how desperate I am for a quality bookend to Sweat (as I don't think Sweat can perform as he should without one)...but that would be a HELLUVA LOTTA money tied up at DE. And honestly? I'd rather grab a rookie DE at #10 than do a Garrett trade. If Poles can swing it using ONLY '26 draft picks, then I might be willing to listen. It's time to make this team right, and acquiring Garrett doesn't do that on its own. It also, most likely, destroys our chance of getting Trey Smith--which is a move that, IMHO, makes more sense.
I hear you, but as yet we don’t know if Trey Smith is going to hit FA. KC could also tag and trade, which changes the calculation again. And we don’t know if Trey Smith wants to come to Chicago.

Poles needs to find out what the Browns would accept.
Taking a break from screen time for Lent. Wish me luck. :thumbsup:
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 32164
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 258 times
Been thanked: 3378 times

Conversely, if the Bears give up substantial draft capital in the upcoming draft for Garrett, and then Dalman and Smith don’t become available, it severely limits your ability to address the OL in the draft.
User avatar
Heinz D.
MVP
Posts: 1564
Joined: Fri May 06, 2022 4:29 pm
Location: Tri-State area
Has thanked: 1630 times
Been thanked: 290 times

Ditka’s dictaphone wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 5:31 pm I hear you, but as yet we don’t know if Trey Smith is going to hit FA. KC could also tag and trade, which changes the calculation again. And we don’t know if Trey Smith wants to come to Chicago.

Poles needs to find out what the Browns would accept.
Sure. And Garrett might not be traded...and so on. But, I guarantee you a tag and trade for Smith would most likely be cheaper than a trade for Garrett.

If we can still keep enough resources to adequately address the O line this year, then due diligence must be done.
wab wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 5:37 pm Conversely, if the Bears give up substantial draft capital in the upcoming draft for Garrett, and then Dalman and Smith don’t become available, it severely limits your ability to address the OL in the draft.
Nailed it.

Even a slight upgrade at DE across from Sweat is a step in the right direction. But, improvement in the run game, and Caleb's protection, is tantamount.
My mother's love was inexplicably linked to kickball.
User avatar
thunderspirit
Head Coach
Posts: 4503
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:51 pm
Location: Greater Chicagoland, IL
Has thanked: 1058 times
Been thanked: 886 times

wab wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 5:01 pm
Z Bear wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 4:42 pm There is a $36M dead cap hit if traded or cut pre June 1st, he has a $20M cap hit if he plays. So you are both right, lol! $36M is the total, but it only adds $16M to what is already is projected for him.

Also going to add his base salary is only $1.255M for 2025 and $1.3M for 2026, that is all you would have to pay him unless you redo his contract.
And he is absolutely going to want a new deal.
This.

You'll need to give up assets and then extend him besides. At age 30.

I'll pass.
KFFL refugee.

dplank wrote:I agree with Rich here
RichH55 wrote: Dplank is correct
:shocked:
User avatar
HisRoyalSweetness
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9313
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:20 pm
Has thanked: 131 times
Been thanked: 3618 times

thunderspirit wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 6:45 pm This.

You'll need to give up assets and then extend him besides. At age 30.

I'll pass.
My thoughts exactly. He's a player you'd love to have, but the cost of acquiring him would simply be too high.

The Browns have already said they wouldn't trade him for 2 first round picks, so despite their protestations that they won't trade him that can be seen as their opening gambit.

All the players from the high draft picks you'd have to surrender plus who you could sign in FA for the money you'd have to pay him adds up to more than even the reigning DPOY is worth in my opinion. Any player is only one injury away from missing extended time or becoming a shadow of their former selves. If I was Poles and the Bears I wouldn't be willing to take that kind of gamble.
User avatar
LacertineForest
Head Coach
Posts: 2258
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:39 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 3321 times
Been thanked: 574 times

HisRoyalSweetness wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 8:03 pm
thunderspirit wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 6:45 pm This.

You'll need to give up assets and then extend him besides. At age 30.

I'll pass.
My thoughts exactly. He's a player you'd love to have, but the cost of acquiring him would simply be too high.

The Browns have already said they wouldn't trade him for 2 first round picks, so despite their protestations that they won't trade him that can be seen as their opening gambit.

All the players from the high draft picks you'd have to surrender plus who you could sign in FA for the money you'd have to pay him adds up to more than even the reigning DPOY is worth in my opinion. Any player is only one injury away from missing extended time or becoming a shadow of their former selves. If I was Poles and the Bears I wouldn't be willing to take that kind of gamble.
Let's hope nobody else in our division wants to take that gamble, either.
User avatar
thunderspirit
Head Coach
Posts: 4503
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:51 pm
Location: Greater Chicagoland, IL
Has thanked: 1058 times
Been thanked: 886 times

LacertineForest wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 8:42 pm
HisRoyalSweetness wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 8:03 pm

My thoughts exactly. He's a player you'd love to have, but the cost of acquiring him would simply be too high.

The Browns have already said they wouldn't trade him for 2 first round picks, so despite their protestations that they won't trade him that can be seen as their opening gambit.

All the players from the high draft picks you'd have to surrender plus who you could sign in FA for the money you'd have to pay him adds up to more than even the reigning DPOY is worth in my opinion. Any player is only one injury away from missing extended time or becoming a shadow of their former selves. If I was Poles and the Bears I wouldn't be willing to take that kind of gamble.
Let's hope nobody else in our division wants to take that gamble, either.
Detroit might, and I could understand it; they're in a very different place than the Bears are.

I wouldn't if i were them, but I'm not them.
KFFL refugee.

dplank wrote:I agree with Rich here
RichH55 wrote: Dplank is correct
:shocked:
User avatar
Heinz D.
MVP
Posts: 1564
Joined: Fri May 06, 2022 4:29 pm
Location: Tri-State area
Has thanked: 1630 times
Been thanked: 290 times

HisRoyalSweetness wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 8:03 pm The Browns have already said they wouldn't trade him for 2 first round picks, so despite their protestations that they won't trade him that can be seen as their opening gambit.
Good lord--seriously?

I didn't see that...but THAT'S INSANE!

Then again, they made the Deshaun Watson trade, so...Browns are gonna Brown, I guess...
thunderspirit wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 8:56 pm Detroit might, and I could understand it; they're in a very different place than the Bears are.

I wouldn't if i were them, but I'm not them.
They won't...but let's hope they do.

Wreck every bit of progress they've made...
My mother's love was inexplicably linked to kickball.
User avatar
HisRoyalSweetness
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9313
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:20 pm
Has thanked: 131 times
Been thanked: 3618 times

Heinz D. wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 10:46 pm
HisRoyalSweetness wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 8:03 pm The Browns have already said they wouldn't trade him for 2 first round picks, so despite their protestations that they won't trade him that can be seen as their opening gambit.
Good lord--seriously?

I didn't see that...but THAT'S INSANE!

Then again, they made the Deshaun Watson trade, so...Browns are gonna Brown, I guess...
Is it that insane? The Bears gave up two R1 picks as part of the Khalil Mack trade. He was a couple of years younger at the time, but his and Garrett's accomplishments are comparable. Also Mack immediately received a contract that made him the highest paid player in NFL history whereas Garrett would come with 2 value years left on his current deal with the Browns.

Here's a reminder of the Mack trade.

The Bears received:
Mack in 2019
A R2 pick in 2020
A conditional R5 pick in 2020 that ultimately became a R7

The Raiders received:
A R1 pick in 2019
A R6 pick in 2019
A R1 pick in 2020
A R3 pick in 2020

So the Browns may demand two R1 picks but that doesn't mean there wouldn't be other picks involved.
Heinz D. wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 10:46 pm
thunderspirit wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 8:56 pm Detroit might, and I could understand it; they're in a very different place than the Bears are.

I wouldn't if i were them, but I'm not them.
They won't...but let's hope they do.

Wreck every bit of progress they've made...
This article includes the Bears and both the Lions and the Packers as a potential landing spot if Garrett is traded:

Myles Garrett requests trade: Nine best team fits for Cleveland Browns' All-Pro edge rusher
https://www.nfl.com/news/myles-garrett- ... dge-rusher
User avatar
Rusty Trombagent
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8359
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 11:19 am
Location: Maine!
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1784 times

I love situation like this because fans are like "OK, we send them Tyler Scott, DomRob and a conditional 7th and as long as they eat 90% of his contract I'm interested."
User avatar
Moriarty
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8330
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
Has thanked: 663 times
Been thanked: 1287 times

Rusty Trombagent wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 9:21 am I love situation like this because fans are like "OK, we send them Tyler Scott, DomRob and a conditional 7th and as long as they eat 90% of his contract I'm interested."

"I don't recall saying 'Tyler Scott'"

Southern Cracker Co. HR
1999-2002: Mouth Off Sports Forum (RIP)
2002-2014: KFFL (RIP)
2014-2016: USAToday Fantasy Sports Forum (RIP)

Hello, my name is Moriarty. I have come to kill your website, prepare to die.
User avatar
Rusty Trombagent
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8359
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 11:19 am
Location: Maine!
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1784 times

Moriarty wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 10:53 am
Rusty Trombagent wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 9:21 am I love situation like this because fans are like "OK, we send them Tyler Scott, DomRob and a conditional 7th and as long as they eat 90% of his contract I'm interested."

"I don't recall saying 'Tyler Scott'"

Southern Cracker Co. HR
"Maybe Tyler Scott play's WR, we don't know. Frankly, we don't want to know."
User avatar
Arkansasbear
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6056
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 10:41 am
Has thanked: 616 times
Been thanked: 1055 times

Heinz D. wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 5:52 pm
Ditka’s dictaphone wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 5:31 pm I hear you, but as yet we don’t know if Trey Smith is going to hit FA. KC could also tag and trade, which changes the calculation again. And we don’t know if Trey Smith wants to come to Chicago.

Poles needs to find out what the Browns would accept.
Sure. And Garrett might not be traded...and so on. But, I guarantee you a tag and trade for Smith would most likely be cheaper than a trade for Garrett.

If we can still keep enough resources to adequately address the O line this year, then due diligence must be done.
wab wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 5:37 pm Conversely, if the Bears give up substantial draft capital in the upcoming draft for Garrett, and then Dalman and Smith don’t become available, it severely limits your ability to address the OL in the draft.
Nailed it.

Even a slight upgrade at DE across from Sweat is a step in the right direction. But, improvement in the run game, and Caleb's protection, is tantamount.
KC will have to free up some space to do a tag and trade. I think they have about $11M in cap space right now, but the tag would cost them $21M, so they have to first clear out $10M before they can apply the tag (granted that's not a huge amount but it is a necessary step).
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 32164
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 258 times
Been thanked: 3378 times

Kelce will likely retire if they win, so that frees up about 17 million. They only have 31 players under contract going into next season, so they are going to have to extend some guys and restructure guys for sure.

IIRC correctly they can restructure Mahomes and potentially get up to 30 million in cap relief by turning his base into a prorated bonus.

But it's going to be really hard for them to keep Smith.
User avatar
Z Bear
MVP
Posts: 1961
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:45 am
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 294 times

Mahommes base is only $16M for 2025, so they can only get about $12M from him. 2026 is when his base jumps up at ton.
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 32164
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 258 times
Been thanked: 3378 times

Z Bear wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 12:43 pm Mahommes base is only $16M for 2025, so they can only get about $12M from him. 2026 is when his base jumps up at ton.
They can convert 15,395,000 of his base plus some/all of the 33,350,000 in non-prorated bonus to give them additional relief. OTC calculates them as being able to save a max of 38,996,000 by doing that.

I don't know how realistic that is because it puts his cap number at close to 80 million for next season. But they will probably convert a good chunk to a prorated bonus.
Ditka’s dictaphone
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5545
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2021 12:33 pm
Has thanked: 1266 times
Been thanked: 1313 times

wab wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 1:24 pm
Z Bear wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 12:43 pm Mahommes base is only $16M for 2025, so they can only get about $12M from him. 2026 is when his base jumps up at ton.
They can convert 15,395,000 of his base plus some/all of the 33,350,000 in non-prorated bonus to give them additional relief. OTC calculates them as being able to save a max of 38,996,000 by doing that.

I don't know how realistic that is because it puts his cap number at close to 80 million for next season. But they will probably convert a good chunk to a prorated bonus.
They could use it as a mechanism to tag and trade Smith though, as long as the trade happens.
Taking a break from screen time for Lent. Wish me luck. :thumbsup:
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 32164
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 258 times
Been thanked: 3378 times

Ditka’s dictaphone wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 1:41 pm
wab wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 1:24 pm

They can convert 15,395,000 of his base plus some/all of the 33,350,000 in non-prorated bonus to give them additional relief. OTC calculates them as being able to save a max of 38,996,000 by doing that.

I don't know how realistic that is because it puts his cap number at close to 80 million for next season. But they will probably convert a good chunk to a prorated bonus.
They could use it as a mechanism to tag and trade Smith though, as long as the trade happens.
They could but it would be a HUGE risk. And it would probably not be viewed favorably by agents or players to hamstring Smith like that. They are almost guaranteed to get a 3rd round comp pick for him anyway.
User avatar
Heinz D.
MVP
Posts: 1564
Joined: Fri May 06, 2022 4:29 pm
Location: Tri-State area
Has thanked: 1630 times
Been thanked: 290 times

HisRoyalSweetness wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 8:47 am Is it that insane? The Bears gave up two R1 picks as part of the Khalil Mack trade. He was a couple of years younger at the time, but his and Garrett's accomplishments are comparable. Also Mack immediately received a contract that made him the highest paid player in NFL history whereas Garrett would come with 2 value years left on his current deal with the Browns.
Well, I'd argue that those two years are a big deal, Mack was more of a disruptive force (although I do like Myles Garrett)...and Garrett is going to want a new contract ASAP. Mack also didn't demand a trade, did he? Don't remember...
HisRoyalSweetness wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 8:47 amThis article includes the Bears and both the Lions and the Packers as a potential landing spot if Garrett is traded:
Huh. I thought the Lions were up against the cap? I may be mistaken (and maybe for a second time in one post :D ).
My mother's love was inexplicably linked to kickball.
User avatar
Arkansasbear
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6056
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 10:41 am
Has thanked: 616 times
Been thanked: 1055 times

wab wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 1:45 pm
Ditka’s dictaphone wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 1:41 pm

They could use it as a mechanism to tag and trade Smith though, as long as the trade happens.
They could but it would be a HUGE risk. And it would probably not be viewed favorably by agents or players to hamstring Smith like that. They are almost guaranteed to get a 3rd round comp pick for him anyway.
Also I think until the trade was finalized they would likely be pressed right up to the cap total and wouldn't be able to sign many FAs.
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 15163
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 2098 times
Been thanked: 3587 times

I’m confused by the contract, I’ve read on Twitter some folks talk about how much it would cost the Browns to trade him, and I’ve read other people point to his cap hit for the acquiring team. Which is it? If the Bears traded for him, what would his cap be for us?
User avatar
southdakbearfan
Head Coach
Posts: 4964
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:23 pm
Location: South Dakota
Has thanked: 1057 times
Been thanked: 479 times

dplank wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 6:59 pm I’m confused by the contract, I’ve read on Twitter some folks talk about how much it would cost the Browns to trade him, and I’ve read other people point to his cap hit for the acquiring team. Which is it? If the Bears traded for him, what would his cap be for us?
I’ve read it’s about 45 million over the next two years, but I’ve also read most of that money is roster bonuses in march of both the next two years and his base salary is peanuts. Which means he will want a new deal with new guaranteed money, something in the 4 year $130-$140 million range most likely. All that makes his trade value even less.

If they do trade him early, from multiple articles, the browns will have over $70 million in dead cap from players no longer on the roster and a $72 million dollar hit from Massage Watson still being on the roster.
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 32164
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 258 times
Been thanked: 3378 times

dplank wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2025 6:59 pm I’m confused by the contract, I’ve read on Twitter some folks talk about how much it would cost the Browns to trade him, and I’ve read other people point to his cap hit for the acquiring team. Which is it? If the Bears traded for him, what would his cap be for us?
His base salary is only 1.2 million, so that would be his cap hit for whoever acquires him. His money is all bonuses, which the Browns would be on the hook for in the form of dead money.

He’s going to most definitely want a new contract.
User avatar
southdakbearfan
Head Coach
Posts: 4964
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:23 pm
Location: South Dakota
Has thanked: 1057 times
Been thanked: 479 times

Roster bonuses = cap hit for the team who has him at the time of the bonus. They are not absorbed by the trading team like signing bonuses.

His cap hit for the browns is his signing bonuses that is spread out over his contract except it gets accelerated when traded.
Post Reply