Could the – A June 1 date matters for the Cleveland Browns’ salary-cap mechanics, but what’s driving the noise isn’t just numbers. Myles Garrett’s March contract modification, Todd Monken’s comments about speaking with him, and Garrett’s continued absence from team activi
For Cleveland, the uncertainty starts with a calendar date. After June 1, the Browns can structure a Myles Garrett trade in ways that would fit under their salary-cap parameters—and that’s exactly why the speculation won’t go quiet.
Garrett. the Cleveland defensive end who set the NFL single-season sack record in 2025 with 23. is entering his 10th season at 30 with the kind of impact that changes how opponents play even when he isn’t recording sacks. The problem for the Browns isn’t that Garrett is declining. It’s that the team hasn’t yet matched his gravity on offense.
Over the past two seasons, the Browns have won a total of eight games. Cleveland has been trying to remake and resuscitate its offense, and the Garrett-to-trade chatter has resurfaced as they look at both their roster needs and their timeline.
Garrett took a trade demand public in early 2025 before deciding to sign a rich new extension to stay. But a contract modification in March—and Garrett’s decision to stay away from the team this spring while staying publicly quiet about his feelings—has sparked discussion about whether the Browns could decide to move him at some point either before or during the 2026 season.
Now it’s June. A trade is possible under the team’s salary-cap parameters. And unless Garrett shows up for mandatory minicamp on June 9 and publicly reaffirms his commitment to staying in Cleveland for the foreseeable future. the talk is likely to keep stretching until the Browns become serious playoff contenders.
The question hovering over everything is simple: is this just noise built from old tension, or is there something new underneath?
Before diving into trade math, it’s worth remembering one detail that cuts both ways. Garrett has never fully participated in the team’s voluntary offseason program in recent years.
Still, this spring’s posture—combined with the March modification—has given the conversation a sharper edge.
Why this discussion is happening right now
If Cleveland wanted to trade Garrett and found a partner willing to pay an exorbitant price, the Browns could do it now. After June 1, they could split the approximately $41 million in dead money they’d 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.
All salary numbers here come from Over the Cap, which lists the Browns with about $17 million in available cap space. Garrett’s 2026 cap number is set to be $23.8 million, so a trade would create around $8 million in 2026 cap space. His cap number rises to almost $28 million in 2027 and almost $30 million in 2028.
Those numbers matter because the Browns didn’t get the kind of extension they did without making trade-offs. After Garrett’s 2025 trade demand, the extension included more than $122 million in new guarantees.
But the recent contract movement is what made the idea of a trade feel less hypothetical.
What changed in March
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.
The only real explanation for the modification, based on what it accomplished, is that both sides were at least opening a trade window. The Browns weren’t going to pay him more again, and then trade him.
Even if this modification doesn’t mean a trade is happening now, the deferral window applies to the next two seasons. It functions like an escape clause for the Browns and potentially for Garrett as well.
Garrett also has a no-trade clause that gives him some level of authority on where he’d play next if the Browns decide to move him.
What coaches and executives have said
Garrett hasn’t had a public availability with Cleveland reporters since last season ended in early January. His relationship with former Browns defensive coordinator Jim Schwartz is part of why the discussion has lingered too; Schwartz was a finalist for the head-coaching job after the Browns fired Kevin Stefanski.
Schwartz resigned when the Browns hired Todd Monken, and that shift has fueled speculation that Garrett may be open to a move.
Monken has been asked multiple times over the last several months whether he’s talked with Garrett in person, and Monken said he has not. Last week, new Browns defensive coordinator Mike Rutenberg said he’s spoken with Garrett but would not share details.
Garrett would be subject to fines if he doesn’t attend the team’s mandatory minicamp.
There’s also timing. The late-March contract modification came just before the start of the NFL’s annual meeting. when the Browns submitted a rule-change proposal asking owners to allow teams to trade draft picks up to five years into the future. That proposal was withdrawn after it became clear it would not pass.
Draft picks can still only be traded up to three years ahead, but the Browns’ proposal arriving right as the Garrett trade window opened through the contract modification didn’t look coincidental to many observers.
What the Browns said before—and where they still stand
In early 2025, the Browns publicly and privately rebuffed almost any discussion of trading Garrett. At this year’s annual meeting, Browns general manager Andrew Berry was asked whether he could “unequivocally” say the team would not trade Garrett.
Berry responded: “Myles is a career Brown. He is one of the faces of our organization. I think we’ve been very clear both past and present in terms of our goals. I understand all the questions. I’ll be honest, I don’t really want to waste a ton more breath on the topic.”
That wasn’t a firm ‘no,’ and so the position still doesn’t fully close the door.
If Cleveland thinks it’s close to turning things around, it won’t trade Garrett. The alternative—letting opposing coaches wonder what it would mean to block him every week—would be an advantage.
If Cleveland thinks it’s still in the early stages of an offensive rebuild and needs to fully embrace a future-based plan of attack, the path looks different. The Browns could ask for multiple premium draft picks in return and seriously consider trade offers.
None of this is happening in a vacuum. The Browns’ own recent draft and roster choices have created the desperation that makes a move like this plausible.
A string of decisions left the offense struggling
The Browns’ offensive failures over the last two seasons are tied to the cost of their past reset. Cleveland traded first-round picks from 2022 through 2024 in a 2022 trade that, so far, resulted in quarterback Deshaun Watson’s winning nine starts in Cleveland.
In 2025, the Browns initiated a youth movement by carrying 14 rookies on their active roster for much of the season.
Now there is a new coach and a different offensive direction. Cleveland added 10 rookies via the draft in April, including four in the first two rounds. The Browns have moved on from four longtime offensive linemen. Watson still has one more season under contract. and the Browns still have around $80 million in salary-cap commitments to him after this season.
Watson is competing this spring with second-year quarterback Shedeur Sanders for the starting job. The Browns added developmental quarterback Taylen Green in the sixth round in April.
The team’s search for a long-term answer at quarterback could resume next spring. With almost all of the core pieces from a strong defense returning, the Browns are hoping to improve on offense and climb out of fourth place in 2026.
But if they win six or seven games and find themselves needing to use major capital to attempt to trade for a quarterback in 2027, they’d likely have to deal almost a full draft class—or Garrett—to do it.
That is where the Garrett trade talk becomes more than a debate about one superstar. It becomes a question about what kind of rebuild Cleveland thinks it is running.
Precedent exists, even if the price would be brutal
Trades like this aren’t impossible. In August, the Dallas Cowboys traded then-26-year-old pass rusher Micah Parsons to the Green Bay Packers for two first-round picks and defensive tackle Kenny Clark.
Earlier this offseason, the Las Vegas Raiders and Baltimore Ravens agreed to a trade that would have sent pass rusher Maxx Crosby to Baltimore for two first-round picks, but the Ravens backed out of the deal before it was finalized.
Garrett’s production in recent years is the kind that drives those comparisons. Garrett has 51 sacks over the last three seasons, the most by any player. Parsons is fourth with 38.5 sacks over that span. Crosby is 10th with 32.
Last season, Garrett became the first player to record at least 12 sacks in six consecutive seasons, and he has missed just one game because of injury over the last six seasons.
There are also older examples that show how quickly dominant pass rushers can reset a franchise’s draft math. Just before the start of the 2018 season. the Raiders traded Khalil Mack and a second-round pick to the Chicago Bears for two first-round picks and a third-round pick. including a swap of late-round picks.
Mack was 27 at the time and was in the middle of four straight double-digit sack seasons. He was the runner-up for what would have been his second NFL Defensive Player of the Year award in the 2018 season. Garrett won his second last season.
When the Raiders tried to trade for Crosby, they liked that they would acquire the No. 14 pick in the 2026 first round from the Ravens. While multiple teams would be interested in Garrett’s services. the Browns would most likely deal with teams that have immediate Super Bowl aspirations—teams that would believe they’re surrendering late first-round picks. at least in 2027.
How much would Garrett cost?
No one can know the exact asking price. But it would be high.
The only team that has multiple 2027 first-round picks is the New York Jets, who have three.
If a trade happened, the Browns would be gambling on whether the market sees this as a “now” deal rather than a “maybe later” move. Interested teams have known about Garrett’s March contract modification since it occurred.
The hurdle for Cleveland wouldn’t just be identifying partners. It would be deciding what they believe is maximum proper value for moving on from a dominant player.
But the flexibility argument is hard to ignore. Premium draft assets for 2027, and potentially 2028 and 2029, would give the Browns room to reshape their roster without guessing.
So should they trade him?
If the Browns can find a team willing to give two first-round picks plus something else of substance. then the value makes sense. Garrett’s value almost certainly will never be higher than it is right now. and contending teams might at least explore giving up future assets for a chance to get Garrett now.
Whether anyone would go further—like giving up three first-round picks, or two first-rounders plus a young player the Browns covet—is harder to predict.
What’s clear is this: after June 1, the mechanics are no longer a barrier. The only question is whether Cleveland’s football decisions—and Garrett’s next public appearance, starting with June 9—move the conversation from speculation into commitment.
Myles Garrett Cleveland Browns NFL trade salary cap June 1 deadline mandatory minicamp June 9 Over the Cap Andrew Berry Todd Monken Mike Rutenberg