Jimmy Garoppolo trade rumors: No, 49ers won’t split salary with Browns

The door might be opening for the 49ers to trade Jimmy Garoppolo before the regular season, but the Browns reportedly have a crazy ask the Niners will refuse.

After failing to move him over the course of the 2022 offseason, the San Francisco 49ers are potentially getting closer to trading veteran quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo.

With one week of preseason action in the books, a number of teams across the league have seen their quarterback contexts change. The Niners are one team, although everyone knows that with the transition from Garoppolo to second-year pro and first-time starter Trey Lance.

There are other teams potentially in the mix now, too, including the New York Jets, depending on what happens with injured starter Zach Wilson.

However, possibly the biggest suitor could be the Cleveland Browns, who have already been linked to a possible Garoppolo trade with San Francisco if their starting quarterback, Deshaun Watson, ends up being suspended for more than the six games he’s already slated to be hit with.

Yet there’s a somewhat goofy caveat, apparently, that might be blocking any would-be trade between the 49ers and Browns.

Browns reportedly want 49ers to pay part of Jimmy Garoppolo salary if traded

The below tweet from @49ersSportsTalk cited a source that claims Cleveland would only agree to a trade for Garoppolo if the Niners pay part of the quarterback’s $24.2 million base salary in 2022:

“Talked to someone familiar with CLE who said: ‘Browns wants the #49ers to pick up part of Jimmy’s salary in any trade scenario,'” the tweet reported.

It’s anyone’s guess whether or not this is factual, and no other major insiders have reported such a thing.

But that’s not the point.

Instead, let’s understand why San Francisco would have zero interest in paying even the smallest of portions of Jimmy G’s salary if it ended up meaning a trade with Cleveland could go through.

49ers won’t pay part of Jimmy Garoppolo salary to trade him to Browns

OK, that’s not entirely true. The 49ers would certainly entertain trading Garoppolo to the Browns while paying a portion of his salary, let’s say $10 million, in exchange for what would either have to be a first-round NFL Draft pick or a lucrative package in return.

If that’s off the table, and with Cleveland already having given up so much to the Houston Texans for Watson earlier this offseason, picks in Rounds 1 or 2 wouldn’t be part of the negotiations anyway.

Especially for what would likely equate to a one-year rental in Garoppolo until Watson returns.

From the Niners’ vantage point, a third- or a fourth-round draft pick certainly isn’t worth paying off $10 million for Garoppolo to play elsewhere either. It’d be far better for them to simply release him as close to the regular season as possible and save that money rather than accrue another mid-round pick.

Perhaps the Browns are trying to save face, as they agreed to pay $10.5 million to now-Carolina Panthers quarterback Baker Mayfield after trading him in the wake of the Watson deal, and that trade has to go down as one of the poorer ones from Cleveland’s vantage point in recent memory.

Would the Browns convince San Francisco to engineer a similar gaffe?

Related Story: Jimmy Garoppolo trade is being held up by this one X-factor

The simple answer (and the correct one) is “no.”

Currently, according to Over the Cap, Cleveland has a league-high $48.97 million in salary cap space. The 49ers know this and understand the Browns can easily absorb Garoppolo’s base salary for 2022 without having to engineer any sort of roster jockeying.

Next year, however, Cleveland is projected to be almost $33 million over the cap, though, meaning a window to compete for a deep playoff run could theoretically close once the final whistle of the upcoming season is blown.

If Watson is suspended for a full year and the Browns want to stay relevant, they have to act now.

The Niners know that, too, yet they’d have no interest in paying to help Cleveland solve its own quarterback issues.