Why the Rams may not have “overpaid” for Myles Garrett, even with Jared Verse still looking for his footing

The debate that followed the Los Angeles Rams’ push for Myles Garrett has not quieted, but it has shifted. For many fans, the headline cost was simple: the Rams surrendered pass rusher Jared Verse, and the immediate concern is whether Verse would justify that kind of extraction from their roster. Through the early part of the season, Verse has produced zero sacks in his first four games with the Cleveland Browns, a stat line that has complicated the “star for star” narrative and changed how quickly people judge the trade.

Even with Verse’s early output checkered, the transaction is not just about sacks. In a conversation aired via the PFF NFL Show, Cleveland cornerback Denzel Ward offered a different lens for evaluating Garrett’s impact. Ward described Garrett as more about intangible leadership and vocal presence than any one measurable category of production, arguing that the “loss” for the Rams may not be as straightforward as the public conversation made it sound.

That distinction matters because the Garrett trade was always about more than a single stat. In elite front-seven players, value often arrives through pressure, run disruption, and the way an opponent has to reconfigure its play-calling. A quarterback can adjust to a pass rusher’s speed, a blocker can overcommit to one side, and tight end protections can change even when sacks are not immediate. Those effects can be real in the opening weeks, but they are frequently less visible than the sack column.

Verse’s early numbers, meanwhile, have given critics a clean talking point. A zero-sack start across four games tends to be the kind of snapshot fans latch onto, especially when the traded player is playing for a team that is already getting attention for having acquired a ready-made centerpiece. But it is also a reminder that defensive development is rarely instantaneous, particularly when a new environment requires timing, leverage adjustments, and different assignment structures.

The Browns’ view of Garrett, as reflected in Ward’s remarks, also underscores how leadership can be a team-wide multiplier. If Garrett is setting the tempo vocally, communicating protections, and organizing teammates in real time, those contributions do not show up in the most basic box score categories. They can still influence the snap-to-snap decisions of linebackers and defensive backs, and they can help a defense operate with fewer mental errors.

So where does that leave the Rams? The early stage does not erase the fact that they traded away a player who many believed had a chance to become a frequent game-wrecker. But it does suggest that “loss” may be the wrong framing if the goal is to measure how a high-impact veteran reshapes the game plan. If Garrett’s presence prompts structural changes that raise the ceiling for the Rams’ entire defense, the trade can look better than the initial comparison of players alone.

What to watch next is whether Verse’s production grows as he settles into his new role. If the sack total rises later in the season, the trade debate will re-open with more urgency. If Verse remains quiet while Garrett continues to drive meaningful defensive value, the early concern will likely fade into the background as the season’s longer arc provides a fuller evaluation. Either way, the conversation is now less about whether one player has a sack yet, and more about what impact each team is building around as games accumulate.