I'm not going to shoot you, but I am going to follow to the original link and see what is up, in order to attempt to gain a bit of context.
New England Patriots Mailbag: Who to target in free agency - ESPN Boston
Q. Mike, why would the Pats possibly trade Ryan Mallett? Tom Brady has two years left at most! -- rezadude (San Diego, Calif.)
A. The idea would be that if a team would give the Patriots a valuable draft chip, it would be worth it because Mallett has just two years left on his contract and would leave anyway after the 2014 season to pursue a starting job. Making the trade would also align with the thought that Brady has more than two years remaining to play at a high level, and that the backup job could be filled through other avenues (e.g. Matt Cassel, if released by the Chiefs).
So what we have is Mike Reiss responding to the often asked question about trading Ryan Mallett, and throwing Cassel's name out there as someone the Pats might look to sign if indeed Mallett were to be traded.
Rotoworld is a wonderful site for compiling a lot of links to specific teams and players all in one place, but the analysis they add in sometimes leaves a bit to be desired. When you read the original column it is obvious that Reiss was just throwing a name out there if -
if - Mallett were to be traded - and not genuinely speculating that Cassel would be returning to the Patriots.
More telling is an explanation on the very next question as to why Mallett is unlikely to fetch enough value in return to make it worth trading him.
Perhaps a better question would be whether or not Cassel would want to return to New England? Would he see himself as a possible successor to Brady? Or would he prefer to go to another team where he had a better chance to play sooner?
