I have no idea if it’s notable or if he’s just being nice, but Jerry Manuel said yesterday he’d be at least open to the idea of starting the season with Josh Thole behind the plate:

The one thing about Josh that is definitely different than Omir is that Josh kind of balances out the lineup. He’s a lefthanded hitter. We’ll take a look at him and talk to the people who saw him in winter ball and see how much progression he made and go from there. It’s not out of the question.

So that’s cool. Anyway, I figured a poll is in order:

[poll id=”3″]

I left the question intentionally vague. I guess I’m just trying to see how y’all¹ feel about Thole in regards to the other options, and in light of all the talk that he needs at least another year of Minor League seasoning.

Also, I didn’t include trade options, because it’s impossible to really judge a trade option without knowing what he’d cost in return. Granted, we don’t know exactly what Barajas or Torrealba would cost either, but it’d only be money.

¹– I really wish English had a word for the second-person plural, and it very much bothers me that Spanish does — vosotros — and most Spanish-speaking countries opt not to use it. I tried adopting it into English for a while, but it didn’t catch on, so instead I use “y’all” and sound like a dunce.

Somehow in all the hubbub the blogosphere stirred up about not signing Bengie Molina to a multi-year contract, it seems everyone forgot the Mets’ fallback plan at catcher. Aaron Gleeman makes an excellent point about ol’ Extra-Base Omir:

And before anyone points out that he was a rookie and is thus likely to improve, please note that Santos was a 28-year-old rookie who previously spent nine seasons in the minors hitting .258/.304/.348, including .256/.311/.325 at Triple-A. Guys who spend a decade in the minors posting a .652 OPS tend not to maintain a .671 OPS in the majors, so as bad as Santos was last season that was actually him playing over his head. Bengie Molina never looked so good.

The overwhelming consensus seems to say that Josh Thole needs a year in Triple-A to work on his game-calling and defense. I didn’t think Thole looked all that terrible behind the plate last year and Mets pitchers didn’t do any worse in small samples with Thole catching than with anyone else back there, but I’ll yield to the wisdom of the crowd and dismiss Thole as a possibility for either starting or platoon duties to begin 2010.

So that leaves Santos, Henry Blanco and Chris Coste. None is much of a hitter. Blanco is likely the best defender, though shoulder problems and advanced age should limit his playing time. Coste seems ticketed for Triple-A to school Thole in the fine art of staff-handling, but could hit the big club should Santos regress to his mean.

It’s rough when someone who posted a .298 wOBA* can be expected to regress, but, as Gleeman pointed out, Santos probably did play a little above his head last year.

That’s bad. Not as bad, mind you, as giving Bengie Molina a multi-year contract to play for a team without much realistic hope of competing in the coming season, but still bad.

So what options might be better than Santos? Rod Barajas and Yorvit Torrealba are still available as free agents. Neither appears primed to be a whole ton better than the Santos/Blanco tandem, but since they’ve both managed to hang on as poor-hitting catchers in the big leagues for a long while now, they’re both less likely than Santos to completely embarrass themselves at the plate — at least not any more than they usually do.

The Mets could also pursue a trade. I discussed Chris Snyder last week, and Dave suggested Dioner Navarro in the comments section. Either would be a nice buy-low acquisition if he could be had at a reasonable price.

The truth is, though, considering the Mets’ projected lineup and pitching staff, especially relative to what the Phillies and Braves will be fielding in 2010, it’s hard to imagine any catcher short of Joe Mauer catapulting them into contention.

That’s not to say, of course, that it’s reasonable to enter the season with Santos tapped to start. And to be honest, I’m nearly certain that all the talk that he will is bluster — misguided though it may be — intended to give the team leverage in some negotiation or another.

*- I noticed that the Daily News has been using OPS, so I’m upping my game. I use more advanced stats to inform my writing, so why not use them to enhance my writing? Anyway, a good overview of wOBA is here. (H/T to Patrick Flood for that link.)

People often ask me why I freak out so much about moves like the Gary Matthews deal or the now long-forgotten promotion of Abraham Nunez. Check out David Roth at Can’t Stop the Bleeding:

But the Matthews trade — Omar getting “his guy” in a deal that everyone else in the entire freaking world thinks is incomprehensible and ridiculous — is a reminder of how bizarrely bleak it is to be a Mets fan right now. The moves arrive out of nowhere, reflect no philosophy beyond an anarchically da-da absence of internal logic, and allow almost no commentary but this. That is, maundering, meandering wonderment. That is, bafflement, more than any sort of disagreement or — because it’s not 2005, and I’m not 26 anymore — aggrieved grief.

Roth is, by his own admission, overreacting. I did too. Sometimes that happens when you’re slapped in the face with absurdity, I think. And with the Mets’ front office, it often feels like an onslaught.

OK, so we’ve got the details: The Mets have traded Brian Stokes to the Angels for Gary Matthews Jr. and $21.5 million of the $23.5 million remaining on the two years left on his contract.

So it’s Brian Stokes for the right to have Gary Matthews Jr. on the team at the massively discounted rate of $2 million over two years.

Whoop-dee-doo.

The good news is that Angel Pagan hasn’t gone anywhere, and theoretically he will still have every opportunity to establish himself as the club’s starting center fielder until Carlos Beltran returns from injury. And Pagan should do that, because he’s a much better player, at this point, than Matthews.

The Mets needed someone to back up Pagan, and so they went out and got a player who, in their eyes, has proven he can play center field at the Major League level.

And that’s the issue here: Gary Matthews Jr. has spent the last three seasons proving that he cannot play center field at the Major League level.

Both UZR and plus/minus say Matthews has been a significantly below average defensive outfielder since joining the Angels in 2007.

Of course the talent evaluators the Mets employ apparently disagree with those imperfect but valuable tools, and here’s hoping they’re right.

Because other than some vague reputation for good defense, Matthews doesn’t bring a whole lot to the table. He had a nice year at the plate in 2006 — earning him a giant contract — but has been a bad hitter since, rocking a .708 OPS in his time with the Angels.

You might even say he’s been below replacement level. And the Mets just went out and traded something to get him.

And that’s the issue here.

Not that Stokes was any great shakes. For whatever reason, he was overrated by some Mets fans — this one included — simply because it appeared Jerry Manuel entirely forgot he existed for stretches of the 2009 season. But Stokes was probably lucky to have a sub-4.00 ERA in 2009 with his high 1.564 WHIP, and he never had overly impressive peripheral stats.

Still, as a hard-throwing relief pitcher who posted 108 ERA+ in 103 2/3 innings over two seasons with the Mets, Stokes was something of value. And they just traded something of value for something of arguably no value, since Matthews has done little over the past three years to show that he’s any better than the readily available replacement.

Make no mistake: This is a deal of a seventh reliever for a fifth outfielder. That’s nothing. This means very little in the grand scheme of things.

But it’s frustrating and a little frightening because it shows, once again, how the Mets seem to judge talent in a way that departs so severely from the stats they should now have at their disposal, then overpay to acquire that talent.

Mike Puma reports in today’s New York Post that the Mets could pursue Fernando Tatis if they decide not to sign Carlos Delgado.

Cool. I’ve been singing Tatis’ praises this offseason; he’s been a versatile and productive player for the Mets, and I could get on board with his return.

The article says that Tatis’ double-play groundouts last season are more notable than his other stats, but I would argue — and have argued — that they were merely a weird, flukish run of terrible luck.

What is funny, though, is that the story says “the team could look to Tatis for a platoon with Daniel Murphy.”

That’s well and good, and I guess since Tatis has a career .808 OPS against lefties, he’d represent an upgrade over Daniel Murphy when opposing southpaws are on the hill.

But interestingly enough, Tatis doesn’t really demonstrate a huge platoon split — he has a career .782 OPS against righties. Ryan Garko, whose career .792 OPS only barely trumps Tatis’ .790, demonstrates a much more severe split: He has an .887 lifetime figure against lefties against a .755 OPS versus righties.

If Garko’s looking for significantly more money than Tatis, it’s probably not worth rewarding him for the slight upgrade offensively against left-handers, given how infrequently teams really face lefties anyway plus Tatis’ defensive flexibility. Plus, if the Mets value Tatis’ versatility and hope to exploit it, he’s worth pursuing over Garko.

But if they’re exclusively looking for the platoon bat to pair with Murphy, Garko’s the–

Holy crap, apparently the Mets have just landed Gary Matthews Jr. I’m assuming this is bad, but I’m going to cut off this Fernando Tatis/Ryan Garko post right here while I find out more.