More idiotic managing

How many times must we watch the same idiocy over and over and over again?

2-2 game heading into the bottom of the 9th. Cards, the road team, hold back their best reliever so they can bring it somebody named Falkenberg. Why? So that we can save our closer Isringhausen for the save, of course! We don't want to take the lead and not have our best pitcher available! Instead, we'll use crap now and hope for the best!

And as has happened a billion times in a billion games, the inferior pitcher gives up the game in the bottom of the 9th. The closer never has a chance to pitch. Glad we saved him, eh?

I have seen this inane, self-defeated strategy employed more times than I care to recount. Does no manager have ANY creativity? Why does everyone follow the same 'book', especially when it always loses? Why not have a computer manage the games? When did players' personal stats become more important than winning games?

I am forever befuddled. Y'all may have complaints that the bad referreeing and lazy play in the NBA makes an otherwise great sport unwatchable. I have the same complaints about MLB.

I agree 100%...except with the fact that Izzy is their best reliever. He is horrid.

But I understand your point and agree about closers needing to be used in these types of situations.

Well LaRussa is the ultimate push button manager...maybe why he chokes in big games/series'...I don't know why managers do this, it defies all logic!

Dogs, you ask a lot of valid questions...Tony LaRussa was the manager that started this trend back in the late 80's early 90's.

I don't know when the trend started, but my guess is that it did not exist prior to 1976 (? or is it 1969?) when the save became an official statistic. Back then, you used the best player for whatever situation you found yourself in. The only reason to save a pitcher is/was if he was tired or you needed him the next day. There was none of this 'put the team in peril so that we MIGHT have the opportunity to pad an individual's statistics.' Very, very odd.

The way that teams manage their closers is unfathomable

Many closers who are "the best pitchers" cannot pitch as effectively without that magic save on the line for them to get. I know it sounds stupid, but so many of these amazing closers have been progammed to only pitch well in certain situations.

As a die hard Dodger fan, I know this first hand. Eric Gagne, ever since he became a closer, has been horrible in non-save situations. Mentally he cannot get up for those sorts of outing versus save situations. He had something like a 7+ERA in non save situations and under 1ERA in save situations.

I've followed the Cards a little bit this year, and though Izzy has been ineffective, he has pitcher better in save-situations than not. Take it for what it's worth.