There has been a lot already made of Manager Ned Yost's decision to bat catcher Jason Kendall 9th this year, moving the pitcher up a spot to hitting 8th. The move is backed by analysis done by some in the Sabermetric community as having the potential to add a few runs over the course of a season. However, outside of some flirting done by Tony LaRussa when his teams were fringe contenders at best, no manager has had the juevos to actually try this in the midst of a pennant race.
Another topic along these lines that readily pops to mind is the way in which "closers" are used in the modern game. The model established by Tony LaRussa in the late 1980's with the Oakland A's is that a manager should use a series of relievers after a starter is pulled from a game, often taking advantage of match-ups, to be able to hand the lead to the teams best reliever or "closer" who almost exclusively pitches in the 9th, or maybe comes in for 4 or 5 outs on occasion. Many people, Sabermetircally inclined or otherwise, have pointed out that there are times when saving ones best reliever for the 9th inning while allowing a lesser reliever to blow a lead in the 7th isn't the best use of resources. But managers stick to this LaRussian model because it is the accepted way of managing.
This all begs several related questions: Should a manager use information gleaned from statistical analysis or otherwise like this, even if it falls well outside of the accepted orthodoxy of how you run a baseball team? Perhaps even more relevant to a fan: Should a fan be able to expect that a manager would use this information to try to get an edge over opponents, even if it means breaking with the accepted norms?
What do you think?