Why aren't setup men paid better?

[tangotiger]

[ QUOTE ]
Unless I'm mistaken, it seems that setup men are way undervalued and underpaid.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are probably mistaken.

[ QUOTE ]
Nowadays, the setup guys often pitch more innings than the closers and usually come into the game in more difficult situations.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not true, for the most part. Certainly in some cases, it may be true. I have a statistic called Leverage Index (LI) which quantifies the crucialness of a situation. The leaders are almost always the annointed closers. You can read about LI here:
http://www.tangotiger.net/crucial.html
All the links are broken, except for the last one, which you may enjoy.

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, most managers don't like bringing in their closers in any situations except to start the last inning, before anyone is on base.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not "any", but, you are right, they are not very visionary about it, these days. Here is how Sutter and Gossage were used:
http://www.tangotiger.net/bullpenuse.html

[ QUOTE ]
I guess the answer is purely statistics: saves are sexier than "holds." But if I were a gm, I would be placing at least as much importance on getting a reliable setup guy as getting a closer or even a 4th starter.

[/ QUOTE ]

A fourth starter is likely more valuable than a setup guy.

Tom