The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-01-08
of speed or vigor among the individual

|
| players.
| Improvement among the catchers has
| been advanced as a theory by many
| writer's. If there is a catcher in the
| National league today who knows any
tricks that Ewing, Flint and Kelly did
not know that man should be placed
| on a pedestal and looked at. He would
| be too good to engage in active play.
II there is a modern catcher whose
| throw is faster and truer to the mark
than those Bennett and Bushong
sent across the diamond he would be
sthe acknowledged wonder Of the age.
The standard Of individual worth
among the catchers is, if anything,
| lower than ten years ago.
| NOT DUE TO BALK.
Baking by the pitchers, pinning the
frightened runners too closely to their
bases for a successful Lead, is another
theory. That doesn't go, either, Calvin.
kllroy and others of that ancient day
| cculd give points to all the modern
pitchers on the art of baking and stop
ping runners. That excuse is nor horne
out by facts, as any old-time ball crank
| can testify.
| Still another theory Is the claim that
| sacrifice hitting spoils the base run
ming. The figures kill that idea. There
wasn't a club In the National league
| with an average Of one sacrifice hit Der
| game last season. The hard hitting
battles, where the bases are full of run
| ners, are fought and won without any
| sacr1nces, and circumstances intervene
1 to prevent the sacrifice in almost every
| case except, when, In the first inning
the first batter gets to base and the
second batsman is expected to advance
him. Things are usually too lively after
the Hrst inning to make use of the
sacrifice with any certainty.
Up to 1889 the relative conditions of
the catcher and the base runner were
calculated to develop daring and sensa-
| tional work upon the base lines. and to
call forth the thickness and brain pow
er or the backstops. A runner stood an
even chance of beating the throw down
he studied to increase the percentages
In his FAVOR, to gain long leads, to be-
Wilder the pitcher, the catcher and the
baseman. The catcher, knowing that
| the runner had as good as an even
break under ordinary circumstances
studied all sorts of devices to entrap
and confuse the pilferers. The result
was generation of willy and sensation
| al base runners, like Latham. Stoyey
and Mike Kelly, while a group of
brainy catchers, full Of original and ap-
piause- winning circunventions, labored
hard to stop the nervy sprinters
BIG GLOVE THE CAUSE.
In the latter part Of 1883 came the
big glove into use, and from that day
began the decline in base running ane
the accompanying retrogressicn OF
heady, brainy catching
The statement is easily tested. easil,
shown correct. A fifteen-minute ses
sion with strong armed friend, a IA
glove of the modern type and a thir
glove, such as worn in 1887, will trans
late the story
When the catchers took the force O
the fiereely pojected ball ont he thi,
glove of years ago their fingers CAV
way, forming a sort of spring box t
receive the shock. So heavy was tn
impact that the hand naturally. I'm
consciously recoiled, and the bali wa
delayed fraction of second befor
the catcher would gather it UP an,
shoot it down to second. Short wa
this delay-only a passing instant--bu
that fleeing margin of time meant al
in all to- the hustling runner 1t mean
that the long slide might beat the base
mans hand by the tenth of a second
and ttlmeant the difference, in a word
between qdfae umpire's cries of Out
and Safe"
It's different with the big glove. TIL,