Omaha daily bee., 1910-03-06
CRACK INFIELDERS
Old Ball Fans Say They've Not Been
Excelled.
WONDERS OF THE PAST RECALLED
start, Morrill,, Arson, Common, BrOuth-
ers, Tucker, Tenney, Pfeffer, Dun-
Lap, Williamson, GIasscock,
Denny, ward and Others.

Et 0AAAAN9Nhp
Denny, ward and Others.
| NEW YORK, March 6.-"Are the infleld-
ers of today fast and clever as those Of the
past? DO they play more scientific ball7"
John M. Ward was requested to answer
these questions and he replied:
There are some great players on the
diamond now. / might mention Vial Chase,
the crack first baseman as an example,
but when. I look back into history and re-
call such star 7infielders as Fred Pfeffer,
Fred Dunlap. Joe Start. John Morrill,. Bur-
dock, Tom Tucker, Roger Conner and
others too numerous to mention l am
forced to say that I see no Improvement
That is the reply almost any veteran
ball player will make TO these queries, but
It Is hard to convince the present day
fans that better infielders that Chase, Dew
lin, Bridwell. Tinker, Wagner Evers, Eddie
Collins, Lajoie, Chance, Miller. Konetchky
and Hoblltzel for instance ever lived. But
going back thirty years or more there were
infielders who made wonderful stops. light
ming double plays, sensational running
catches and played the game with plenty
Of the science prevalent today.
Orator James O'Rourke, who sold the
Bridgeport club. the other day and finally
retired from active work on the field, was
O high class first baseman when he wore
a Boston uniform in 1873 and 1874. Joe
Start was in his prime when he covered
the bag for the Providence club in 1884,
but he had previously earned renown in
Hartford. Another star first sacker was
Chubb Sullivan, who played with Cincin-
natl and led the National league in fielding
this position in the season of 1878. Cap
tan Arson, too, was a great man to throw
to when he headed the Chicagoes in those
days, while John Morrill,, who managed
the champion Bostons In 1888, was without
Ia peer. When Big Dan Brouthers played
in Buffalo in the same year he was close
behind Morrill, in the percentages, but he
didn't have the speed of the Beaneater.
AL ,McKinnon, who led the league as a
member OF the st. Louis team in 1885, was
considered at the time a better first base
man than had ever Oeen seen before, but
he was a comparatively poor hitter.
Sid Farrar Of the Philadelphias in 1886
was a superb handler of thrown balls and
headed the list with an average Of $40 for
us games, which was a new record. But
the following year Morrill, surpassed those
figures for 1856 for 1924 games and carried
off the honors. Arson recovered his grip
in 1888 and 1889, while the leading first
baseman in 1890 Was Jake Virtue of the
Clevelands. Roger Conner, who had left
the Giants after several years of brilliant
work, played with the Philadelphias In 1892
With the top average Of 1856 for 1853 games,
another record. Pat Tebeau OF the Cleve-
lands excelled in the averages of 1895, 1895
and 1897. his percentage Of 1892 in 1895 being
Az Ix11A 1..- --A1- 49, - NLAA At.N
Tom Tucker Of the champion Bostons
under the late Frank G.. sSelee, held the
title Of king of the first basemen after that
until he was replaced ~ Tired Tenney.
who was considered a phenomenon. Prior
to the SUCCESS of Tucker and Tenney base
ball saw other noted first baggers In
Comiskey, Dave Foutz. Long John Reilly,
Tommy Esterbrook. Dave Orr and many
others who played great ball. Jack Doyle
when a member of the champion Baltt-
mores was a star in this position, and
later Hugh Jennings covering the bag for
the Brooklyns, was rated in the same class
with Tenney, Dan Mccain and Kitty
Bransfield when wearing New York and
P%ittsburg uniforms respectively were also
high In the averages. McGann still holds
the record percentage Of 1876 for 1873 games
in 1906. although Chance OF the Cubs hung
up 1854 last year. Chance, Chase, Konetchy
and Hoblitzel are considered the leading
first basemen today and Chase Is probably
the greatest that ever played the game.
First-class second basemen have always
been scarce. Johnny Evers OF the Cubs,
Miller Of the Pirates, Gardner of the High
landers, Eddie Collins Of the Athletics,
Egan OF the Cincinnati Reds, Lajoie Of the
Clevelands and several others In the major
leagues are naturally regarded as without
an equal. But baseball history discloses
some remarkable second sackers, just the
same. Ross Barnes, who played with the
Bostons and Chicagos more than thirty
years ago, was far ahead of his rivals in
point OF skill. In fact those who remember
him insist that he has never been exceIled.
John Burdock OF the Bostons succeeded
Barnes as the leading second baseman
and there was never any doubt as to his
ability. He covered plenty of ground, was
death on thrown balls and knew base ball
from A to 2. Jack Farrell of the Provi-
dence team in 1888 led the league in the
averages and was considered Burdock's
equal. Chicago at that time had a sterling
second baseman in Joe Quest. but II was
not long before Fred Dunlap was the klnge
Dunlap had the record average of 1853 IN
sixty-four games with the Detroit club IN
1887. and was the personification of ease
and grace. He was something Of a grand
stand player because OF his tendency to
make one-handed catches and stops, but
he got there just the same and was a big
favOrite wherever he showed.
Fred Pfeffer Of the Chicagos was per
haps a shade better than Dunlap. while
Bid McPhee, for many years with the
Cincinnati club, was an ideal man at this
bag. McPhee's percentage OF 1852 for JIG
games In 1896 stll stands as a record in the
National league. Other crack second base
men of olden times were Danny Richard
son Of the champion Giants Of 1883 and
1889; Henry Reitz Of the Baltimores Of 1894
Bobby Lowe of the Bostons, Billy Mailman
Of the Philadelphias Wuh Cout,s ~