The Washington times., 1930-05-22
SENT
To REDS IN
TRADE
BY DAVIS J. WALSH

many a fathead deal our Mr..
McGraw has made during the
years that he has maintained his
heirachy in connection with the
New York Giants. But the one
he pulled out of the hat yester-
day, whereby he gave up a losing
pitcher, Larry Benton, for a win
ming second baseman, Hughey
Critz. was no less than genius
and. if it doesn't win the pennant
for the Giants, then the thing
they call form" is a deluslon
and our mathematical tenetS
have been established in vain.
McGraw gave up nothing be-
cause Benton couldn't win for
him. The only thing the former
hadn't lost during the last two
seasons was his way to the ball
park. He may help the Clncln-
natl Reds; indeed, he looked like
the old Benton two days ago IN
going 10 innings against the
Braves.
But what is suppOsitiOus
value compared with Ger
tainty? CritZ at second will
give the New York Giants
the greatest infield in all
baseball and, in fact, one OF
the great combinations of the
ages.
Ball clubs don't go wrong with
that kind. The old Cubs had
Chance. Evers, Tinker and Stein
field and they won four pennants
and two worlds championships IN
the five seasons between 1906 and
1910. The old Athletics followed
with McInnis, Collins, Barry and
Baker and you couldn't get them
out between 1910 and 1914, dur
ing which they also won four
pennants and the worlds title
thrice.
McGraw himself had one OF
these foolproof infieldS, Kelly.
FriSch. Bancroft and Groh, some
seven or eight years ago. And
what was the result? He eStab-
hshed a modern record with four
successive pennantS between 1921
and 1924. although the original
quartet didn't start this regime
and suffered requirements in its
final year.
However, the requirements
were as good and maybe better
than the originals and so the
idea of infield-domlnion in base
ball isn't altered. One can win
pennant with an indifferent
infield; both the Cubs and
Athletics proved this last year
In effect, infield mediocrity
doesn't pressage failure but in
field greatness is quite another
matter. It is the hallmark OF
success. It is almost impossible
to lose a pennant with an infield
like Terry. Critz, Jackson and
LindStrom.
1t may be pointed out that the
Giants have an ordinary outfield
What of it? So did the old
Athletics. 1t may be contended
that the Giants pitching is un
certain. And what of that? 1t
won't stay that way now. An
infield with a pair of madmen
like Critz and Jackson around
second base and Terry and Lind
strom at the two extremities will
make any pitcher look good,
The stand-Out pennant win.
nerS of the modern genera
tiOn have had sound pitching
but one is entitled to wonder
how good it would have
looked, if its infield had had
some of the aspects of q
first-cIaSS porous plaster.
The current infield at the Polo
Grounds is greater defensively
than its predecessor of seven
years ago and at least its equal
in attack. I wouldn't hesitate to
! compare it with the immortal four
men of Chicago and Philadelphia,
for Critz and jackson have
double-play possibilities that smack
of the greatness that Tinker and
EverS and Barry and Collins
knew. In fact, Critz already holds
the double-play record in col
laboration with Horace Ford and
the latter is to jackson as the
pulse throb is to a split-second
That jackson surely can mizzle,
so to speak.