Larry MacPhail and Branch Rickey, two baseball leaders in $1931,$ adopted different economic strategies to save their respective baseball clubs from the effects of the Great Depression.

MacPhail, who was in charge of the Cincinnati Reds, believed in investing heavily in the team during the economic downturn. He spent a significant amount of money on improving the stadium and facilities, as well as on recruiting top players. His approach was based on the belief that these investments would attract more fans and generate more revenue, which would eventually lead to the club's financial recovery.

On the other hand, Rickey, who was managing the St$.$ Louis Cardinals, took a more conservative approach. He focused on developing the team's farm system, which involved nurturing young, inexpensive talent within the organization rather than spending large sums of money on established players. Rickey's strategy was to build a strong team over time without incurring significant expenses.

In terms of impact, both strategies have their merits. MacPhail's approach can lead to immediate improvements and potentially quick financial recovery, but it also carries a high risk due to the large investments required. Rickey's strategy is less risky and can lead to long$-$term success, but it requires patience and may not bring immediate financial relief.

Personally, I believe Rickey's approach is more impactful. By focusing on developing young talent, he not only ensured the team's competitiveness in the long run, but also created a sustainable model that many other teams have since adopted. This approach has had a lasting impact on the way baseball teams are managed, making it more influential in my opinion.