Here you go, Marc.

Jeez, I've been dead 77 years.

(Signed)

Denny Lyons

;-)

Heh. :-)

I'm glad that you brought him up, BTW, because I don't have any analysis of his candidacy saved. I don't remember if I just didn't do it at the time when he became eligible or it became lost over the years.

#67 on my ballot.
Short career. High OPS+, low ink. Defense seems about average at position, per era.

An interesting comparison is Lyons and Cupid Childs. They were the dominant offensive players in the 1890 AA, had relatively similar offensive stats otherwise, and arguably had similar defensive value (Childs was a better defensive player but Lyons played a slightly more difficult defensive position). It is the existence of all of the valuable 1880s and 1890s 3B that keep Childs from soaring to the top of my ballot based on his position dominance.

Childs was a better defensive player but Lyons played a slightly more difficult defensive position

As I pointed out in the McGraw, etc. thread. Win Shares doesn't think too much of Lyon's fielding. Maybe not Bill Joyce-bad, but certainly below average.

Childs also was much more durable and played against the more tougher competition throughout his career, as well as being the best countless times at his position.

In the end, Childs' somewhat shortish career is what is killing him here and almost nothing else, IMO.

Childs and Lyons ≥ 100 games in same league (*except as noted):

1890 AA

Childs 189 OPS+ at age 22
Lyons 193 at age 24 (*88 games--due to injury???)

1892-93 and 96 NL

Childs 149-29-33 at ages 24-25-28
Lyons 130-31-23 at ages 26-27-30

Lyons in AA prior to these years and in 1891, then not a regular in 1894-95. Otherwise:

Lyons AA 162-47-57-37 at age 21-22-23-25 (total 8 years ≥ 88 games)
Childs NL 119-21-(90)-19-12-(93)-(71) at age 23-26-27-29-30-31-32 (11 years > 100 games)

Totals

Lyons about 5000 PAs OPS+ 138 (would probably season adjust to another 500-700 PAs at Childs-length seasons)
Childs about 6600 PAs OPS+ 119

Just for whatever perspective this brings to Childs, who is still in the backlog mix, unlike all of the '90s 3Bs. Childs looks somewhat interchangeable therewith.

Lyons in AA prior to these years and in 1891, then not a regular in 1894-95. Otherwise:

Lyons AA 162-47-57-37 at age 21-22-23-25 (total 8 years ≥ 88 games)
Childs NL 119-21-(90)-19-12-(93)-(71) at age 23-26-27-29-30-31-32 (11 years > 100 games)

If we could estimate what Lyons' OPS+ would be adjusted for league strength, then a better comparison could be made.

Looks like Childs was clearly the better hitter when they played in the same league.

>Looks like Childs was clearly the better hitter when they played in the same league.

23 pts of OPS+ over 4 seasons. Clear maybe, decisive no. And Lyons' final year in this particular comp was his final year as a regular, his decline year such as it was (he didn't have much of a decline actually).

23 pts of OPS+ over 4 seasons. Clear maybe, decisive no.

Well, Childs also played more games during that time (almost 300 more), so it pushes him closer to decisive, IMO.

his decline year such as it was (he didn't have much of a decline actually).

Well, '97 was a sharp decline (and not as a third baseman, either). Don't know what happened to him that year.