"In the days before smaller ballparks ... no one went to the concession stands when Allen was scheduled to hit ... And that means something."

It means that the author's memory is faulty.

no one went to the concession stands when Allen was scheduled to hit

I did, but then I was nine years old and very fond of ice cream.

Immediately above Allen on the list, with 101 points respectively, are Luis Gonzalez and Andruw Jones, and with 100 points is Fred McGriff. Just below, with 97 points, is Jason Giambi. None of these four players has a chance at induction, so the voters will most certainly need to look at other factors when considering Allen for election.

I still believe that McGriff has a chance at induction, as he'll be viewed as one of the "clean" sluggers. It is entirely possible, however, that I'm completely wrong in this matter.

I still believe that McGriff has a chance at induction, as he'll be viewed as one of the "clean" sluggers. It is entirely possible, however, that I'm completely wrong in this matter.

I agree. However, I still don't think this will be enough to get him into the Hall. He does seem like an ideal VC choice, tho.

While admittedly not a perfect tool, because it doesn’t include defense in its rankings, the Baseball Reference Hall of Fame monitor ranks Allen 151st all time, with Santo 185th.

It is not even close to a perfect tool as Santo was a great defender at 3rd base, while Allen was lousy at left, 1st, and some 3rd base.

I do know this. In the days before smaller ballparks, juiced balls and players, before televised home run hitting contests, no one went to the concession stands when Allen was scheduled to hit. You can’t say that about Ron Santo, or Joe Torre, or Gil Hodges, or 99% of the guys who ever played this game.

And that means something.

I do know this, back in the 70s, no one went to the concession stands when Dave Kingman was scheduled to hit.

That doesn't make Dave Kingman a better player or even as a good a player as Ron Santo, or Joe Torre, or Gil Hodges.

While admittedly not a perfect tool, because it doesn’t include defense in its rankings, the Baseball Reference Hall of Fame monitor ranks Allen 151st all time, with Santo 185th.

More to the point, does this writer even understand what the Monitor's purpose is? Obviously not.

Allen's...personality issues definitely have to be considered. If the two of them were right in front of me at age 20 waiting to be drafted, I would choose Santo without hesitation.

In the days before smaller ballparks, juiced balls and players, before televised home run hitting contests, no one went to the concession stands when Allen was scheduled to hit.
Quibble alert, the author forgot about this.

But was he as feared as Jim Rice?

before televised home run hitting contests

I didn't realize Dick Allen played in the 1950's.

I must say, I pine for the day when big league ballplayers would compete in home run hitting contests for the love of competing in home run hitting contests, not just because the television cameras were on them.

While admittedly not a perfect tool

It's not intended to be a "tool" at all.

Allen's...personality issues definitely have to be considered.

The article points out that it was all racism.

Allen thrived in Chicago under the relaxed managerial style of manager Chuck Tanner.

This single phrase completely sabotaged the author's credibility.

Because I didn't know relaxed meant oblivious.

I must say, I pine for the day when big league ballplayers would compete in home run hitting contests for the love of competing in home run hitting contests, not just because the television cameras were on them.

Didn't they do it for what today would seem like a ridiculously meager payday for a ballplayer? They weren't millionaires back then.

I'm as inclined as anyone to favor Allen for the HOF, but this sort of BS argument on his behalf isn't why.

Allen's behavior in Chicago was often bizarre, indeed.

He actually thrived, from all reports, in L.A. under the no-nonsense managerial style of Walter Alston.

He actually thrived, from all reports, in L.A. under the no-nonsense managerial style of Walter Alston.

No, not all reports. Allen quickly got into the O'Malley/Campanis doghouse by refusing to make PR appearances.

Anthony Giacalone had a presentation about White Sox teammates Allen and Santo at one of the SABRcons. Giacalone is one of the better prersenters that I've seen at those.

Link

It painted Allen in a rather favorable light while Santo came across as something less than a team player. FWIW, Leo Durocher wasn't all that impressed with Santo either. That might actually be a point in Ron's favor, but there you are.

Actually I find the poor job of running down Santo in the article ("And while no one will can make the claim Allen was underrated defensively, I’m of the impression Santo was overrated with the glove, as his 11 seasons of 20 or more errors will attest.")even more irritating than the poor job promoting Allen.

The Hall of Meriters have Santo as the 7th best third baseman, and Allen as the 9th. Both were easily enshrined and ahead of luminaries like Jimmy Collins and Brooks Robinson. Personally, I give a lot more weight to that than whether the VC chooses Santo or Allen or neither. The other Hall has not earned the respect that the (mostly great) players in it deserve.

Yeah, there's not really much reason that both these guys shouldn't be in.

Yeah, there's not really much reason that both these guys shouldn't be in.

Precisely. And the legitimate case for Allen doesn't need to prop itself up by trying to tear Santo down.

I do know this, back in the 70s, no one went to the concession stands when Dave Kingman was scheduled to hit.

That doesn't make Dave Kingman a better player or even as a good a player as Ron Santo, or Joe Torre, or Gil Hodges.

Not that it says anything about Allen's worthiness or lack thereof, but it's the single most effective reason for setting aside the "spectacle" aspect of any hitter.

On the pitching side, my dad still maintains that Ryne Duren was the most "stay in your seat to watch" pitcher he ever saw and I don't think anyone is clamoring for a Duren plaque.

Dick Allen: The only 20th century player in the top 20 career OPS+ who had to fall to the veteran's commitee to get a chance.

And for what good reason? Because Philly sportwriters didn't personally like him? Gives us an idea what fate awaits Frank Thomas.

And we have to hear Ron Santo cry about not being in the HOF, as if there wasn't a more deserving player from the same era getting the shaft.

And for what good reason? Because Philly sportwriters didn't personally like him?

To be fair, there's much more reason than that. One needn't be persuaded by the case against Allen (I'm not) to acknowledge that the baggage cart he hauled around was gargantuan, and shouldn't be dismissed as irrelevant.

I do know this. In the days before smaller ballparks, juiced balls and players, before televised home run hitting contests, no one went to the concession stands when Allen was scheduled to hit.

Before Primer fave Bill Jenkinson thought that Babe Ruth would hit 104 home runs if he were timewarped to today, he thought that Allen hit the ball further than anyone else.

Yeah, there's not really much reason that both these guys shouldn't be in.

If that were so, they'd be in already.

Frank Thomas has nearly 3000 more PAs than Dick Allen.

And for what good reason? Because Philly sportwriters didn't personally like him?

Also sportswriters everyone else didn't like him, and lots of his teammates didn't like him, and all of his managers and team owners didn't like him, and most fans didn't like him. And he was often seen as somebody who should be traded away in order to improve the team he was on, and was traded several times. And he never played for a playoff team until his second-to-last season. And his career was over at age 35, and there were only 6 seasons in which he played more than 130 games, some because of injury and some because of conflicts with management. He had only 1848 career hits, putting him at 323rd all time, between Pete Runnels and Chuck Knoblauch.

There are many reasons, some more superficial than others.

I don't think--and I may be mistaken, because all I know is what I read--I don't think Tanner's handling of Allen could be characterized as "oblivious". I recall well when the Sox got Allen that Tanner was supposed to be sympatico to Allen, that Allen would thrive under Tanner's PMA-style stewardship. Much was also made of the fact that Allen's hometown and Tanner's hometown practically made them neighbors, in a sense. In 1972, this seemed to be justified. And he was going great the next year till he was injured. Then the relationship unraveled, as was Allen's tendency (and it's stuff like that keeping him out of the Hall, of course).

And his career was over at age 35, and there were only 6 seasons in which he played more than 130 games, some because of injury and some because of conflicts with management.

And one because he quit on the team in August.

It's funny how Allen is still such a polarizing figure, with most people's attitudes at either "He was a great guy whose only troubles were brought about by racists" or "He was a worthless human being that hurt every team he was on." Allen's problems were indeed exacerbated and eaxggerated by management and the press, but that doesn't mean the man himself was a day at the beach.

I don't think--and I may be mistaken, because all I know is what I read--I don't think Tanner's handling of Allen could be characterized as "oblivious".

Perhaps not, but Tanner's overall stewardship of the White Sox, which featured not just Allen going from MVP to jumping the team midseason within two years, and Wilbur Wood and Carlos May leading the race to see who could get the fattest, could fairly be described that way. That Tanner later became the manager of a team in which cocaine dealing in the clubhouse was rampant, while he claimed not to have had any idea about it, would also seem to be a good indicator of obliviousness.

Gives us an idea what fate awaits Frank Thomas.

Not hardly.

Dick Allen

Year...............Age................G.................OPS+
1963...............21.................10...................110
1964...............22.................162.................162
1965...............23.................161.................145
1966...............24.................141.................181
1967...............25.................122.................174
1968...............26.................152.................160
1969...............27.................118.................165
1970...............28.................122.................145
1971...............29.................155.................151
1972...............30.................148.................199
1973...............31.................72...................175
1974...............32.................128.................164
1975...............33.................119...................94
1976...............34.................85...................130
1977...............35.................54.....................89
Career..............................1749..................156


It was not just that his career was over after 35. After age 30, he never played a full season -- or even 130 games -- at a high level, and he missed huge parts of the season at ages 25, 27 and 28. That is an awful lot of missed time, and a short career, for a HOFer, and especially one who chose to miss some of that time (however put upon or provoked he was).

Big Hurt

Year.................Ag.................G.................*OPS+
1990.................22.................60...................177
1991.................23.................158.................180
1992.................24.................160.................174
1993.................25.................153.................177
1994.................26.................113.................211
1995.................27.................145.................179
1996.................28.................141.................178
1997.................29.................146.................181
1998.................30.................160.................125
1999.................31.................135.................125
2000.................32.................159.................163
2001.................33..................20....................94
2002.................34.................148.................118
2003.................35.................153.................146
2004.................36.................74..................156
2005.................37.................34...................131
2006.................38.................137.................140
2007.................39.................155.................125
2008.................40.................71.....................97
Career..................................2322.................156

Bearing in mind that 1994-95 were strike years, Thomas was both better and steadier. He maintained his 156 OPS+ through a full decline phase, which Allen skipped.

The Hall of Meriters have Santo as the 7th best third baseman, and Allen as the 9th

Leafing over to those discussion threads, I notice that the HOM first had Allen as a first baseman (where he played the plurality of his games), and then decided to rank him among the third basemen. Ranking Allen among the third basemen is a little like ranking Rogers Hornsby among the shortstops. That's fine; they had to rank him somewhere. But I think if you were drafting an actual 30-team league from among everyone who ever played, Allen would go considerably lower than 9th among the third basemen. The HOM ranked Brooks Robinson 13th among third basemen, for instance, but if you had your choice between Robinson and Allen, beginning of their careers, with the stipulation that the one you picked could only ever play third base for you, you would be kind of nuts to choose Dick Allen.

Another quibble: there is a "defensive credit factor" in both HOF monitor and Standards.

there is a "defensive credit factor" in both HOF monitor and Standards.

Well, it is really more of a "positional adjustment" than a defensive credit: You get points for playing the position, and/or for playing a certain of games at a position, and more points for playing a tougher position for a playoff team (more points depending on how far you advance). But you don't get any bonus for playing it better than other people.

So Jeter gets his bonus for 1,800 games at short-stop and for being the regular short stop on a WS team, regardless of how well he played it.

Another quibble: the HOF monitor is a crock of ####

I will point out that there is always a "line" where someone is on the cusp and folks think, "Aw gee, isn't that too bad that so and so was SO close to getting this or that".

Allen DEFINES that line. As he should. He is a plethora of tremendous positives and negatives.

I will keep repeating that it all matters. Offense. Defense. Running the bases. Team results. Teammate interaction. The view of peers.

Which is why I continue to be flummoxed by so many in our community who take a holistic view of most players but when it comes to Allen everything but his offense is all but ignored.

Why is that??

Perhaps not, but Tanner's overall stewardship of the White Sox, which featured not just Allen going from MVP to jumping the team midseason within two years, and Wilbur Wood and Carlos May leading the race to see who could get the fattest, could fairly be described that way. That Tanner later became the manager of a team in which cocaine dealing in the clubhouse was rampant, while he claimed not to have had any idea about it, would also seem to be a good indicator of obliviousness.

I think that's too harsh. It's not like he couldn't see Wilbur Wood getting on in pounds, but as long as he was pitching well, what could he really say? You can't force-feed a guy broccoli and cucumbers, he's got to be responsible for himself. As for the cocaine, that may be strictly speaking oblivious, but it's not completely to his discredit that he thought the best of his guys and refused to believe the worst. It's not optimal, but on the other hand I don't see how it applies to Allen, either. Ultimately, Allen spit the bit, like he always did, and maybe Tanner could've done something about it, but I doubt he could've.

Which is why I continue to be flummoxed by so many in our community who take a holistic view of most players but when it comes to Allen everything but his offense is all but ignored.

Why is that??

Probably because it ain't true. All it is is recollections from sportwriters and Bill James. As if he were the only SABR member that matters.

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/index.php?category=11&id=2068

Bob,

Many Hall of Meriters place greater weight on peak/prime performance than on career performance. Taking Allen's peak/prime as through age 29 or 30, Allen spent the plurality of his time at third base and hit better than Eddie Mathews but with more lost time. There is a plausible argument that he was more valuable than Brooks Robinson, say, during this period.

I personally would weight career performance greater than the average Hall of Merit voter, but there is no right answer to that question.

Post 39:

What isn't true?

By the way, I was present for Dick's career in "real time". And while my memory isn't what it was I am not completely daft.

Enlighten me.......

Probably because it ain't true.

You mean that, unbeknown to everyone, Dick Allen really was a good fielder who played an additional 300 games which nobody knows about? Wow, that is big news.

Give it up. Most people here really don't give that much of a crap about why he didn't play more -- the simple fact is that he didn't. And he couldn't field worth a damn.

Which is why I continue to be flummoxed by so many in our community who take a holistic view of most players but when it comes to Allen everything but his offense is all but ignored.

Why is that??

First of all, there are plenty of people here who do make note of everything.

Second, even among those pushing enshrinement, I don't think it is ignored. It is just that his hitting was so very good, that to their minds, it overcomes the other stuff. He would hardly be the first player to get into the HOF whose sole HOF-caliber ability was his hitting, and who was otherwise less than a ray of sunshine on the bench.

It is not unreasonable to downplay issues of chemistry and personality, given (a) the inability to quantify it, and (b) the excellent careers of many well known SOBs. The only issue is whether he performed well enough, long enough, to merit enshrinement.

With Allen, there is a big issue of how long his career was, and even those pushing enshrinement, by and large, concede that it is a short career.

Again, I don't care why it was short, given that there are two sides to a lot of these stories. The fact is that, to me, it was so significantly short, that he would have to have been truly breathtaking for the period of time he was in there. At a minimum, at the level of Big Hurt.

As good as Allen was, he was not at that level. Given the overall lack of years and playing time, and the lack of other value, it just does not rise to the level I would want for enshrinement.

I personally would weight career performance greater than the average Hall of Merit voter, but there is no right answer to that question

Yes, I agree, Mike.

Peak/prime value, to me, correlates with "how much talent did the guy have" (or rather, did he prove conclusively in the majors that he had). Allen had amazing hitting talent, beyond a doubt, though as Srul says he didn't deliver on it for all that long.

I think there's little reason to believe that Allen was so obnoxious that he hurt his clubs when he showed up to play. He didn't always show up, which contributes to his shortened career and stunts his HOF case.

Allen spent the plurality of his time at third base and hit better than Eddie Mathews but with more lost time.

From BB-REF Splits, which washes out PH appearances:

As 1B: 800 G, 3,368 PA, OPS .897
As 3B: 650 G, 2,837 PA, OPS .939
As LF: 252 G, 1,046 PA, OPS .902


Now, if you look at his overall batting and fielding, it may be true that he provided more value overall while playing 3d than 1st, but he really played less than 40% of his career at 3d, and close to half of it at first.

Matthews played nearly his entire career at 3d, covering 2181 games out of 2345 in the field (a good part of it during the 154 game season), finished with a 143 OPS+, and while not one of the giants with the glove, was clearly far superior to Allen.

Many Hall of Meriters place greater weight on peak/prime performance than on career performance.

Why is that? I try to read the threads there on occasion but usually feel like I'm walking into some conversation that's been going on for ages and there's a lot of inside stuff involved; including unfamiliar jargon.

It's not like he couldn't see Wilbur Wood getting on in pounds, but as long as he was pitching well, what could he really say? You can't force-feed a guy broccoli and cucumbers, he's got to be responsible for himself.

I agree that in the end, a player has to be responsible for himself. But Tanner wasn't a bystander here, he was the manager of the team. He has not only a right but an obligation to do his best to sustain and enforce reasonable standards of fitness. Moreover, the fact was that the fatter Wood got the less well he pitched, until he finally broke down at an age far younger than most knuckleballers.

As for the cocaine, that may be strictly speaking oblivious, but it's not completely to his discredit that he thought the best of his guys and refused to believe the worst.

I'm fully ready to give Tanner credit for being a nice guy. But it isn't a manager's job to think the best of his guys and refuse to believe the worst.

Ultimately, Allen spit the bit, like he always did, and maybe Tanner could've done something about it, but I doubt he could've.

Perhaps, but the fact remains that Tanner was every bit as ineffectual at keeping Allen under control as Gene Mauch and Bob Skinner had been, and being ineffectual at keeping players under control became something of a theme in Tanner's managerial career.

Moreover, the fact was that the fatter Wood got the less well he pitched, until he finally broke down at an age far younger than most knuckleballers.

I'd be wary of attributing Wood's early breakdown to his weight.

For one thing, he was worked really, really hard, even for a knuckleballer. The man started 97 games over the course of two seasons.

Secondly, he was more or less fine until Ron LeFlore broke his kneecap. The weight may have made it harder for him to recover from the injury, but I'd still ascribe the decline more directly to his injury. People say that knuckleballers need perfect mechanics, and I'd guess it's hard to get your mechanics straight when one of your knees doesn't work.

That said, though, Wood was truly fat.

Dick Allen was not obnoxious.

He was a "different breed of cat". Some termed it being an "individual" and others termed it being a "pain in the *ss". When Dick was playing well it wasn't an issue. Except when it was.

I used this description before and believe it's apt, Dick Allen is Gary Sheffield's big brother with more aches and attitude.

Gary can hit. Dick could REALLY hit. Gary got hurt every so often. Dick got hurt more often. Gary yelped. Dick acted out in different ways. Both got passed around like a drunken cheerleader on prom night.

Even with the aggravation if Dick had lasted as long as Gary I would have no objection. But he didn't. He lasted 2/3 as long. It matters....

For younger folks wondering about Tanner just look at Phil Garner. As long as Phil's happy dust was working everyone pulled in the same direction and the team got results. But eventually most of the guys wake up like the crew from Oz, and say, "What the heck? Who hired THIS guy?".

Phil Garner couldn't anticipate a fart. He claps his hands and reassures everyone everything is going to be ok because Hey, We are ALL GREAT PEOPLE.

Which is a fine approach if you are working with special needs kids. But not for jaded pro athletes. Over time they recognize a pushover.

I'd be wary of attributing Wood's early breakdown to his weight.

For one thing, he was worked really, really hard, even for a knuckleballer. The man started 97 games over the course of two seasons.

Agreed, but especially in a circumstance of extremely demanding workload, being overweight is an invitation to trouble.

Secondly, he was more or less fine until Ron LeFlore broke his kneecap.

Wood's ERA+ in the five seasons prior to suffering his knee injury: 188, 126, 116, 105, 95. Do I detect a trend?

Wood was truly fat.

All together now:

How fat was he?

A slight difference between the two, Harveys, might be that Allen could be a mentor when he wanted to be; he had some interpersonal skills that he put to good use on the mid-70s Phillies, when he taught Mike Schmidt, for instance, quite a bit about the game. He was almost a leader in those years. Sheffield does not seem to have ever stopped a low-level constant selfish complaining.

But Allen was much more volatile and mood-swingy, and never stopped being so.

The "other" Frank Thomas would probably have called Allen obnoxious at best. Allen brought out visceral dislike in some people.

he had some interpersonal skills that he put to good use on the mid-70s Phillies, when he taught Mike Schmidt, for instance, quite a bit about the game. He was almost a leader in those years.

He was, until he up and refused to suit up for the 1976 NLCS unless the Phillies put the 40-year-old Tony Taylor on the post-season roster.

Allen was a much nicer, more charming personality than a Sheffield. But he was appallingly selfish, unpredictable, and irresponsible, and endlessly confrontational with management.

Question: prior to Wood, who was the last pitcher to throw 1070 innings in 3 years? I don't know the answer, but it strikes me that his workload was the real cause of his decline. Knuckleball or no knuckleball, that's a HUGE number of innings to toss.

That's an average of over 350 innings a year. Phil Niekro's single season high was 342. Looking it up, the last person who threw that much in such a short time span was Pete Alexander from 1915-7.

The managerial neglect wasn't the indifference to weight watching, it was ignorance of the limits of the human arm.

How fat was he?

You could put a tatto of the world atlas on his gut with the scale reading 1 mile = 1 mile..........

I don't know the answer, but it strikes me that his workload was the real cause of his decline.

Could it be within the realm of possibility that there were multiple causes of Wood's decline? ;-)

Sheffield does not seem to have ever stopped a low-level constant selfish complaining.

***

Allen was a much nicer, more charming personality than a Sheffield. But he was appallingly selfish, unpredictable, and irresponsible, and endlessly confrontational with management.

There is an awful lot of ragging on Gary Sheffield, when as near as I can tell, his biggest problem is that he runs his mouth 4 hours for every 3 minutes he puts his brain in gear.

And please, spare me the inevitable "he admitted he committed errors on purpose", when that has already been debunked six ways from Sunday.

What Manny is to behavior, Gary is to conversation -- you never quite know what you are going to get, but you can't take all of it too seriously.

The fact is that Gary plays. He had some injury problems early in his career, but he got past that, although age has started to wear him down. He sucks it up and plays in pain, when perhaps he shouldn't, but he suits up.

All together now:

How fat was he?

....
sorry, I can't top # 55

I've searched for some photos, but like this one most online seemed to have been taken after he'd been dieting for months... I saw him pitch, he was a lot heavier than the guy on his baseball cards

Srul:

Correct. But I am trying to help folks associate. And given all the factors Gary is the best current day comp to Allen.

And if Dick had hung in there for 9000 at bats he would be in the HOF......

The fact is that Gary plays. He had some injury problems early in his career, but he got past that, although age has started to wear him down. He sucks it up and plays in pain, when perhaps he shouldn't, but he suits up.

Agreed. In this way and in terms of personality, I don't think the Allen - Sheffield comparison is terribly apt.

Allen truly is not very comparable to any other character in history. He was a charming, funny, malcontent pain in the a$$, very often drunk to boot. Not exactly typical.

All together now:

How fat was he?

Almost as fat as yo' momma.

I've searched for some photos, but like this one most online seemed to have been taken after he'd been dieting for months... I saw him pitch, he was a lot heavier than the guy on his baseball cards

Looks to me like that shot was from very early in Wood's Chicago tenure. By the mid-70s, he was a blimp.

When he rolled out of bed in the morning, he ROLLED out of bed.

Correct. But I am trying to help folks associate. And given all the factors Gary is the best current day comp to Allen.

***

Agreed. In this way and in terms of personality, I don't think the Allen - Sheffield comparison is terribly apt.

I generally agree with the broad idea of a Dick Allen-Gary Sheffield comparison. I just thought that people were starting to go off a little stronger on Gary than was called for.

Wilbur Wood looking kind of jowly.

Wilbur Wood looking kind of jowly.

That...does not look like an athlete.

That...does not look like an athlete.

And even that doesn't capture him at close to his most rotund.

That...does not look like an athlete.

And even that doesn't capture him at close to his most rotund.

Can't be worse than this.

That...does not look like an athlete.

"I ain't an athlete, lady, I'm a baseball player."

John Kruk

And if you want jowly.

There is an awful lot of ragging on Gary Sheffield

Yes, I didn't really mean to pile on. Sheffield, indeed like Manny, is by all appearances irritating. Like Manny, he has been on lots and lots of postseason clubs, and has a World Series ring.

I don't know if there's ever been a player who was so irritating that he distracted pro teammates from winning. Rogers Hornsby, for crying out loud, was completely impossible, and he managed a World Series winner.

Wood was so fat, that when he wanted to sit down, he needed a BLANK! ..

Wood I be right in guessing that this is the game that Tom's photo is from?

while swimming he has been stuck with a flag and claimed as new territory by 5 nations

No sarcasm intended, but can someone who knows these players better than I explain why Dale Murphy, whose career is comparable to Santo's, doesn't get anything like the support Santo does for the Hall at BTF?

can someone who knows these players better than I explain why Dale Murphy, whose career is comparable to Santo's, doesn't get anything like the support Santo does for the Hall at BTF?

They aren't all that comparable. Win Shares has a 324-294 edge for Santo. WARP1 has it 115.5 to 89 in Santo's favor.

And for what good reason?

a mere 1750 games played? No full seasons after the age of 30? A purely peak case for a poor defensive corner player? Then add in the baggage.

He was a great hitter for 9 seasons. That's usually not enough to get you in the HoF on its own although obviously there aren't very many test cases (because such guys almost always go on to play for many more seasons). He's borderline (I'd probably put him in).

he was so fat that three stadiums had ground rules covering balls caught in his gut.

It's noteworthy that the writer makes the comparison between Allen and Santo; those two carried on a celebrated feud as teammates with the White Sox. From what I've heard, they really couldn't stand each other. It would be interesting to see them on the stage together in Cooperstown next July. Personally, I'd vote for both of them.

Allen was a poor defender, no doubt. He never should have played third base, and was below average at first. But he was generally regarded as one of the great baserunners of the era. I've read a lot of accounts and talked to some former players who have made a point of praising Allen for how smart and aggressive he was on the basepaths. Right up there with people like Frank Robinson, Allen was terrific at taking the extra base and breaking up the double play. Allen's baseball intelligence, especially, has always been underrated.

Wilbur Wood was so fat that his teams only had room for 37 other players on their 40-man rosters.

He was so fat that MLB had him jump and down on all the mounds between 1968 and 1969.

He's so fat that when he was spotted in Boston wearing a green shirt, people paid $160 each to sit on top of him.

He's so fat that his defensive number on the scorecard was A1.

I suppose that when he sat around the dugout, he sat around the dugout.