Who were the best Oriole clutch hitters?

[Old#5fan]

So, you just looked at some box scores and worked out those WAR numbers on the back of an envelope, did you?

Or did you just look up a bunch of of prefab numbers on the internet?

Look, it's one thing to say that we have a lot more slicing and dicing of numbers now. It's something else to say people were idiots because they didn't used to have them in the past. Nobody had access to a ton of numbers then. Nobody got to see all the games on TV either. So, what was a sportswriter supposed to go by when it came to MVP voting? He was gonna go by the numbers he had, which is just what you would've done if it was you. And what they had was AVG, RBI, H, R, 2B, 3B, HR, BB, SB, and that's about it. Not only did nobody have computers, people didn't have calculators either. So, people didn't do computation based on those numbers, they just stared at them. Of the numbers they stared at, the main way people judged bat productivity was by the Triple Crown numbers: AVG, HR, and RBI. You may not like it, but you know it's true anyway.

Of those, in '73 Davis led the club's fulltime players in 2 out of 3. The team leader in HR was Earl Williams, and he hit .237. So, exactly who do you think they were supposed to vote for? Any team that won it's division for the 4th time in 5 years is gonna have some hitter getting MVP votes. Maybe not a lot, but some. They just are, that's all. And that year the O's won the division without anybody on the team hitting worth a damn. Which means somebody was gonna get some MVP votes that look goofy in retrospect. It might as well have been Davis. It's not like he didn't deserve them any more than anybody else didn't. Plus, it's not like he got a lot of votes. He got just a few. He didn't finish in the top-3, which is all that got reported back then. When it came to MVP votes, what he got was just pocket change. So, all in all, this is much ado about not much. It's much more of a comment about the state of available information than it is about sportswriters being stupid.

The bolded part of your superb post is how I still do it, and find it to be the best way as it is consistent with players of the past as to how they were viewed (traditional you might say).

Your explanation is also spot on accurate.:clap3: Whether he likes it or not that is the way it was so who cares?

[ShaneDawg85]

The bolded part of your superb post is how I still do it, and find it to be the best way as it is consistent with players of the past as to how they were viewed (traditional you might say).

Your explanation is also spot on accurate.:clap3: Wheter he likes it or not that is the way it was so who cares?

Because it's narrow minded thinking and isolation of numbers that leads people to think players like Tony Batista are good hitters just because they hit 30+ home runs and 90+ RBI's, or that guys like Joe Carter are Hall of Famers.

[Old#5fan]

Because it's narrow minded thinking and isolation of numbers that leads people to think players like Tony Batista are good hitters just because they hit 30+ home runs and 90+ RBI's, or that guys like Joe Carter are Hall of Famers.

For a third baseman Batista was a good home run hitter. He is probably top three on the Orioles all time list for average home runs per season from that position.

[The Wedge]

For a third baseman Batista was a good home run hitter. He is probably top three on the Orioles all time list for average home runs per season from that position.

Mind...blown. Viscera...everywhere.

[ShaneDawg85]

For a third baseman Batista was a good home run hitter. He is probably top three on the Orioles all time list for average home runs per season from that position.

As I said elsewhere, this isn't worth anything. Why? Because 3rd base for the Orioles essentially consists of Brooks Robinson, Doug Decinces, Melvin Mora, going way, way back to George Kell, and Cal Ripken Jr. before his prime, and Ripken way past his prime. Between Doug Decinces and Melvin Mora the Orioles have had jack squat at 3rd.

[KAZ97]

The best hitters. Frank, Eddie, Cal, Singleton, selected years of Brooks, Mora, Boog, Raffy, Lowenstein, Markakis. I'm sure I'm missing a few.

There are two questions that could be asked here:

(1) Who performed the best in clutch situations? If we want to answer that question, then Drungo is most likely correct. The best hitters probably performed the best in clutch situations. And probably the best in non-clutch situations too. That's why we recall them as the best hitters.

(2) Whose performance increased the most when in the clutch? This is another question entirely and it would be fun to find out. First, we'd had to define "clutch" situations. Once defined, we can then estimate the performance in clutch situations and all other situations and take a difference. My biased answer to question number 2 is Jeff Reboulet. And by "clutch" I mean at bats against Randy Johnson in my favorite season.

[DrungoHazewood]

So, you just looked at some box scores and worked out those WAR numbers on the back of an envelope, did you?

Or did you just look up a bunch of of prefab numbers on the internet?

Look, it's one thing to say that we have a lot more slicing and dicing of numbers now. It's something else to say people were idiots because they didn't used to have them in the past. Nobody had access to a ton of numbers then. Nobody got to see all the games on TV either. So, what was a sportswriter supposed to go by when it came to MVP voting? He was gonna go by the numbers he had, which is just what you would've done if it was you. And what they had was AVG, RBI, H, R, 2B, 3B, HR, BB, SB, and that's about it. Not only did nobody have computers, most people didn't even have calculators either. So, people didn't do computation based on those numbers, they just stared at them. Of the numbers they stared at, the main way people judged bat productivity was by the Triple Crown numbers: AVG, HR, and RBI. You may not like it, but you know it's true anyway.

Of those, in '73 Davis led the club's fulltime players in 2 out of 3. The team leader in HR was Earl Williams, and he hit .237. So, exactly who do you think they were supposed to vote for? Any team that won it's division for the 4th time in 5 years is gonna have some hitter getting MVP votes. Maybe not a lot, but some. They just are, that's all. And that year the O's won the division without any fulltime player hitting worth a damn. Which means somebody was gonna get some MVP votes that look goofy in retrospect. It might as well have been Davis. Going by the numbers everybody looked at then, it's not like he didn't deserve it any more than anybody else didn't. Plus, it's not like he got a lot of votes. He got just a few. He didn't finish in the top-3, which is all that got reported back then. When it came to MVP votes, what he got was just pocket change. So, all in all, this is much ado about not much. It's much more of a comment about the state of available information than it is about sportswriters being stupid.

I don't see any possible way you could look at the available data from 1973 and conclude that Tommy Davis was one of the top 50 players in the American League. This is a guy who played a handful of defensive innings all year, and was only in the top 10 in one meaningful batting category (batting average, where he was 3rd). His only job was to hit, and he wasn't among the league leaders in homers, RBI, runs, steals, doubles, or triples.

The writers basically said he was as valuable as Thurmon Munson, who had far better triple crown stats and was a good defensive catcher. They said he was better than Yaz, who was a former MVP who hit twice as many homers, drove in more runs and played good defense.

When I was 12 years old, if you'd given me a stack of 1974 baseball cards there's no way I'd have come up with Tommy Davis as being one of the better players in the league.

I guess what I may have been missing here was that many of the writers of the day put a lot more emphasis on playing for a winning team. So they'd sometimes vote for a clearly inferior player if he was on a good team.

I think this is all about sportswriters not having good information, and being stupid.

Oh, and the WAR totals came from Rally's site, baseballprojection.com.

[Frobby]

I don't see any possible way you could look at the available data from 1973 and conclude that Tommy Davis was one of the top 50 players in the American League. This is a guy who played a handful of defensive innings all year, and was only in the top 10 in one meaningful batting category (batting average, where he was 3rd). His only job was to hit, and he wasn't among the league leaders in homers, RBI, runs, steals, doubles, or triples.

The writers basically said he was as valuable as Thurmon Munson, who had far better triple crown stats and was a good defensive catcher. They said he was better than Yaz, who was a former MVP who hit twice as many homers, drove in more runs and played good defense.

When I was 12 years old, if you'd given me a stack of 1974 baseball cards there's no way I'd have come up with Tommy Davis as being one of the better players in the league.

I guess what I may have been missing here was that many of the writers of the day put a lot more emphasis on playing for a winning team. So they'd sometimes vote for a clearly inferior player if he was on a good team.

I think this is all about sportswriters not having good information, and being stupid.

Oh, and the WAR totals came from Rally's site, baseballprojection.com.

Well, of course I agree that today the voters have far more information at their disposal than they did in 1973. But on a simplistic level, Tommy Davis came over to a team that had missed the playoffs the year before because they had been horrible offensively, was the best hitter on the team, routinely batting 3rd or 4th, he finished 3rd in the league in batting and the Orioles rebounded to make the playoffs. Batting average was much more highly regarded then. So, that explains the thinking.

[Lucky Jim]

Well, of course I agree that today the voters have far more information at their disposal than they did in 1973. But on a simplistic level, Tommy Davis came over to a team that had missed the playoffs the year before because they had been horrible offensively, was the best hitter on the team, routinely batting 3rd or 4th, he finished 3rd in the league in batting and the Orioles rebounded to make the playoffs. Batting average was much more highly regarded then. So, that explains the thinking.

With a healthy dose of "causation/correlation" confusion, it would appear.

[Frobby]

With a healthy dose of "causation/correlation" confusion, it would appear.

Perhaps. But take a look at the '72 Orioles, who really suffered from the lack of a big bat when they traded Frank. That team had a 2.54 ERA and yet it only finished 80-74 because the hitting was so anemic. The team scored 235 more runs the following year with Davis in the lineup. He was far from the only reason, but he was definitely part of the reason.

Mind you, I'm not defending the vote, just explaining it in the context of the time.

[Lucky Jim]

Perhaps. But take a look at the '72 Orioles, who really suffered from the lack of a big bat when they traded Frank. That team had a 2.54 ERA and yet it only finished 80-74 because the hitting was so anemic. The team scored 235 more runs the following year with Davis in the lineup. He was far from the only reason, but he was definitely part of the reason.

Mind you, I'm not defending the vote, just explaining it in the context of the time.

Well, that's sort-of my point. A look at the team as a whole for both years shows that TD was a pretty small part of that improvement. Everyone underperformed in 1972 (to the tune of a .230ish team BA and sub-.700 team OPS). Even with that, however, the team underperformed its Pythag by 10 games. It won 17 more games (and got 15 games better in Pythag) in 1973, and while TD was clearly part of that, real credit goes to Baylor and Bumbry, I would think:

1973

Rk  	Pos  	 	Age  	G  	PA  	AB  	R  	H  	2B  	3B  	HR  	RBI  	SB  	CS  	BB  	SO  	BA  	OBP  	SLG  	OPS  	OPS+  	TB  	GDP  	HBP  	SH  	SF  	IBB1  	C  	Earl Williams  	24  	132  	536  	459  	58  	109  	18  	1  	22  	83  	0  	2  	66  	107  	.237  	.333  	.425  	.758  	114  	195  	13  	3  	1  	7  	82 	1B 	Boog Powell* 	31 	114 	464 	370 	52 	98 	13 	1 	11 	54 	0 	2 	85 	64 	.265 	.398 	.395 	.792 	126 	146 	11 	0 	4 	5 	103 	2B 	Bobby Grich 	24 	162 	700 	581 	82 	146 	29 	7 	12 	50 	17 	9 	107 	91 	.251 	.373 	.387 	.760 	116 	225 	7 	7 	3 	2 	34 	SS 	Mark Belanger 	29 	154 	544 	470 	60 	106 	15 	1 	0 	27 	13 	6 	49 	54 	.226 	.302 	.262 	.564 	61 	123 	9 	5 	15 	5 	15 	3B 	B. Robinson 	36 	155 	619 	549 	53 	141 	17 	2 	9 	72 	2 	0 	55 	50 	.257 	.326 	.344 	.670 	90 	189 	19 	3 	8 	4 	56 	LF 	Don Baylor 	24 	118 	459 	405 	64 	116 	20 	4 	11 	51 	32 	9 	35 	48 	.286 	.357 	.437 	.794 	124 	177 	11 	13 	0 	6 	37 	CF 	Paul Blair 	29 	146 	554 	500 	73 	140 	25 	3 	10 	64 	18 	8 	43 	72 	.280 	.334 	.402 	.736 	108 	201 	10 	0 	6 	5 	48 	RF 	M. Rett'nmund 	30 	95 	390 	321 	59 	84 	17 	2 	9 	44 	11 	2 	57 	38 	.262 	.378 	.411 	.789 	124 	132 	4 	4 	6 	2 	49 	DH 	Tommy Davis 	34 	137 	590 	552 	53 	169 	20 	3 	7 	89 	11 	3 	30 	56 	.306 	.341 	.391 	.732 	107 	216 	15 	1 	3 	4 	310 	OF 	Rich Coggins* 	22 	110 	426 	389 	54 	124 	19 	9 	7 	41 	17 	9 	28 	24 	.319 	.363 	.468 	.831 	134 	182 	7 	0 	7 	2 	211 	OF 	Al Bumbry* 	26 	110 	395 	356 	73 	120 	15 	11 	7 	34 	23 	10 	34 	49 	.337 	.398 	.500 	.898 	154 	178 	5 	3 	1 	1 	012 	C 	Etchebarren 	30 	54 	168 	152 	16 	39 	9 	1 	2 	23 	1 	1 	12 	21 	.257 	.317 	.368 	.686 	94 	56 	7 	2 	1 	1 	113 	DH 	Terry Crowley* 	26 	54 	148 	131 	16 	27 	4 	0 	3 	15 	0 	0 	16 	14 	.206 	.297 	.305 	.603 	71 	40 	4 	1 	0 	0 	114 	C 	E. Hendricks* 	32 	41 	114 	101 	9 	18 	5 	1 	3 	15 	0 	0 	10 	22 	.178 	.257 	.337 	.593 	67 	34 	2 	1 	1 	1 	415 	SS 	Frank Baker* 	26 	44 	71 	63 	10 	12 	1 	2 	1 	11 	0 	0 	7 	7 	.190 	.268 	.317 	.585 	65 	20 	0 	0 	0 	1 	016 	1B 	Enos Cabell 	23 	32 	53 	47 	12 	10 	2 	0 	1 	3 	1 	3 	3 	7 	.213 	.250 	.319 	.569 	61 	15 	1 	0 	1 	2 	017 	IF 	Larry Brown 	33 	17 	35 	28 	4 	7 	0 	0 	1 	5 	0 	0 	5 	4 	.250 	.353 	.357 	.710 	102 	10 	1 	0 	1 	1 	018 	UT 	Jim Fuller 	22 	9 	27 	26 	2 	3 	0 	0 	2 	4 	0 	0 	1 	17 	.115 	.148 	.346 	.494 	36 	9 	0 	0 	0 	0 	019 	IF 	Doug DeCinces 	22 	10 	19 	18 	2 	2 	0 	0 	0 	3 	0 	0 	1 	5 	.111 	.158 	.111 	.269 	-22 	2 	0 	0 	0 	0 	020 	C 	Sergio Robles 	27 	8 	16 	13 	0 	1 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	3 	1 	.077 	.250 	.077 	.327 	-3 	1 	0 	0 	0 	0 	021 	UT 	Curt Motton 	32 	5 	7 	6 	2 	2 	0 	0 	1 	4 	0 	0 	1 	1 	.333 	.429 	.833 	1.262 	251 	5 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0

1972:

Rk  	Pos  	 	Age  	G  	PA  	AB  	R  	H  	2B  	3B  	HR  	RBI  	SB  	CS  	BB  	SO  	BA  	OBP  	SLG  	OPS  	OPS+  	TB  	GDP  	HBP  	SH  	SF  	IBB1 	C 	Johnny Oates* 	26 	85 	288 	253 	20 	66 	12 	1 	4 	21 	5 	7 	28 	31 	.261 	.332 	.364 	.696 	105 	92 	5 	0 	5 	2 	82 	1B 	Boog Powell* 	30 	140 	539 	465 	53 	117 	20 	1 	21 	81 	4 	0 	65 	92 	.252 	.346 	.434 	.780 	129 	202 	13 	4 	1 	4 	143 	2B 	Davey Johnson 	29 	118 	436 	376 	31 	83 	22 	3 	5 	32 	1 	1 	52 	68 	.221 	.320 	.335 	.655 	93 	126 	10 	4 	2 	2 	84 	SS 	Mark Belanger 	28 	113 	313 	285 	36 	53 	9 	1 	2 	16 	6 	3 	18 	53 	.186 	.236 	.246 	.482 	42 	70 	3 	2 	4 	4 	15 	3B 	B-Robinson 	35 	153 	612 	556 	48 	139 	23 	2 	8 	64 	1 	0 	43 	45 	.250 	.303 	.342 	.644 	90 	190 	12 	2 	4 	7 	46 	LF 	Don Buford# 	35 	125 	485 	408 	46 	84 	6 	2 	5 	22 	8 	3 	69 	83 	.206 	.326 	.267 	.593 	76 	109 	5 	4 	3 	1 	107 	CF 	Paul Blair 	28 	142 	514 	477 	47 	111 	20 	8 	8 	49 	7 	8 	25 	78 	.233 	.267 	.358 	.626 	83 	171 	16 	0 	5 	7 	08 	RF    Rettenmund 	29 	102 	346 	301 	40 	70 	10 	2 	6 	21 	6 	4 	41 	37 	.233 	.325 	.339 	.663 	96 	102 	10 	0 	4 	0 	09 	MI 	Bobby Grich 	23 	133 	528 	460 	66 	128 	21 	3 	12 	50 	13 	6 	53 	96 	.278 	.358 	.415 	.773 	127 	191 	8 	7 	3 	5 	310 	OF 	Don Baylor 	23 	102 	363 	320 	33 	81 	13 	3 	11 	38 	24 	2 	29 	50 	.253 	.330 	.416 	.745 	119 	133 	9 	9 	2 	3 	011 	RF 	Terry Crowley* 	25 	97 	283 	247 	30 	57 	10 	0 	11 	29 	0 	0 	32 	26 	.231 	.319 	.405 	.724 	112 	100 	8 	1 	1 	2 	512 	C 	Etchebarren 	29 	71 	210 	188 	11 	38 	6 	1 	2 	21 	0 	2 	17 	43 	.202 	.276 	.277 	.553 	63 	52 	5 	3 	0 	2 	213 	C 	Hendricks* 	31 	33 	98 	84 	6 	13 	4 	0 	0 	4 	0 	1 	12 	19 	.155 	.258 	.202 	.460 	37 	17 	1 	0 	1 	1 	214 	LF 	Tommy Davis 	33 	26 	88 	82 	9 	21 	3 	0 	0 	6 	2 	0 	6 	18 	.256 	.307 	.293 	.600 	77 	24 	3 	0 	0 	0 	015 	LF 	Tom Shopay* 	27 	49 	45 	40 	3 	9 	0 	0 	0 	2 	0 	0 	5 	12 	.225 	.311 	.225 	.536 	60 	9 	0 	0 	0 	0 	016 	OF 	Rich Coggins* 	21 	16 	43 	39 	5 	13 	4 	0 	0 	1 	0 	2 	1 	6 	.333 	.350 	.436 	.786 	131 	17 	0 	0 	3 	0 	017 	CI 	Chico Salmon 	31 	17 	16 	16 	2 	1 	1 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	4 	.063 	.063 	.125 	.188 	-46 	2 	1 	0 	0 	0 	018 	RF 	Al Bumbry* 	25 	9 	11 	11 	5 	4 	0 	1 	0 	0 	1 	1 	0 	0 	.364 	.364 	.545 	.909 	165 	6 	0 	0 	0 	0 	019 	3B 	Tommy Matchick* 	28 	3 	9 	9 	0 	2 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	1 	0 	1 	.222 	.222 	.222 	.444 	31 	2 	0 	0 	0 	0 	020 	1B 	Enos Cabell 	22 	3 	5 	5 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	1 	0 	0 	0 	0 	.000 	.000 	.000 	.000 	-100 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	021 	C 	Sergio Robles 	26 	2 	5 	5 	0 	1 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	.200 	.200 	.200 	.400 	18 	1 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0Rk 	Pos 		Age 	G 	PA 	AB 	R 	H 	2B 	3B 	HR 	RBI 	SB 	CS 	BB 	SO 	BA 	OBP 	SLG 	OPS 	OPS+ 	TB 	GDP 	HBP 	SH 	SF 	IBB22 	P 	Jim Palmer 	26 	36 	106 	98 	12 	22 	3 	1 	0 	8 	0 	0 	2 	36 	.224 	.240 	.276 	.516 	52 	27 	0 	0 	6 	0 	023 	P 	Mike Cuellar* 	35 	35 	94 	87 	5 	11 	0 	0 	2 	7 	0 	0 	0 	38 	.126 	.126 	.195 	.322 	-6 	17 	1 	0 	7 	0 	024 	P 	Pat Dobson 	30 	38 	94 	85 	3 	12 	2 	0 	0 	3 	0 	0 	1 	39 	.141 	.151 	.165 	.316 	-7 	14 	2 	0 	8 	0 	025 	P 	Dave McNally 	29 	36 	84 	79 	4 	12 	2 	0 	2 	6 	0 	0 	3 	38 	.152 	.183 	.253 	.436 	28 	20 	0 	0 	2 	0 	026 	P 	Doyle Alexander 	21 	35 	29 	25 	1 	2 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	1 	7 	.080 	.115 	.080 	.195 	-42 	2 	1 	0 	3 	0 	027 	P 	Roric Harrison 	25 	39 	19 	17 	2 	2 	1 	0 	1 	1 	0 	0 	1 	9 	.118 	.167 	.353 	.520 	50 	6 	0 	0 	1 	0 	028 	P 	Grant Jackson# 	29 	32 	4 	4 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	3 	.000 	.000 	.000 	.000 	-100 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	029 	P 	Mickey Scott* 	24 	15 	3 	1 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	2 	1 	.000 	.667 	.000 	.667 	109 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	030 	P 	Bob Reynolds 	25 	3 	2 	2 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	1 	.000 	.000 	.000 	.000 	-100 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	031 	P 	Dave Leonhard 	31 	16 	2 	1 	1 	1 	1 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	1 	0 	1.000 	1.000 	2.000 	3.000 	767 	2 	0 	0 	0 	0 	032 	P 	Eddie Watt 	31 	38 	2 	2 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	1 	.000 	.000 	.000 	.000 	-100 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0	Team Totals 	28.8 	154 	5676 	5028 	519 	1153 	193 	29 	100 	483 	78 	41 	507 	935 	.229 	.302 	.339 	.641 	89 	1704 	113 	36 	65 	40 	57

Team ERA went from 2.5ish to 3.00ish, but team ERA+ was basically unchanged. The dawn of the DH age.

[Old#5fan]

Well, of course I agree that today the voters have far more information at their disposal than they did in 1973. But on a simplistic level, Tommy Davis came over to a team that had missed the playoffs the year before because they had been horrible offensively, was the best hitter on the team, routinely batting 3rd or 4th, he finished 3rd in the league in batting and the Orioles rebounded to make the playoffs. Batting average was much more highly regarded then. So, that explains the thinking.

Its pretty bad you have to school the guy by giving him a history lesson about a time where there were no cell phones, computers, stats geeks and Fantasy Leagues like there are now. There was nothing wrong with Tommy Davis getting some votes. Its not like he was in the running reallistically for the MVP. Who was the Oriole MVP that year? Maybe Davis was? Even if he wasn't what is the big deal? Its just a guy not having a clue how things were back then and transferring the way things are now back to where they wouldn't make a lick of sense.

[markdublya]

Baines always seemed to deliver. Surhoff too.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Its pretty bad you have to school the guy by giving him a history lesson about a time where there were no cell phones, computers, stats geeks and Fantasy Leagues like there are now. There was nothing wrong with Tommy Davis getting some votes. Its not like he was in the running reallistically for the MVP. Who was the Oriole MVP that year? Maybe Davis was? Even if he wasn't what is the big deal? Its just a guy not having a clue how things were back then and transferring the way things are now back to where they wouldn't make a lick of sense.

Who are the three greatest hitters of all time?

[Lucky Jim]

Its pretty bad you have to school the guy by giving him a history lesson about a time where there were no cell phones, computers, stats geeks and Fantasy Leagues like there are now. There was nothing wrong with Tommy Davis getting some votes. Its not like he was in the running reallistically for the MVP. Who was the Oriole MVP that year? Maybe Davis was? Even if he wasn't what is the big deal? Its just a guy not having a clue how things were back then and transferring the way things are now back to where they wouldn't make a lick of sense.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8GTHXTEvIc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8GTHXTEvIc&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>