Poll: How long will the MLB lockout last?

How long will the lockout last?

  • Just a couple of weeks. Doesn't impact the season at all.

    Votes: 40 13.6%
  • A couple of months. The start of the season could be briefly delayed but it's largely unaffected.

    Votes: 151 51.2%
  • Several months. A significant number of regular season games are lost.

    Votes: 68 23.1%
  • Half the season. The regular season begins mid-summer and we have a 2020-like schedule.

    Votes: 21 7.1%
  • The entire season.

    Votes: 15 5.1%

  • Total voters
    295

Tokyo Sox

Baka Gaijin
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 16, 2006
5,182
There
I personally disagree.

Perhaps their money and accountants don't, but I do.
- Ohtani did some stuff that hadn't been done in 100 years, and some stuff that had never been done.
- A fun Braves won the World Series with Joc Pederson wearing a pearl necklace.
- Five teams were in contention for the final two AL playoff spots until the last weekend of the season.
- The rebuilding Red Sox went 6 games in the ALCS!!
- This:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tdryup169L0


...just off the top of my head. What's your gripe exactly?
 
Surely the Braves winning the World Series was the canary in the lockout coal mine, no? I mean, there's no way an Atlanta sports team and the world can have nice things at the same time. (Also, an appropriate bookend alongside the Braves winning the World Series immediately after the last significant disruption to a baseball season... buckle up.)
 

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
33,110
Southwestern CT
Can someone change the thread title to remove "strike?" It's a lockout pure and simple.
I will second this request.

This is a lockout, not a strike. And no, it’s not standard practice. It’s an expression of intent that is meant to bludgeon the other side into compliance.

For whatever reason, owners believe that “this time, it’s different.” They are intent on achieving a massive rollback in the terms of labor relations, which is an absolute fantasy.

Absent a dramatic change in posture by the owners, we are going to lose a significant portion of the season. Without movement in the next few months, the odds of losing the entire season are much higher than most think. (Maybe 50/50.)
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
7,516
For whatever reason, owners believe that “this time, it’s different.” They are intent on achieving a massive rollback in the terms of labor relations, which is an absolute fantasy.
Doesn't look like it to me. I'm getting the sense that all the owners really want is expanded playoffs. Anything else is just a distraction. The owners could lift the lockout but all it would lead to is a strike.

Actually that might be the owners strategy. Frustrate the Union and then offer a status quo deal around Spring Training.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
15,631
Maine
Doesn't look like it to me. I'm getting the sense that all the owners really want is expanded playoffs. Anything else is just a distraction. The owners could lift the lockout but all it would lead to is a strike.

Actually that might be the owners strategy. Frustrate the Union and then offer a status quo deal around Spring Training.
Saw an interesting graphic on MLB Network last night that showed that only strikes have ever resulted in cancelled games. It may be due simply to the fact that lockouts generally happen when there are no games to be played anyway (as opposed to strikes coming during the season), but clearly they think it will expedite the process more than operating through the off-season with an expired CBA and hoping the players don't walk out if (when?) there's still no agreement come February/March.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
24,964
Doesn't look like it to me. I'm getting the sense that all the owners really want is expanded playoffs. Anything else is just a distraction. The owners could lift the lockout but all it would lead to is a strike.

Actually that might be the owners strategy. Frustrate the Union and then offer a status quo deal around Spring Training.
I hope you're correct and I don't follow this much outside SOSH but it seems to me that owners want significant concessions from the players and the only way they are going to do that is to cancel games. LOTS of games.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
233
I will second this request.

This is a lockout, not a strike. And no, it’s not standard practice. It’s an expression of intent that is meant to bludgeon the other side into compliance.

For whatever reason, owners believe that “this time, it’s different.” They are intent on achieving a massive rollback in the terms of labor relations, which is an absolute fantasy.

Absent a dramatic change in posture by the owners, we are going to lose a significant portion of the season. Without movement in the next few months, the odds of losing the entire season are much higher than most think. (Maybe 50/50.)
Most happy to change the title but I can’t figure out how to do it!
 

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
33,110
Southwestern CT
Doesn't look like it to me. I'm getting the sense that all the owners really want is expanded playoffs. Anything else is just a distraction. The owners could lift the lockout but all it would lead to is a strike.

Actually that might be the owners strategy. Frustrate the Union and then offer a status quo deal around Spring Training.
Depends entirely on your bias, and I will outline mine below.

In the fifty plus years that we’ve had a union, MLB owners have consistently worked in opposition to the best interests of baseball. I honestly cannot think of a single exception.

They have colluded. They have used replacement players. They consistently whined about how much money they lose while simultaneously blackmailing cities for stadiums, tax credits, etc. And all the while, the value of their teams have skyrocketed.

The only thing that has changed is that the owners have gotten smarter about the business of baseball. I’m old enough to remember when Ruly Carpenter sold the Phillies for $32.5 million back in 1981 and announced that “you can’t make money In baseball anymore.” (The Phillies are now valued at over $2 billion.) The new owners aren’t that stupid - they know they have a gold mine and they are determined not to let the players have any of the revenue streams they have built outside of the CBA - which are so valuable to them they are probably deluding themselves into believing that players are fungible. Just like their predecessors.

You are probably right that the owners will cave once they get a minor concession, but if history is any guide it’s not because their actual objectives are modest. It’s that they will come to realize that they are out-of-touch billionaires with delusions of grandeur.

I should add that John Henry has been a great owner for the Red Sox. But anyone who thinks he’s so smart that he would never be so greedy or make the kind of mistake I’m talking about needs only to remember that he was right in the thick of the plot to create a European “Super League” that would have gutted the traditional order of European football. And that he was eventually forced to issue a humiliating apology to quiet the calls for his head in Liverpool.

Owners don’t give a shit about the traditions of the game or improving the product they put on the field. They resent their players and hold their customers (fans) in contempt. And to the extent we give them any sympathy we are damn fools.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
14,065
I'm sure the MLB owners look at their brethren in the NFL, NBA, and NHL with green envy. It is impossible to lose money owning a team in the first 2, and the only money losers in the NHL are bad teams in bad markets (Arizona), and even there the money drain is capped.

Owners in all leagues think alike: money being paid to the players is money coming out of their own pockets. There is no thought of long term consequences, or the idea of fan interest. It's entirely about cost certainty. There are certainly some differences among owners, but those tend to be minor. Not every NFL owner called their players "cattle", but no owner in any league pushed back on that comment either.

The season long NHL lockout of 2004 remains a warning sign, as there is nothing to prevent the same to happening to MLB. The biggest problem then was that the NHLPA had zero leadership, and so completely underestimated the owners' resolve, and then foolishly tried the same thing again a few years later to similarly disastrous results. The MLBPA has a much better track record (although Marvin Miller is long gone), and the players are in this case right to be peeved with the current CBT/arbitration system. And while the players "won" in 1994, it took a long time to recover from the PR beating they took.

All of this will all be mostly a footnote if the season starts by Memorial Day. But if it goes past that things will get ugly, and the season-ending scenario definitely comes into play.
 

crow216

Dragon Wangler
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
19,484
Garden City
This is all so ridiculous. MLB had a great year, with a lot of exciting young stars emerging and seemed to have some momentum and the owners seem intent on screwing it up. Shameful. If games, or god forbid, a season is lost…..in the aftermath of CoViD, I think it will take a long long time for the league to recover from. I don’t know how Manfred or the owners think they can win this one in the court of public opinion.
Maybe the game takes awhile to recover but I don't much care about whether the next 10 years sees ratings declines if a lockout results in better long-term health of the game. I'm sure you would agree with that, so I'm not trying to disagree here. I just think most of us here are going to watch regardless of the outcome.

The issues I currently have that impact my enjoyment of the game are all related to the inconsistency year-to-year. What kind of baseball are we going to have? What's the playoff format going to be? What new rules will there be for in-game managing of pitchers? Are we going to have automatic strikezones or not? The game is in limbo right now, not because of the lockout but in my opinion due to everything else. All of this lockout is purely money stuff that has no true bearing on the audience and fans. The rest of it? Much more problematic to me not knowing whether your power hitters are going to lose 10% of their homers or line drives because Manfred wants an experimental baseball for a couple months.
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
The issues I currently have that impact my enjoyment of the game are all related to the inconsistency year-to-year. What kind of baseball are we going to have? What's the playoff format going to be? What new rules will there be for in-game managing of pitchers? Are we going to have automatic strikezones or not? The game is in limbo right now, not because of the lockout but in my opinion due to everything else. All of this lockout is purely money stuff that has no true bearing on the audience and fans. The rest of it? Much more problematic to me not knowing whether your power hitters are going to lose 10% of their homers or line drives because Manfred wants an experimental baseball for a couple months.
Pretty much agree with all of this.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I should add that John Henry has been a great owner for the Red Sox. But anyone who thinks he’s so smart that he would never be so greedy or make the kind of mistake I’m talking about needs only to remember that he was right in the thick of the plot to create a European “Super League” that would have gutted the traditional order of European football. And that he was eventually forced to issue a humiliating apology to quiet the calls for his head in Liverpool.
Let's also keep in mind that the owners voted unanimously for the Lockout, so JWH has told us where his priorities lie. I would really like believe in an enlightened ownership concerned with growing the game and finding a partnership approach with the players as best way to do that, but that's my fantasy and obviously not the reality.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Let's also keep in mind that the owners voted unanimously for the Lockout, so JWH has told us where his priorities lie. I would really like believe in an enlightened ownership concerned with growing the game and finding a partnership approach with the players as best way to do that, but that's my fantasy and obviously not the reality.
The chances that anyone but a Charlie Finley type would be an owner who would vote against the wishes of 29 other owners on any matter are pretty darn small.
 

Hank Scorpio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2013
6,033
I too feel like the unanimous vote by owners is just a ploy to make them appear as a united front. I can’t help but to feel that if this decision was solely on the Red Sox, Yankees, and Dodgers, we’d have a deal weeks ago.

It’ll never happen, but I’d love to know which owners are pushing for the laughable terms put forth, which owners have more sway amongst their peers, which ones are merely doing as they’re told, etc…
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
7,516
I too feel like the unanimous vote by owners is just a ploy to make them appear as a united front. I can’t help but to feel that if this decision was solely on the Red Sox, Yankees, and Dodgers, we’d have a deal weeks ago.
You're assuming if the Owners offered a status quo deal... that the players would accept that.

MLB Owners have it pretty good. No floor and the Big Market teams rake in the dough with the gate.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
20,840
Alamogordo
The chances that anyone but a Charlie Finley type would be an owner who would vote against the wishes of 29 other owners on any matter are pretty darn small.
I guess the question that this leads to is, if "one" owner wouldn't go against the other 29, how many would it take to actually get some of them to splinter? 5? 10? At some point, SOME of these owners have to know that this isn't good for their revenue streams, right?
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Let's also keep in mind that the owners voted unanimously for the Lockout, so JWH has told us where his priorities lie. I would really like believe in an enlightened ownership concerned with growing the game and finding a partnership approach with the players as best way to do that, but that's my fantasy and obviously not the reality.
Not taking sides, but a unanimous vote on the part of owners makes total sense on their end. A lockout at this time of the year benefits the owners more than a mid season strike by the players, yes? I think that's the crux of this particular issue. Owners controlling the stoppage with the intentions of salvaging all or most of the season as opposed to surrendering that control and allowing the players to call for an in season strike and being forced with the threat of losing regular season and possibly post season revenue.
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
7,516
Possibly related... I wonder if the Owners are concerned about Rona lockdowns coming back. Even if it's just a localized thing. The Gate is that important to MLB that I don't think they want to go another season without it.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
17,863
Los Angeles, CA
Saw an interesting graphic on MLB Network last night that showed that only strikes have ever resulted in cancelled games. It may be due simply to the fact that lockouts generally happen when there are no games to be played anyway (as opposed to strikes coming during the season), but clearly they think it will expedite the process more than operating through the off-season with an expired CBA and hoping the players don't walk out if (when?) there's still no agreement come February/March.
Yup.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MLB_lockout
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Not taking sides, but a unanimous vote on the part of owners makes total sense on their end. A lockout at this time of the year benefits the owners more than a mid season strike by the players, yes? I think that's the crux of this particular issue. Owners controlling the stoppage with the intentions of salvaging all or most of the season as opposed to surrendering that control and allowing the players to call for an in season strike and being forced with the threat of losing regular season and possibly post season revenue.
The only way the players would be able to strike and shut down a season that started would be if both the MLBPU and ownership decided that games could start without a CBA in place, presumably extending the rule set from last year. Ownership could have continued negotiations without any real fear that what you suggest would occur.

I’m sure it makes negotiating sense for Ownership to show a united front and attempt to end the labor negotiations quickly, before their in season revenues are affected. But that also means I can hold JWH responsible for the position he’s decided to unite with.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
The only way the players would be able to strike and shut down a season that started would be if both the MLBPU and ownership decided that games could start without a CBA in place, presumably extending the rule set from last year. Ownership could have continued negotiations without any real fear that what you suggest would occur.

I’m sure it makes negotiating sense for Ownership to show a united front and attempt to end the labor negotiations quickly, before their in season revenues are affected. But that also means I can hold JWH responsible for the position he’s decided to unite with.
I don't think I disputed that.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I don't think I disputed that.
Fair enough; I don’t mean my response to implicate you as holding any specific position, rather as a jumping off point to go go a bit deeper.

JWH is welcome to vote as he sees it benefitting his interests, but we are also welcome to judge him based on that vote and his actions in other leagues as described by Average Reds, and I for one think less of him and the Red Sox because of it.
 
Oct 5, 2021
1
Sad topic for my very first ever post here (have lurked for years) but if there is baseball being played before July 2022 I will be stunned and very happy.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
Fair enough; I don’t mean my response to implicate you as holding any specific position, rather as a jumping off point to go go a bit deeper.

JWH is welcome to vote as he sees it benefitting his interests, but we are also welcome to judge him based on that vote and his actions in other leagues as described by Average Reds, and I for one think less of him and the Red Sox because of it.
You’re certainly entitled to your opinion. And I’ve seen no evidence that Henry is a dissenter in any sense. If he is, however, then he’s probably better off joining the unanimous vote and pressing for moderation behind the scenes, rather than casting the sole dissenting vote and being ostracized by his fellow owners, the way Angelos was as a public dissenter in 1994-95.

I’m hoping that a handful of owners have no interest in a work stoppage and will exert their influence at the right moment this off-season to push for a deal.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
15,631
Maine
At what point will the sides even start negotiating again?
I'd be shocked if they do anything before January, and I don't expect much in the way of serious talking until the end of January or early February. No one on either side is going to be properly motivated until the normal date for pitchers and catchers to report is looming.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
58,242
That may be true, but wow would it be stupid if it is, because these sides have about a billion things to agree on before this is settled.

I'm still predicting they lose a month or so of games, 130 game season starting around May 1.
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
That may be true, but wow would it be stupid if it is, because these sides have about a billion things to agree on before this is settled.

I'm still predicting they lose a month or so of games, 130 game season starting around May 1.
Guess they used 2020 as a framework for how they want discussions to go, and that they want to play as few Spring Training / Regular Season games as possible.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
24,964
That may be true, but wow would it be stupid if it is, because these sides have about a billion things to agree on before this is settled.

I'm still predicting they lose a month or so of games, 130 game season starting around May 1.
If it were a negotiation, they would be talking. But it seems to me that this isn't a negotiation, it's a showdown. To me, this is like Gary Bettman and the NHL. I hope the players do better this time.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I think this is how everyone expected it to go once the league implemented the lock-out. They'll take the holidays off and start talking next year. Even then they're not likely to show any urgency until there's the chance that real games will come off the schedule...
 

section15

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 23, 2007
197
Bradford, MA and section 15
Came to this thread to see if anyone else had exactly this reaction. His letter looks like a draft you'd write because it's how you feel, before a level-headed advisor tells you how you need to be more of a grown-up and a diplomat, and so you revise it accordingly before sharing it with the public. It's woefully counterproductive from any type of ongoing negotiation / progress standpoint.

That was a letter to the fans, not the MLBPA. Yeah it's childish, and petty - but, we understand, owners are trying to paint the players as the Big Blue Meanies. We're mature and intelligent enough to see it for what it is.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
58,242
I still think we lose at least a month/30 games this season, six weeks now with no effort from MLB to try to resolve this.

“Did the two sides meet last week?

No. The span between any core-economic conversations between the sides is now approaching the 40-day mark. That is nearly a month and a half during which the sides could have been talking. To put it another way: The gap between the Dec. 2 lockout and today is greater than that between today and the mid-February dates pitchers and catchers are expected to report to spring training.

Are they planning to meet this week?

There's nothing on the books. The union believes it's the league's turn to make an offer, and MLB is discussing potential proposals. Negotiations are likely to recommence on MLB's timetable.”

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/32882139/mlb-lockout-owners-players-talking-baseball-fans-worried-here-latest