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 12.2%
  • A couple of months. The start of the season could be briefly delayed but it's largely unaffected.

    Votes: 163 49.8%
  • Several months. A significant number of regular season games are lost.

    Votes: 76 23.2%
  • Half the season. The regular season begins mid-summer and we have a 2020-like schedule.

    Votes: 28 8.6%
  • The entire season.

    Votes: 20 6.1%

  • Total voters
    327

NDame616

will bailey
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,314
I'll be "glass half full"

They all knew the cut off date to start spring training late and still get the season on time was getting a deal done about this week. If there isn't a deal done this week, then we will probably miss games. Opening day is supposed to be March 31st . They need a deal in the next week, give everyone 4 or 5 days to get to their ST sites, and a month of ST/games before the regular season.

They didn't really negotiate a month ago because they didn't need to. Now with an ACTUAL deadline approaching, they know it's go time or we lose games. Everyone negotiates better with a deadline.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,731
To be clear, the owners don't care about missing the first 30 or 50 regular season games, they make a lot more money on the postseason and would be happy to not pay salaries for a month or two.

The reason to be somewhat optimistic this week is as I said above, "the MLBPA just played one of the few cards they have and told MLB that they will not agree to expanded playoffs for 2022 if the season is less than 162 games. Kind of brilliant IMO, we’ll see if it works." So the MLBPA have added a lot of urgency to this week's negotiations as the owners do not want to lose that extra playoff TV money. If they can't agree this week and they do officially start cancelling regular season games, then it could get really ugly, so it's a big week.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,316
I tend to agree that this week is really the first moment in all of this that will tell us anything. There were news stories even before the lockout started saying essentially that there would be no genuine negotiation until mid-February, so I don’t think it’s worth reading anything into the relative lack of back and forth to this point.

JA makes an interesting point that the owners may not mind losing a month or so of regular season games. I find that persuasive, although I do recall reading somewhere that games have never been lost because of a lockout, only because of a strike. In any case, I don’t know that I’m optimistic we won’t lose any of the season, but I agree that it remains a plausible scenario that we won’t.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
One thing not mentioned in all of this is IF they get something done this week and IF they start the season on time, where's the concern for pitchers not being properly stretched out? Pitchers will be 3+ weeks behind in their preseason process and while some might not need that full period 6-7 weeks before opening day, dropping that to 3-4 weeks has to be risky for more than a few.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,921
Is that as big a concern after the last two years, which have hardly been normal? And especially now that a good start is 4 innings?
 

NDame616

will bailey
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,314
One thing not mentioned in all of this is IF they get something done this week and IF they start the season on time, where's the concern for pitchers not being properly stretched out? Pitchers will be 3+ weeks behind in their preseason process and while some might not need that full period 6-7 weeks before opening day, dropping that to 3-4 weeks has to be risky for more than a few.
IMO it'll be on the pitchers if they aren't ready. This isn't 1964 where players needed a winter job to stay paying the bills. I'd argue for a shorter ST/fewer ST games since there's nothing stopping pitchers from being on a meticulous pitching schedule in the off season. There's really no reason they can't be "game ready" in a week or two
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
IMO it'll be on the pitchers if they aren't ready. This isn't 1964 where players needed a winter job to stay paying the bills. I'd argue for a shorter ST/fewer ST games since there's nothing stopping pitchers from being on a meticulous pitching schedule in the off season. There's really no reason they can't be "game ready" in a week or two
Under the supervision of their teams during spring training they're not game ready in a week or two.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,731
Under the supervision of their teams during spring training they're not game ready in a week or two.
But that is mostly because of overall inning concerns for the long season, not because they can't get stretched out in a few weeks if that was their goal.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
7,878
Boston, MA
Most pitchers go through a dead arm period two or three weeks into the start of spring. It seems like four weeks is the absolute minimum to be ready for the regular season.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Is that as big a concern after the last two years, which have hardly been normal? And especially now that a good start is 4 innings?
More than that, I think after the last two years, if they come to a fast agreement and don't delay Opening Day, they'll also put a provision in to expand rosters maybe though the end of April or something. Basically allow teams to carry extra pitchers to counteract the shorter ramp-up.
 

santadevil

wears depends
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
6,472
Saskatchestan
Most pitchers go through a dead arm period two or three weeks into the start of spring. It seems like four weeks is the absolute minimum to be ready for the regular season.
I've never heard this before. Got something to back it up?

As said upthread, pitchers have a throwing program for the winter, so if they conditioned properly, it's on them. The biggest issue is not seeing live batters in a game. Which is also the same issue the batters have
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,731
It looks like 2020 ‘spring’ training was 3 weeks, started July 2 and the first real games were July 23.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,020
Oregon
It looks like 2020 ‘spring’ training was 3 weeks, started July 2 and the first real games were July 23.
The difference, I guess, is that in 2020 there wasn't as much uncertainty regarding where several free agents would land or potential trades. Teams pretty much could use those three weeks without any major roster shuffling.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,921
In 1995, the strike ended on 4/2 and the season began on 4/25. On 3/26, they had canceled the first 18 games of each teams schedule. But yeah, there are 140 free agents out here so it could be a frenzy when and if this thing ends for them to get signed quickly.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,316
I’d think that the large majority of remaining FAs aren’t the sort that will command multiple offers and ignite time-consuming bidding wars. Teams likely know who they’ll target and have a pretty good idea of what the cost will be. It will probably be a flurry, but nothing that in and of itself should affect the season.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,731
I’d think that the large majority of remaining FAs aren’t the sort that will command multiple offers and ignite time-consuming bidding wars. Teams likely know who they’ll target and have a pretty good idea of what the cost will be. It will probably be a flurry, but nothing that in and of itself should affect the season.
20 of the top 50 from this winter remain unsigned according to MLBTR, it will go fast but still could take a week or so for many of them. It’s hard for teams to plan without knowing the details of the new CBA.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/01/best-remaining-mlb-free-agents.html
 

Wingack

Yankee Mod
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
34,370
In The Quivering Forest
The difference, I guess, is that in 2020 there wasn't as much uncertainty regarding where several free agents would land or potential trades. Teams pretty much could use those three weeks without any major roster shuffling.
Doesn't mean spring training can't start.

It's up to those guys to sign when they want to.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,020
Oregon
Doesn't mean spring training can't start.

It's up to those guys to sign when they want to.
That's not the point. The three-week period JA referenced, while not ideal, at least had the benefit of teams being pretty much in place. A three-week period with 100+ free agents needing homes will add a bit of chaos -- teams trying to solidify rotations and bullpens, for instance
 

Bosoxian

New Member
Aug 17, 2021
158
I think it was Manfred who said that they had learned from 2020 that they need at least 4-5 weeks of spring training for the pitchers
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,921
That's not the point. The three-week period JA referenced, while not ideal, at least had the benefit of teams being pretty much in place. A three-week period with 100+ free agents needing homes will add a bit of chaos -- teams trying to solidify rotations and bullpens, for instance
Sure, but it’s what happened the last time there was a work stoppage. Not necessarily ideal, but doable.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,020
Oregon
Sure, but it’s what happened the last time there was a work stoppage.
JA was comparing it to the covid year. I suggested this is a bit different, and therefore more difficult

I've long since given up the notion of posters understanding the context of how/when comments are made.
 
Last edited:

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
JA was comparing it to the covid year. I suggested this is a bit different, and therefore more difficult

I've long since given up the notion of posters understanding the context of how/when comments are made.
It's also a bit different for another reason. IIRC, spring training in 2020 started when it normally would in February, but was suspended mid March before resuming for three weeks at the beginning of July.
 

absintheofmalaise

too many flowers
Dope
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2005
23,335
The gran facenda
Doesn't mean spring training can't start.

It's up to those guys to sign when they want to.
Yes, ST can start. That's not his point if I'm understanding correctly. His point is that there will still be a lot of uncertainty about where many of the players will actually be playing. And many of the pitchers might be using the first few weeks of the season to build up arm strength.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
It's also a bit different for another reason. IIRC, spring training in 2020 started when it normally would in February, but was suspended mid March before resuming for three weeks at the beginning of July.
There was also likely constant communication between players and coaches/trainers during the down time as well, so players could work on team-approved programs on their own. That most definitely isn't going on now.

I think spring training can be abbreviated in the name of saving regular season games from being cancelled. There just needs to be an intermediary step in the process to protect pitchers in particular as they ramp up, such as having extra roster spots for the first few weeks of the season. Say, 30 players in April, 28 in May, then the normal 26 after Memorial Day. They expanded rosters during the COVID season for much the same reason (as well as protecting against players missing time with infection/close contact situations).
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
There was also likely constant communication between players and coaches/trainers during the down time as well, so players could work on team-approved programs on their own. That most definitely isn't going on now.

I think spring training can be abbreviated in the name of saving regular season games from being cancelled. There just needs to be an intermediary step in the process to protect pitchers in particular as they ramp up, such as having extra roster spots for the first few weeks of the season. Say, 30 players in April, 28 in May, then the normal 26 after Memorial Day. They expanded rosters during the COVID season for much the same reason (as well as protecting against players missing time with infection/close contact situations).
I don't disagree with any of this. Starters aren't going to be where they would normally be after three weeks.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
7,878
Boston, MA
I've never heard this before. Got something to back it up?

As said upthread, pitchers have a throwing program for the winter, so if they conditioned properly, it's on them. The biggest issue is not seeing live batters in a game. Which is also the same issue the batters have
You've never heard of spring training dead arms or that it happens to most pitchers?

I think most people have it backwards in the thread. Pitchers can work on their stuff on pretty much any mound anywhere. The guy standing in the box doesn't matter too much. It's the hitters who need a few weeks of live major league level pitching to get their timing down. A pitching machine is no substitute for standing in against Chris Sale slinging the ball from way over on the first base side.

So yes, pitchers could get their work in on their own, but teams want to be in communication while it's happening to be on top of any issues. That's not allowed during the lockout. I feel like teams would rather miss a week of regular season games than to risk letting pitchers manage their own throwing programs.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
You've never heard of spring training dead arms or that it happens to most pitchers?

I think most people have it backwards in the thread. Pitchers can work on their stuff on pretty much any mound anywhere. The guy standing in the box doesn't matter too much. It's the hitters who need a few weeks of live major league level pitching to get their timing down. A pitching machine is no substitute for standing in against Chris Sale slinging the ball from way over on the first base side.

So yes, pitchers could get their work in on their own, but teams want to be in communication while it's happening to be on top of any issues. That's not allowed during the lockout. I feel like teams would rather miss a week of regular season games than to risk letting pitchers manage their own throwing programs.
Everything I've ever heard or read about MLB spring training is that the exhibition schedule is as long as it is for the benefit of the pitchers, not the hitters.

Just looking at 2019 spring training stats (the last season to have a "real" spring training), the leaders in plate appearances for the Sox were Devers (53) and Bogaerts (46). They each achieved those totals playing in 19 games out of 27 team games (presumably this doesn't count intrasquad and college games). For contrast, it took Devers 13 games to get to that number of PA during the 2019 regular season and it took Bogaerts just 11. Regular season they were presumably playing every inning of each game they started.

Hitters should have no problem being ready after an abbreviated spring training simply by playing longer into games earlier in the schedule. Just have them play 6+ innings and get 2-3 PAs right out of the gate instead of 2-3 innings and 1-2 PA in the first week. Probably can get away with fewer days off during the exhibition schedule as well.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
7,878
Boston, MA
Right, spring training is that long because pitchers have to stretch out and get over any dead arm periods. But it's not about facing live hitters. For hitters it's the opposite, they don't need a ton of time to get physically ready to play the game. They just need a couple weeks of live pitching to get used to major league game speed.
 

santadevil

wears depends
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
6,472
Saskatchestan
You've never heard of spring training dead arms or that it happens to most pitchers?
I haven't, no

I was a pitcher in college, and I've coached pitchers in college and many other age groups as well. No professionals, but guys that definitely pitch in the early spring time
This isn't something I've ever heard of, or come across personally

That's why I was asking for something to back it up? Has someone written on this and I'm just totally unaware?
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
I haven't, no

I was a pitcher in college, and I've coached pitchers in college and many other age groups as well. No professionals, but guys that definitely pitch in the early spring time
This isn't something I've ever heard of, or come across personally

That's why I was asking for something to back it up? Has someone written on this and I'm just totally unaware?
It happens, but I think it's more of an occasional thing during spring training. Perhaps in some cases it can be a byproduct of unsupervised off season throwing. Eduardo Rodriquez went through it at the end of last year's spring training, was scratched as the season opener and started the season on the DL. While I do believe that "dead arm" is a thing, I also wonder if the phrase has become a convenient catch all phrase for unknown/undiagnosed conditions.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
MLB takes two dumb ideas off the table, that’s a positive. Dunno the thinking behind the original proposal of limiting the number of times someone can be optioned in a season, but IMO it was going to result in pitchers getting hurt.

View: https://twitter.com/evandrellich/status/1495930241348521988?s=21
Two seasons ago MLB eliminated 25% of the teams from MiLB. I'm curious as to the thought process behind wanting to control MiLB's roster sizes. I'm sure economics plays a role, but how much is there to gain there? What other reasons might there be?
 

staz

Intangible
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2004
20,659
The cradle of the game.
The difference, I guess, is that in 2020 there wasn't as much uncertainty regarding where several free agents would land or potential trades. Teams pretty much could use those three weeks without any major roster shuffling.
If I’m an owner/GM, it’s one thing leaning on your coaches and trainers to get your pieces ready on an accelerated timeline. It’s an entirely different challenge not having all your pieces in the first place. Correa, Rodon, Freeman, Bryant, Castellanos, Kershaw and another 190+ are still out there unsigned. The front office’s workload has to be front and center in the revised timeline calculus.

https://www.fangraphs.com/roster-resource/free-agent-tracker?&sign=unsigned
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
7,878
Boston, MA
I haven't, no

I was a pitcher in college, and I've coached pitchers in college and many other age groups as well. No professionals, but guys that definitely pitch in the early spring time
This isn't something I've ever heard of, or come across personally

That's why I was asking for something to back it up? Has someone written on this and I'm just totally unaware?
According to Neal Heaton, every single pitcher he knows has experienced it.

What is Dead Arm - And How to Deal With It? - Axcess Baseball

Every year there's a starter who skips some spring appearances with a "dead arm." Announcers and writers always just mention it like it's a normal thing that happens every spring. The Athletic did a long story about it in 2018.

Lott: Dead-arm stories, from Blue Jays who lived through them – The Athletic

I kind of feel like you're messing with me if you say you've literally never heard of such a thing.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Two seasons ago MLB eliminated 25% of the teams from MiLB. I'm curious as to the thought process behind wanting to control MiLB's roster sizes. I'm sure economics plays a role, but how much is there to gain there? What other reasons might there be?
It’s a specific kind of economics: MLB would be legislating overall roster sizes so that every team plays with same talent pool, but they’re asking to skew it down to the level of the cheapest teams who don’t want to spend on anything. It’s another way to limit what all teams can spend to find & develop big leaguers, so the Pirates, Guardians & Rays don’t have to without being at a disadvantage.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
It’s a specific kind of economics: MLB would be legislating overall roster sizes so that every team plays with same talent pool, but they’re asking to skew it down to the level of the cheapest teams who don’t want to spend on anything. It’s another way to limit what all teams can spend to find & develop big leaguers, so the Pirates, Guardians & Rays don’t have to without being at a disadvantage.
Would ownership be in agreement on that? I mean I can see the owners of the teams you mention benefiting from it, but why would the Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, etc... be in on that? They could scale back individually if they so desired, but why give up the ability to spend or invest in those areas where others can't or won't?
 

santadevil

wears depends
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
6,472
Saskatchestan
I kind of feel like you're messing with me if you say you've literally never heard of such a thing.
Thanks for the links
Yes, I know what dead arm is

I read what you posted earlier, probably different than you meant it

Most pitchers go through a dead arm period two or three weeks into the start of spring. It seems like four weeks is the absolute minimum to be ready for the regular season.
I took that to mean every pitcher gets dead arm in spring training, which is why I was confused

I know there will be a few. Happens to different guys through an entire season at different points. Some won't get it at all

We're on the same page now

Edit/ Reading Heston's article, he says most have it happen in Spring training. I'd honestly never heard most pitchers have it. Doesn't really seem to ever get reported during Spring Training
 
Last edited:

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
It’s a specific kind of economics: MLB would be legislating overall roster sizes so that every team plays with same talent pool, but they’re asking to skew it down to the level of the cheapest teams who don’t want to spend on anything. It’s another way to limit what all teams can spend to find & develop big leaguers, so the Pirates, Guardians & Rays don’t have to without being at a disadvantage.
it could also be bullshit proposals that they were always willing to pull back on so they could say “see? We are working with you!”
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Thanks for the links
Yes, I know what dead arm is

I read what you posted earlier, probably different than you meant it



I took that to mean every pitcher gets dead arm in spring training, which is why I was confused

I know there will be a few. Happens to different guys through an entire season at different points. Some won't get it at all

We're on the same page now

Edit/ Reading Heston's article, he says most have it happen in Spring training. I'd honestly never heard most pitchers have it. Doesn't really seem to ever get reported during Spring Training
It probably doesn't get reported as much because teams anticipate and work around it for the most part. It really only gets attention if a pitcher is scratched from a scheduled appearance or comes out of a game earlier than expected. If I were to hazard a guess, when pitchers are said to be throwing on the side or in an intrasquad or minor league game rather than a league game, it's code for dealing with a dead arm.
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,126
Two seasons ago MLB eliminated 25% of the teams from MiLB. I'm curious as to the thought process behind wanting to control MiLB's roster sizes. I'm sure economics plays a role, but how much is there to gain there? What other reasons might there be?
Cutting the roster sizes further if/when they are forced to actually pay the minor leaguers.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Would ownership be in agreement on that? I mean I can see the owners of the teams you mention benefiting from it, but why would the Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, etc... be in on that? They could scale back individually if they so desired, but why give up the ability to spend or invest in those areas where others can't or won't?
I think this goes to the owners putting up a united front (remember Hal & JWH both signing the letter supporting stricter LT/ CBT thresholds?), but really this seems to be an area where interests could diverge in how best to put a winning product on the field. This just seems to be a continuing extension of Commissioner Selig's legacy, and of course the owners would be happy enough if such a proposal were accepted (just like the CBT numbers) because hey, more money.

it could also be bullshit proposals that they were always willing to pull back on so they could say “see? We are working with you!”
The owners do seem to keep doing that, don't they? This sort of gaslighting as a standard part of their negotiating strategy is not going to have good long term effects...
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,502
According to this ESPN article, the specifics are that while the players reduced their Super 2 ask from 80% to 75%, they also increased the minimum salary raises from $25,000 to $30,000. So in the players' proposal, the minimum in Year 1 would be $775,000, Year 2 would be $805,000, Year 3 would be $835,000, then $865,000 in Year 4 and $895,000 in Year 5 of the deal. The league is offering a starting minimum of $630,000 in 2022.

The article reports that there aren't enough owners to make any changes to arbitration "so the union can ask for any amount above [the current system] but it won't get it."

No new proposals were made on competitive tax.
The reason to be somewhat optimistic this week is as I said above, "the MLBPA just played one of the few cards they have and told MLB that they will not agree to expanded playoffs for 2022 if the season is less than 162 games. Kind of brilliant IMO, we’ll see if it works." So the MLBPA have added a lot of urgency to this week's negotiations as the owners do not want to lose that extra playoff TV money. If they can't agree this week and they do officially start cancelling regular season games, then it could get really ugly, so it's a big week.
Interesting strategy for the union to drop such a big piece of leverage into the negotiations and then have piecemeal proposals thus far. Maybe the union dropped that to the media but hasn't formally mentioned the concept in negotiations. I mean if the negotiations don't go anywhere this week and the union sticks to this, I agree with your bolded statement.