The question: Will there be a strike?

Peter Gammons

No I still believe it's 60/40 not, but the longer it goes, the more it becomes a religious issue and in the hands of the fanatics. I say no for two reasons: 1. It will end any chance that any television network would ever want to partner with MLB's "leaders" again; 2. The banks can squeeze their heads. Problem is, many owners don't care what they do to television partners, fans, banks or taxpayers who give hundreds of millions to build stadiums. And Donald Fehr, as good as he is, doesn't have to worry about whether or not the next generation of players has any fans to cheer for them. The commissioner only represents the owners, and the union represents only the highest-paid players, and there is absolutely no one who represents the values baseball should represent.

Rob Dibble

No I think a strike will be avoided not only because both sides are very close on a lot of issues, but that both sides have to know how much a strike at this juncture will effect the future of baseball. The game has never fully recovered from the 1994 strike, and if there is another strike as we approach the one-year anniversary of the worst public tragedy since Pearl Harbor, I think both sides would be responsible for causing irreparable damage. The game would never recover from it. What we did not have in '94 that the players and owners have right now is dialogue. So I feel any differences can be resolved.

Rob Neyer

Yes There will be a strike, because it'll take a strike to get the opposing sides moving. But it won't last long, because even the billionaires and the millionaires aren't that dumb.

Tom Candiotti

No There will not be a strike. All parties involved are fearful for another work stoppage. It is just a high-stakes poker game being played right now with both sides flexing their muscle. The recent signings of Darin Erstad, Al Leiter and Mike Lieberthal had to be approved by both parties, and it sends me the message that this will be a 24th-hour process that will be settled.

Dave Campbell

No But it's just a 60-40 feeling. This is the first time, though, that I've felt both sides realize the urgency of getting a deal done. In the past, I don't think either side has taken the fans into consideration, but this time they have to because of the pending anniversary of Sept. 11.

Tony Gwynn

No Too many things have happened already that never happened before, including concessions on the players' part. That never happened before. The conversations about a strike date never happened before. Even though the players set a strike date, I look at it like they weren't going to be able to get a deal because there wasn't one. Now that there is a strike date, it sets the ground work for both sides to come to an agreement. In the past, once the strike date was set, then the conversations would begin. This time the conversations were already in progress, and they set the date to expedite getting the deal done. I'm optimistic.

Joe Morgan

No I would be shocked if a strike occurred. In past strikes, one side always felt it had more to lose than the other. That is why sometimes the players forced a strike and at other times the owners forced one. In this case, both sides have too much to lose. I think both sides will settle the dispute, and we will have a World Series.