ORLANDO, Fla. -- Lenny Dykstra had his say yesterday. He expressed his doubts and asked his questions and then generally submitted to the will of the 260 or so fellow strikers who showed up for a regional meeting of the Major League Baseball Players Association.
Lest anyone forget, Dykstra is the one big-name player to question the solidarity of the union. He is the one who said on ESPN's "Up Close" last week that he wanted to convene a meeting of the 20 highest-paid players in baseball to review the performance of the union leadership.
Instead, he got to state his case in front of about a quarter of the union rank-and-file. He aired some of the same concerns that he expressed during his controversial television interview, but he also assured other union members that he would not cross the picket line.
"It was spirited," said former Orioles first baseman Randy Milligan. "I think people were frustrated with him at first, but a lot of the questions that he had were in the back of a lot of people's minds. People may not agree with him, but he stood up for what he believed."
Dykstra didn't back down. He didn't come out after the 4 1/2 -hour meeting and express remorse for his ill-timed interview. He didn't come out at all, which left room to wonder whether the informational session at the Hyatt Grand Cypress Resort cleared up any of his concerns about the stalemated labor negotiations.
"We went over Lenny's deal," teammate Darren Daulton said, "and we're very solid. I believe when he made those comments on TV, he was still very solidly with the union."
That view was not universal. Several players were critical of Dykstra, claiming that his public dissent had given aid and comfort to the enemy.
"That set us back two or three weeks," Los Angeles Dodgers outfielder Brett Butler said, "because it makes the owners think that there are a lot of players who think like that."
The meeting was not just about Dykstra, of course. Union director Donald Fehr briefed the players on the progress of the negotiations and discussed all of the scenarios under which the union would call off the six-month-old strike.
He said definitively -- apparently for the first time -- that the players would go back to work if the National Labor Relations Board forced the owners to restore the terms of the previous labor agreement.
The players also have said they would agree to binding arbitration, either immediately or after a presidential fact-finding commission examines the game for a year, and would call off the strike if Congress lifts baseball's antitrust exemption.
Of course, the owners almost certainly would lock out the players if they called off the strike before there is a negotiated settlement.
"We want to go back and play," Butler said. "We'll go back under the '94 rules. We'll take binding arbitration. We'll try our luck with the NLRB or in court. We'll do just about anything to get back on the field, but they [the owners] don't want to do any of that."
The owners have made it just as clear that they were not interested in continuing with the old system and would have no interest in an arbitrated settlement.
Since it appears unlikely that Congress will act on either the antitrust exemption or President Clinton's call for special legislation to impose binding arbitration, the only way to save the 1995 season may be the old-fashioned way -- through the collective bargaining process.
Fehr said yesterday that no new negotiations have been scheduled, but indicated that special mediator William Usery might bring the two negotiating teams back together sometime next week.
There has been speculation that the controversial Usery settlement recommendation might provide the framework for an eventual agreement, but the union isn't ready to embrace it.
"If you look at some of the [provisions] in isolation, there are things we can talk about," Fehr said. "If you look at it in total, it looks pretty dismal."
The Usery proposal calls for an end to salary arbitration by 1997 in exchange for four-year unrestricted free agency. The players have offered to trade salary arbitration straight up for free-agent eligibility, which would free most players after three years of service.
The Usery proposal calls for a phased-in 50 percent tax on payroll in excess of the major-league average. The players reluctantly have agreed to talk about a luxury tax, but nothing nearly so severe. Still, the numbers are straightforward enough to invite an attempt at compromise.
"That assumes that you view the Usery proposal as if it is a management proposal, which presents a tricky situation," Fehr said.
The union does view the Usery recommendation as a one-sided management proposal. The owners grudgingly agreed to accept but have not given any indication that they would use it as a baseline for further negotiations. In fact, that seems highly unlikely.
So for most teams, spring training will begin this weekend with replacement players, a subject that also was discussed in the players meeting and also another union meeting later in the day with coaches, managers and trainers.
Despite rumors to the contrary, there was no evidence that the prospect of replacement teams was having any significant impact on union solidarity.
"If you've got to worry about Ken Oberkfell or Brad Komminsk or Gorman Thomas taking your job," Butler said, "then you've got a little bit of insecurity there. . . . I think it's a joke. Baseball is never going to be the same."