NEW YORK -- Revenue sharing was the chief topic as baseball players and owners resumed labor talks Wednesday, and the sides agreed they were about $70 million apart annually.

Revenue sharing is one of the two key issues in the talks, along with management's desire for a luxury tax on high payroll clubs that would slow salary growth.

"It was positive. There were some ideas that were thrown out,'' union lawyer Michael Weiner said. "We'll continue discussions.''

Additional bargaining sessions are scheduled for Thursday and Friday.

Players are fearful that owners will unilaterally change work rules after the postseason or lock them out, so they are considering striking in August or September. It would be baseball's ninth work stoppage since 1972.

Deferred compensation and the rights of injured players also were discussed at Wednesday's two-hour session, the first meeting since last Friday. Three players attended the meeting -- Montreal's Brian Schneider and Dan Smith, and the New York Mets' Al Leiter -- along with Baltimore owner Peter Angelos and Chicago Cubs chief executive officer Andy MacPhail.

Union head Donald Fehr was in Houston to meet with the Milwaukee Brewers.

"I think he is cautiously optimistic,'' Brewers infielder Mark Loretta said. "People compare this with the 1994 talks, but he feels this is a different setting. The rhetoric isn't nearly as strong. Of course, things can change very quickly.''

Management's top negotiator, chief operating officer Bob DuPuy, also was traveling.

"From my view, it was a productive discussion on all three topics,'' management negotiator Rob Manfred said.

Players and owners disagree on both the amount and structure of revenue sharing. Owners want to increase the percentage of shared local revenue from 20 percent to 50 percent, and they want a "straight-pool'' system, which would favor clubs with payrolls closer to the average of the 30 teams. The current "split-pool'' system is more favorable to teams with the highest and lowest revenue.

Last year, about $167 million was transferred in revenue sharing. Management's current proposal, if it had been in place, would have transferred about $298 million last year while the union's plan would have moved approximately $228 million.

Thus far, the sides have spent little time discussing management's desire for a 50 percent luxury tax on the portions of payrolls above $98 million. The union is against a tax, although the previous agreement -- which expired Nov. 7 -- contained one for the 1997, 1998 and 1999 seasons.

Management said it was ineffective, but players say it kept the payrolls of the highest-spending teams -- such as the New York Yankees -- closer to those of the other clubs.

Deferred compensation has become an issue because the commissioner's office thinks clubs have gotten into too much debt. Currently, teams are required to fund deferred payments they owe within 3-4 years of the season in which the player earns the money.

Management's proposal would require teams to fund deferred compensation by the end of the season in which it is earned. The union is worried that would decrease the attractiveness of deferred compensation for clubs.

Teams also want to be able to require injured players to undergo rehabilitation at spring training sites. That proposal stems from Carlos Beltran's failure to follow the Kansas City Royals' order for him to go to Haines City, Fla., during the 2000 season.

Kansas City originally suspended Beltran and stopped paying his salary, then gave him the money after the players' association filed a grievance and a default notice on his behalf. While there were hearings, the grievance was never submitted to an arbitrator for determination.