It's time to brush up on all those dry terms NBA fans thought they could forget about, like "defined gross revenues," "average player compensation" and the always popular "non-qualifying veteran free agent exception." Just two years ago everyone breathed a sigh of relief when the NBA and the players' association averted a work stoppage and settled on a six-year collective bargaining agreement that seemed to ensure labor peace into the next century. Now, though, the owners and the union appear to be headed back to the bargaining table as early as next summer—and if there's a lockout, it could very well be a long one.

It looks more and more likely that the league will take advantage of its option to discard the collective bargaining agreement after this season. The owners locked the players out during the previous negotiations, and there have been hints that they would do it again. The NBA is concerned about the widening disparity among players' salaries, as a few superstars receive huge contracts and a growing number of lesser players sign for much closer to the minimum ($272,250 this season). There are also some loopholes in the salary cap that the league would like to close.

Two off-season developments illustrated the league's problems with the current agreement. Timberwolves forward Kevin Garnett rejected a $103.5 million contract-extension offer—a sign of things to come, now that first-round draft picks like Garnett can become free agents after their third year in the league. [Garnett subsequently signed a six-year, $120 million contract.] The Garnett situation "was kind of a snapshot of what's going on now about money," says commissioner David Stern. Also, the Knicks acquired center Chris Dudley from Portland in a three-way deal with Toronto that the league unsuccessfully argued was a circumvention of the salary cap. (An arbitrator upheld the trade, but the league appealed the decision.)

Deputy commissioner Russ Granik says that more than a third of the NBA's 29 teams were in the red in '96-97, compared with two or three the year before. "It's something we're going to have to consider," Granik says concerning reopening the agreement. "Things are heading in the wrong direction."

The players' association might agree but will no doubt want to go in an entirely different direction than the league. A sizable faction in the union pushed unsuccessfully for the abolition of the salary cap two years ago, and those players will most likely be just as vocal if negotiations are reopened. "If the league is inclined to set aside the deal, so be it," says Bill Hunter, executive director of the players' association. "Everything will be back on the table. But I suspect the commissioner and I will be meeting at times this season to see if we can resolve the matter."

Perhaps they will resolve it. But expect the lockout talk to become a roar before they do.

—Phil Taylor