Pat Sullivan, Associated Press LIKE OLD TIMES? Roger Clemens will make the highest single-season salary of any pitcher in the history of the game -- $18 million -- and his numbers didn't even come close to the numbers the top free agents were given this offseason. Click photo for larger image.

Jim Bouton, former major-league pitcher and tell-all author, once observed: "The reason baseball calls itself a game is because it's too screwed up to be a business."

The prettiest game on dirt returns Thursday when pitchers and catchers report. The business side? It looks the same as it ever was, which is to say dysfunctional, after the market for premier free agents closed last week with Detroit's signing of Magglio Ordonez for $75 million over five years.

Following three years of relative restraint, and more than halfway through a collective bargaining agreement in which revenue sharing and the luxury tax were touted as solutions to competitive imbalance, three dozen or so big-name players got deals that rival lottery jackpots.

"There seemed to be a mentality of keeping up with the Joneses," said Maury Brown, co-chair of the Business of Baseball Committee for the Society for American Baseball Research.

"Teams felt if they didn't keep up with the spending, they weren't going to be able to sign free agents. The disturbing thing is the long-term contracts. They can hamstring a franchise for a long time."

Six clients of mega-agent Scott Boras -- Ordonez among them --signed contracts totaling $360 million. Rogers Clemens (one year, $18 million) becomes the highest-paid pitcher for a single season.

Eleven players got deals that give them eight-figure salaries, on average. Pitchers with career losing records received contracts that pay them in excess of $7 million per season.

The New York Yankees supposedly reached their spending limit when they lost out to the New York Mets for outfielder Carlos Beltran. But their payroll will break the $200 million barrier. That's at least five times higher than the $38 million or so that the Pirates will shell out and does nothing to quash the notion that the chasm is as wide as ever between the haves and have-nots.

Joining the Yankees, Mets, Boston Red Sox and other big spenders were teams like the Florida Marlins, Arizona Diamondbacks and Washington Nationals, formerly known as the Montreal Expos.

	Toteboard: Nothing free here Biggest free agent contracts of the offseason (dollar figures in millions) Player, pos Team Yrs $ Carlos Beltran, CF Mets 7 $119 Magglio Ordonez, RF Tigers 5 $75 Adrian Beltre, 3B Mariners 5 $64 J.D. Drew, RF Dodgers 5 $55 Pedro Martinez, RHP Mets 4 $53 Carlos Delgado, 1B Marlins 4 $52 Richie Sexson, 1B Mariners 4 $50 Troy Glaus 3B D'backs 4 $45 Carl Pavano, RHP Yankees 4 $40 Edgar Renteria, SS Red Sox 4 $40 Jason Varitek, C Red Sox 4 $40 Derek Lowe, RHP Dodgers 4 $36 Russ Ortiz, RHP D'backs 4 $33 Orlando Cabrera, SS Angels 4 $32

Three decades into free agency, nothing makes the eyes glaze over quicker than a recap of salaries given to those who can throw, hit or catch a baseball for a living -- especially if you're a wage-earner paying an extra $42 a year for the privilege of working in Pittsburgh.

So what to make of this splurge?

"It's like a train wreck," said one observer familiar with the big picture of baseball salaries. "As disturbing as it is, you can't keep your eyes off it."

The Pirates, who are candidates for the lowest payroll in baseball, were like hibernating bears at the big table. The stakes were too high and their stack of chips was too short to pursue top names. Their off-season signings were limited to the minor-league deals given to the likes of Todd Ritchie, Albie Lopez, Ben Grieve and Rick White.

Kevin McClatchy vented his disappointment at his fellow owners, allowing that they must be drinking "funny water" because they're back on a binge. He also said the spending has turned him into a hawk on seeking more constraints on spending when the next round of negotiations opens in another year.

Given the opportunity to expand on his thoughts, McClatchy declined. Several other owners agreed with him, but they didn't want to speak on the record because the issue of salaries is such a lightning rod.

It is true that McClatchy contributed to the spiral he finds himself trapped in because of dubious contracts he signed off on prior to moving into PNC Park. He is hardly alone, however, in his opinions.

Contracts have a ripple effect, affecting the arbitration process and the ability to keep talent that is eligible for free agency after six years. Since 1992, the familiar lament is that if the Pirates can't afford to keep their talent, they're little more than a farm team for richer clubs.

"Suddenly, it becomes a cycle where the whole thing runs wild," said Brown. "The situation in Pittsburgh is difficult. It's a crying shame. The system needs to have more meaningful revenue sharing. The system has to be robust enough for a team to keep its own players and be able to sign free agents."

Among the owners who have uttered sentiments similar to McClatchy's are San Diego's John Moores and Kansas City's David Green, both of whom sit on baseball's executive committee. That could lead to interesting talks before the expiration of the collective bargaining agreement in 2006.

"Some clubs have been unbelievably responsible. This is no way to run a railroad," Moores said. "We have problems to deal with. We might as well attack them head on."

Said Green of his off-season priorities: "The single most important thing for the Royals is for the game to fix itself and get more parity."

Another owner who has apparently seen the error of his ways is Baltimore's Peter Angelos, who has shelled out princely sums on players without winning any titles. In fact, he could qualify as the poster child for showing that throwing money at players doesn't guarantee success on the field.

But after losing out to the Marlins in the bidding for Carlos Delgado, Angelos told the Baltimore media: "You can say I'm disappointed, but, on the other hand, I'm pleased that we're not party to this fiscal insanity that has taken hold of the game. The market needs to be reassessed ... Major League Baseball has to come to grips with the crisis it's in. These salaries are beyond what 90 percent of the teams are able to pay. It's a problem that has to be dealt with in the future."

But there is no crisis in the eyes of the players union or agents like Boras. Their point is that the public only sees what the owners pay in salaries, not what they take in from sources like merchandising and the Internet.

"I don't think any business owner is going to spend money they don't have," said Josh Fogg, the player representative for the Pirates.

"You see the Diamondbacks and teams like that spending money, but they're obviously planning on making it back whenever they get into the season with the talent they are putting on the field. You've got to spend money to make money."

It is worth noting that hockey looks as if it is killing itself to find a cure over equitable distribution of money. The players favor the baseball system of revenue sharing and a luxury tax. NHL commission Gary Bettman has flatly rejected the baseball system as one that doesn't work, with nothing less than a salary cap acceptable to the owners.

Baseball, meanwhile, may have a little known economic factor working to hack away at imbalance. It's called the debt-service rule, which is modeled after something in the loan industry and is seen by some as a "soft cap." Basically, it says a team's debt is limited to 10 times the amount of its cash flow, or earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA).

Concerns about compliance, which is to be enforced following this season, reportedly caused the Yankees to back off on signing Beltran.

Still, it's hard to muster up sympathy for a franchise that has estimated revenues of $315 million a year. Not only can that treasure chest meet payroll, but it also covers the amount the Yankees paid to other teams last years -- $63 million in revenue sharing and $25 million in luxury tax.

Brown says the Yankees "possibly" have reached their limit on spending, but it's too soon to say.

"He may be tired of subsidizing the Pirates and the Royals, but, if George Steinbrenner wants to spend, he'll go ahead a do it," Brown said.