From personal experience, I can assure you that getting older sucks.

It is better than the alternative however.

Marchman is making a relevant point -- young players, in and of themselves, aren't any more valuable than older players of equal current ability. Their main value is cost control allowing you to buy the other pieces you need. (And of course they're hopefully still getting better, providing a team with more longterm flexibility as well.)

But I think he underplays the role of cost-controlled players in the success of the Yankees. They came back to prominence primarily on the strength of an excellent young core of Jeter, Williams, Posada, Rivera. They've managed to continue to produce some very good players over the years -- Soriano, Cano, Gardner, Robertson, Hughes.

Looking 1995-2012, WAR for the Yankees through their 5th ML season:

Jeter 27
Pettitte 24
Cano 21
El Duque 18**
Rivera 17
Gardner 14
Wang 13
Williams 10 (2 seasons)
Posada 9
Soriano 9
Mendoza 9
Robertson 7
Joba 7
Hughes 6
Cabrera 4.5
Nova 4
Spencer 3
Johnson 3

Conversely, Yanks aged 31 to 36:

AROD 29
Jeter 24
Mussina 23
Posada 22
Cone 20
Rivera 20
Giambi 19
ONeill 16
Williams 14
Damon 13
Matsui 12
Wells 9
Sheffield 8
Pettitte 8
Brosius 7
Stanton 7
Teixeira 7
Abreu 6
Ventura 5
Gooden 5
Tino 4
Gordon 4

Now the old farts win that pretty easily at 282 to 206. But think about how much those 282 cost and how much it would have cost to replace the 206 they got from fairly cheap players. That's about 12 wins a year so at today's prices that's another $60 M per year in payroll.

I thought I'd look at the Yanks 76 to 93 as a contrast. They got very little out of old pitchers -- Guidry at 19 WAR then the next highest is Key at 6. They did better with younger pitchers -- Guidry 23, Righetti 15, Figueroa 10. On offense, they hit the jackpot with Randolph 26, Mattingly 25 and Roberto Kelly 13 then it's Dent with 5 and Bernie with 4. Old offense was pretty good with Nettles 24, Winfield 20, Reggie 16, Randolph 10 and 7 more players with 5 to 8.

So, comparing the two time periods for the young players (most recent listed first)

20+: 3 3
15-19: 2 1
10-14: 3 2
5-9: 6-7 4

Now for the old

20+: 6 2
15-19: 2 2
10-14: 3 1
5-9: 9 4

So while there's a big gap among the young guys, there's a massive gap among the older ones. Apparently spending 50% to 100% more than your competitors has its benefits. :-)

** I moved Matsui down to the old farts because I recall he was paid pretty well for his first 6 seasons. I left El Duque in the first 6 group because he was pretty moderately paid (about $2 M per year).

Pettitte looks a little worse for 3 of the later set in HOU, but his 35-38 years have been worth 11 WAR. His 23 (5.3), 24 (8.0), and 35 (6.0) seasons are the only times he's been over 3.5 WAR.

Getting Old Is Nothing to Fear

yes, it is (I speak from hard experience)

pre-emptive New Coke to Walt

We have nothing to fear but fear itself. And getting older.

We have nothing to fear but fear itself and getting older. And getting hit by meteorites.

The only three things we need fear are fear itself, getting older and getting hit by meteorites. And the 2012 Yankees.

No, I think I had it right there -- fear itself, getting older and getting hit by meteorites.

That White Album collection...wow.

It is better than the alternative however.

Not always clear.