Infinite trade speculation

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
11,969
Michigan
With Rodriguez and Smith on the DL opening day, will/should Dombrowski trade for pitching or is the team "all set" for now?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
13,643
Maine
With Rodriguez and Smith on the DL opening day, will/should Dombrowski trade for pitching or is the team "all set" for now?
Considering neither is expected to miss significant time (i.e. months), there's no real reason to trade for replacements. They have the depth to deal with this kind of thing, so they'll make do. That doesn't rule out shopping on the discard pile when guys on minor league deals start opting out or guys with no more options get waived.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
13,643
Maine
Jon Heyman ‏@JonHeyman 5m5 minutes ago
A few teams have talked to padres about James shields. O's are one. Red sox have talked to SD about SP; shields logical

Jon Heyman ‏@JonHeyman 4m4 minutes ago
Padres are willing to pay some of shields' backloaded deal (21M per now), how much depends on return. Nothing thought close

Unless it was a bad deal for bad deal kind of swap involving Sandoval or something, I'm not sure how much benefit the Sox could really derive from acquiring Shields even at a discount.

My bet is whatever talking that the Red Sox did with SD about pitching, it had little to do with Shields. They were probably asking about someone younger/cheaper like Cashner or Ross.
 

Mike F

Mayor of Fort Myers
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
2,068
If Sox looking, I'd suggest Badenhop
(Terrible name for a ground ball pitcher). He' currently on a ml deal and should cost next to nothing.
 

Danny_Darwin

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,877
Cleveland is reportedly interested in Bradley (not happening) and Castillo (hmmm). I doubt they'd give up Salazar without another significant piece, though.
 

JBJ_HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2014
421
Cleveland is reportedly interested in Bradley (not happening) and Castillo (hmmm). I doubt they'd give up Salazar without another significant piece, though.
Castillo would be a hindrance to that deal, and in the offseason the Indians wanted Betts and Swihart for Carrasco or Salazar, so, yeah.

I was listening to some big Cleveland podcast and they want to trade some combination of Trevor Bauer [can't throw strikes], Cody Anderson [can't strike anyone out] and Mike Clevinger [24 an in double-a] for JBJ.
 
Last edited:

Danny_Darwin

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,877
Castillo would be a hindrance to that deal, and in the offseason the Indians wanted Betts and Swihart for Carrasco or Salazar, so, yeah.

I was listening to some big Cleveland podcast and they want to trade some combination of Trevor Bauer [can't throw strikes], Cody Anderson [can't strike anyone out] and Mike Clevinger [24 an in double-a] for JBJ.
Right. Bauer, Cashner - these are more guys with potential who could put it all together some day. The Red Sox have that. In other words, if they aren't going to be able to get a Ross or a Salazar - and I think those deals would require giving up someone we here would be pissed to see go, moreso than some were over Margot - then I'm not sure what the point would be unless Dombrowski is just that pessimistic about Castillo. I guess it's possible.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Castillo strikes me as reasonable candidate for trade. His offensive upside is looking more limited if he's going to keep hitting ground balls, but it's a lot more palatable from CF. he wouldn't bring back much by himself but the Sox could use his contract to buy a better return.

Ideally it would be nice if Castillo had shown more offensive upside this spring, but the Sox do have luxury of waiting out the market if he's not the key to adding a SP (which I don't think he should be).
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,253
If Castillo is traded, who's our starting LF?

Young can't hit right-handed pitching. Murphy's a terrible outfielder. Holt's too valuable as a utility piece. Shaw hasn't really played much LF.

I suppose it's possible that this is Benintendi's job by Labor Day, but at the very least I would want them to have a better plan in place for the first half of the season.
 

Clears Cleaver

Lil' Bill
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
11,324
I was saying to friends that I would really like this Red Sox team if I didn't have to watch Panda and Castillo play ever again. So, in my mind any trade that eliminates Castillo and/or Panda is a net net positive regardless of the return (partial tongue in cheek). Panda for Shields with some money going to SD? Done and Done! then you have excess pitching and a farm system that can get you a legitimate OFer before the deadline. I'm not sure Castillo is anything more than a AAAA player.
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,253
Also, and please forgive two posts in the same thread, but I haven't seen this yet, Shields has a career 5.42 ERA at Fenway, which makes sense, given that he gives up a ton of home runs. I wouldn't kick any of Buchholz/Porcello/Kelly/Rodriguez out of our rotation for him even if he came free.

 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
If Castillo is traded, who's our starting LF?

Young can't hit right-handed pitching. Murphy's a terrible outfielder. Holt's too valuable as a utility piece. Shaw hasn't really played much LF.

I suppose it's possible that this is Benintendi's job by Labor Day, but at the very least I would want them to have a better plan in place for the first half of the season.
I assumed that at least a platoon partner for Young might come back.

What got me thinking about this was the Cubs having such a surplus of corner OFs that they're planning to play Heyward in center. They're not a great fit as the talent doesn't match up (& it seems like they solved their problem), but the general idea seems workable.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
17,737
Rogers Park
If Castillo is traded, who's our starting LF?

Young can't hit right-handed pitching. Murphy's a terrible outfielder. Holt's too valuable as a utility piece. Shaw hasn't really played much LF.

I suppose it's possible that this is Benintendi's job by Labor Day, but at the very least I would want them to have a better plan in place for the first half of the season.
Also, Holt has a reverse split of .070 points of OPS in what's starting to be a decent sample size.

I was saying to friends that I would really like this Red Sox team if I didn't have to watch Panda and Castillo play ever again. So, in my mind any trade that eliminates Castillo and/or Panda is a net net positive regardless of the return (partial tongue in cheek). Panda for Shields with some money going to SD? Done and Done! then you have excess pitching and a farm system that can get you a legitimate OFer before the deadline. I'm not sure Castillo is anything more than a AAAA player.
I think Castillo could be a 2 WAR CF with upside for more on a reasonable contract. That's something we don't need and the Padres don't have.

Castillo hits a lot of hard groundballs to have a sub-.300 BABIP as a fast runner. If you could give him defensive innings in CF, he'd earn his paycheck.

That said, I don't want to run the guy out of town. A 1 WAR left fielder (again, with legitimate upside) is better than we had last season.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
5,516
Do we all agree that Castillo has negative trade value at the moment? As do Shields and Panda, of course. Reasonable minds can disagree, but I think I'd say Shields is the "best", then Castillo and then Pablo. But they're all in the same general neighborhood.
 

Clears Cleaver

Lil' Bill
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
11,324
I think Castillo could be a 2 WAR CF with upside for more on a reasonable contract. That's something we don't need and the Padres don't have.

Castillo hits a lot of hard groundballs to have a sub-.300 BABIP as a fast runner. If you could give him defensive innings in CF, he'd earn his paycheck.

That said, I don't want to run the guy out of town. A 1 WAR left fielder (again, with legitimate upside) is better than we had last season.
We had a 1 WAR LF last year in De Aza. Chris Young is also a 1 WAR LF. so were Sam Fuld, Khris Davis, and ryan Raburn etc etc. this are platoon players at best. Basically the Red Sox would be better off finding a platoon partner for Young than keep Castillo, unless you think he is a platoon partner for JBJ in CF. If so....then the logical thing to do is find either a LHH LF (Shaw) or a RHH 3B (with Shaw platooning both positions). Ideally, you'd axe Panda for Shields and get a RHH third baseman and have flexibility at almost every position on the field.
1B - Hanely, Shaw, Holt
2B - Pedroia, Holt
SS - Boegarts, Holt
3B - shaw, RHH, Holt
LF - Shaw, Young, Castillo
CF - JBJ, Castillo
RF - Betts, JBJ
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Do we all agree that Castillo has negative trade value at the moment?
I think Castillo could in theory have a bit of positive trade value as a CF. He could easily earn his salary in a full-time role, and if he can improve offensively he could be a small-scale bargain.

The problem is that there are only a very few teams for whom Castillo would be a clear CF upgrade without significantly outperforming his projections, and those teams aren't likely to see it as a wise use of resources to commit that kind of $ for an upgrade that modest, even if the contract is a reasonable one on the merits. The Indians are the most likely candidate, since they have a good chance of finding themselves in a position where one or two extra wins could be a difference-maker. But even there, I wouldn't expect to get much back.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Do we all agree that Castillo has negative trade value at the moment? As do Shields and Panda, of course. Reasonable minds can disagree, but I think I'd say Shields is the "best", then Castillo and then Pablo. But they're all in the same general neighborhood.
No, I wouldn't classify Castillo as a negative trade value piece. Aren't his defensive metrics off the charts good? Play him in CF and he's good enough to earn his keep even if he's a bad hitter, and that has t been established yet. If I were a GM with a good budget and a CF vacancy like SD I'd be looking for a buy low opportunity.

Or what Savin said b
 

JBJ_HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2014
421
His metrics were really good in RF last year, but only 350 innings and defensive metrics seem to be massively inflated playing in Fenway's RF on a yearly basis (Hello, Nava). Plus terrible error marks.
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
Jun 27, 2006
32,664
Haiku
His metrics were really good in RF last year, but only 350 innings and defensive metrics seem to be massively inflated playing in Fenway's RF on a yearly basis (Hello, Nava). Plus terrible error marks.
On the other hand, Fenway's LF deflates defense metrics, yet Castillo does impressively well there -- mostly because of his arm. All samples are pretty small, but he certainly has the raw speed and throwing ability.
 

Fireball Fred

lurker
Jul 29, 2005
172
NoCa Mass.
Castillo is at least a fourth OF, rather than a AAAA player, because he can play all OF positions. I'd say he does have negative value, given his contract and age, but a team that would start him in CF might take a chance, or offer another possibly overpaid player in return. Playing half in LF in Fenway minimizes his value; Sox should consider any offer.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
11,668
Single season UZR is almost worthless. There was one season where Ellsbury was ranked last among all MLB OF'ers in UZR by quite a margin.

I'm not convinced of Castillo's trade value, but I don't want Betts or JBJ moved around just to accommodate a potential Castillo trade either. On this team, it's better to keep him in left; or send him to AAA if he can't break the Mendoza line.
 

Sprowl

mikey lowell of the sandbox
Dope
Jun 27, 2006
32,664
Haiku
Single season UZR is almost worthless. There was one season where Ellsbury was ranked last among all MLB OF'ers in UZR by quite a margin.

I'm not convinced of Castillo's trade value, but I don't want Betts or JBJ moved around just to accommodate a potential Castillo trade either. On this team, it's better to keep him in left; or send him to AAA if he can't break the Mendoza line.
Ellsbury was legitimately awful in CF in 2009, and earned his low ratings (which, while bad, were not particularly bad in UZR). His false starts, slow breaks and inability to judge balls hit in front of him was the subject of endless game thread

I don't think that single-season UZR or DRS numbers are worthless as retrospective indicators of performance during that single season. Where they are of limited value is in projecting future performance -- there I think three full seasons are needed to predict future performance with any consistency.

In any case, I would trust the eye test more than UZR when it comes to Castillo's fielding, and my eye test reports that he played the Monster beautifully, anticipating caroms, grabbing the ball bare-handed, and getting it to 2B on the fly. He should get another chance to show that Monster whispering is a repeatable skill.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
5,516
Nick Cafardo (I know) is reporting the Padres are scouting Pablo

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2016/03/28/padres-are-scouting-pablo-sandoval/KeKF3M8kqXscesU88MtjwI/story.html

Not sure I would want Shields back though. I'd rather just give Sandoval away.

If you mean "give Sandoval away and have the Padres pay him", I'm pretty sure that's not on the table. It's either Padres take Sandoval and Red Sox pay most of his deal, or a Shields/Sandoval swap with a much smaller financial subsidy.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
67,862
Oregon
It could always be a three-team deal with Shields winding up elsewhere
 

Eck'sSneakyCheese

Member
SoSH Member
May 11, 2011
9,305
NH
If Shields for Pablo is on the table, why hasn't the trigger been pulled yet? Seems like a no-brainer. So, we take some bad money back in return. We've essentially lost that money already in the form of a useless position player who can't play his position. Why not get something moderately useful? 200 innings of a likely sub 4.00 ERA? Anyone else on the staff going to give that to us (aside from Price?) IMO, if it was offered it would be done. Probably nothing to see here.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
Wait, are the Padres actually trying to compete this year? Why on earth would they be interested in Pablo? I could see before last season going after him because they seemed to be pushing their pile into the pot, but now? Moving Shields seems it should be a straight dump. Doesn't add up for me that they would take back Pablo.
 

mauidano

Mai Tais for everyone!
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2006
29,073
Maui
Spent a little time talking with James Shields and his wife and daughter in the off season at Victorino's golf tournament. Incredibly nice down to earth people. They actually very much love San Diego and where they live and want to retire there.
Just looking at his contract on Cot's. $21 million this year. Ouch! No "No Trade" clause. He does get a $750K "assignment bonus" if traded. Damn! Plus he gets an "opt out" of his contract after this year.
https://www.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/nl-west/san-diego-padres/
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
11,547
Just curious... If the Sox were to give Panda away free but basically subsidize his entire contract, why not just keep him on the team if you're going to pay full freight anyway? I find it hard to believe that his true playing level has dropped so far that he's now below a bench player. Why not have Shaw start and Pablo be a substitute, if you're going to pay his entire contract anyway? What advantage is there in just giving him away for nothing?
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,169
Not here
Just curious... If the Sox were to give Panda away free but basically subsidize his entire contract, why not just keep him on the team if you're going to pay full freight anyway? I find it hard to believe that his true playing level has dropped so far that he's now below a bench player. Why not have Shaw start and Pablo be a substitute, if you're going to pay his entire contract anyway? What advantage is there in just giving him away for nothing?
The argument is that yes, he is that bad and you really don't want him playing any games. Roster spots have value and giving him away for nothing would increase the total talent on the team by allowing the team to fill that roster spot with someone who isn't terrible.

That argument is entirely based on the worst season of his career, and one that was, for part of the season, clearly hampered by an injury. I think it's a stupid argument, but that's what it is.
 

Corleone

Sleeps with the fishes
Jul 24, 2015
67
Nick Cafardo (I know) is reporting the Padres are scouting Pablo

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2016/03/28/padres-are-scouting-pablo-sandoval/KeKF3M8kqXscesU88MtjwI/story.html

Not sure I would want Shields back though. I'd rather just give Sandoval away.

Shields is a workhorse. Going to give you 15 wins and 200 innings. Not to mention a career 3.74 era.
Far better SP than Porcello. Far as Fenway stats who gives a rats arse.

The track record shows he should be worth the coin, at the very least the next 2 years.

Make the move. Dump a sh!t storm in Sandoval for a Veteran Arm that can pitch plus makes you a better defensive club in today's game where Pitching and Defense wins games..
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,031
Scituate, MA
Shields is a workhorse. Going to give you 15 wins and 200 innings. Not to mention a career 3.74 era.
Far better SP than Porcello. Far as Fenway stats who gives a rats arse.

The track record shows he should be worth the coin, at the very least the next 2 years.

Make the move. Dump a sh!t storm in Sandoval for a Veteran Arm that can pitch plus makes you a better defensive club in today's game where Pitching and Defense wins games..
9 straight years of 200+ innings is impressive.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
52,334
San Andreas Fault
Just curious... If the Sox were to give Panda away free but basically subsidize his entire contract, why not just keep him on the team if you're going to pay full freight anyway?
Because going from World Series hero to forgotten bench warmer in two years probably makes for a sad Panda, which becomes sulking Panda and maybe even a clubhouse cancer?
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,169
Not here
Shields is a workhorse. Going to give you 15 wins and 200 innings. Not to mention a career 3.74 era.
Far better SP than Porcello. Far as Fenway stats who gives a rats arse.

The track record shows he should be worth the coin, at the very least the next 2 years.

Make the move. Dump a sh!t storm in Sandoval for a Veteran Arm that can pitch plus makes you a better defensive club in today's game where Pitching and Defense wins games..
Pitchers are going to give us wins, we're capitalizing Veteran Arm like we're Winnie the Pooh, and capital P Pitching and capital D Defense win games.

I should probably get off your lawn.

I don't really give a damn about Pablo Sandoval or James Shields, but Shields was pretty mediocre last year, is due to be paid 21 million for each of the next three seasons, and oh yeah, can opt out after 2016. Meanwhile, Sandoval is something like five years younger and the standard for being a decent bat at third really isn't that high.

I'm kinda thinking we should see some real games before we go messing with the roster.
 

geoflin

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2004
448
Melrose MA
I don't see that Shields' ability to opt out after this year is a big deal. If he pitches poorly he won't opt out although we might wish that he did, but it's either paying him or paying Panda. If he pitches well enough to help get us to the playoffs or farther, then opts out, we got our money's worth this year and save the future Panda money.
 

PrometheusWakefield

Nasty, brutish, and short
SoSH Member
May 25, 2009
9,547
Boston, MA
Sandoval would have to improve by +3 WAR from past year to achieve mediocrity.

He's not a decent bat.

He cannot play third on a team that cares about defense.

If there is an opportunity to bail on this contract jump on it.

Shields struck out over a batter an inning and is projected for 3.1 WAR this year. That would be the second highest WAR on our pitching staff.

If this move is possible then SDP is stupid and we should take advantage.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
Because going from World Series hero to forgotten bench warmer in two years probably makes for a sad Panda, which becomes sulking Panda and maybe even a clubhouse cancer?
I'd be cool with sending him to the Island of Misfit mascots for James Shields at this point.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
Pitchers are going to give us wins, we're capitalizing Veteran Arm like we're Winnie the Pooh, and capital P Pitching and capital D Defense win games.

I should probably get off your lawn.

I don't really give a damn about Pablo Sandoval or James Shields, but Shields was pretty mediocre last year, is due to be paid 21 million for each of the next three seasons, and oh yeah, can opt out after 2016. Meanwhile, Sandoval is something like five years younger and the standard for being a decent bat at third really isn't that high.

I'm kinda thinking we should see some real games before we go messing with the roster.
That is not an unusual reaction. No one wants to be panicky, least of all before a single game has been played.

But it appears pretty likely to me that the Sox 2-5 will be, at best, challenging. Porcello has had an awful spring and was mostly awful last season. Expecting him to perform well now seems kind of dreamy. I doubt that DD, having traded him, is all that optimistic about what we are going to get. Joe Kelly finished strong last year and has looked good in ST. Let's be optimistic and say he'll be a solid mid rotation starter. Even with that forecast, durability is not his strong suit and expecting 30 starts out of him or him to be a guy who is able to keep the Sox in games over the course of a full season seems a bit unrealistic. Speaking of durability, it takes a lot of faith to project Buchholz to remain healthy for a full season. He simply never does that. He is also somewhat of a trick or treat guy. Great in stretches. Way less than that for other periods. Rodriguez has by far the best upside in the group and it would be hard to nit pick him if he was not hurt. He should be fine when he returns but anyone coming back from injury is somewhat of a question mark. Probably not a big one, but we've all seen injuries linger. Last, Stephen Wright could be a Dickey/Wake knuckleballer in a bottle and rattle off a bunch of wins. But again, whether he can be a dependable guy for a whole season, much less the length of E-Rod's injury, is far from certain. And I'm cautiously optimistic about him.

So putting aside any and all Panda issues, I would LOVE to see this team pick up one more truly dependable starter. James Shields sounds almost too good to be true. Low career ERA and AL East tested. Without a healthy E-Rod (and I know he will be back eventually), he would instantly become the Sox second best starter. Joe Kelly might somehow show that his talk with Pedro was a game changer and might keep going the way he finished last season. But even then, Shields is more dependable and consistent.

And we really can't put Panda aside. On one level, I can see wanting to roll with him at third given the uncertainty at LF, 3B and 1B. He's a piece in that equation and it would be nice to know what we have at first and left before we give up and sell low on an asset at third. On the other hand, he's kind of a train wreck. Is it any surprise that he's terribly overweight, making errors in ST (another one yesterday in a A game) and already having back issues?

This is an admittedly too long way of saying that if the Sox have any shot of dumping Panda and landing a solid starter, they should do it and not wait to see how 2-5 and Panda play out.
 

Mighty Joe Young

The North remembers
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
5,676
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
The are some rather practical implications of acquiring Shields - namely who gets bumped from the rotation? I suppose it would be Kelly - but I think he has the greatest upside of anyone in the rotation and I'd hate to see that chance missed. So I guess it would be Porcello - but what do you do with him? Trade him to upgradfe Rusney? And it would effectively end any hopes of breaking in Owens this year.

I really don't see Shields as an improvement on anyone in the rotation.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
The are some rather practical implications of acquiring Shields - namely who gets bumped from the rotation? I suppose it would be Kelly - but I think he has the greatest upside of anyone in the rotation and I'd hate to see that chance missed. So I guess it would be Porcello - but what do you do with him? Trade him to upgradfe Rusney? And it would effectively end any hopes of breaking in Owens this year.

I really don't see Shields as an improvement on anyone in the rotation.
I'm a little unclear on whether you mean that Shields would not be an improvement on Porcello. To me, there's nothing to talk about between the two. Shields has made 31 starts in 2007 and either 33 or 34 in every year since 2008. His career ERA is in the 3s. Now it's true that Porcello has also been quite dependable in the starts made category but it took a late season surge last year to push his ERA below 5. It's also true that I don't what they would do with him. But Dombrowski is on record saying that money (invested by the previous regime) would not drive roster decisions. Whether it's regarding Panda or Porcello or both, it would be nice to see that theory in action. If you can get Shields,* either slot him in for an injured guy (at the time) or jettison the most under performing starter not named Price or Rodriguez.

* Yep, this stems from Nick Cafardo. So your mileage may vary on whether there is anything at all to the possibility.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
11,547
If the Sox can move Panda for Shields straight up, I do that in a heartbeat. Let Shaw play 3b (with Brock being the backup play if Shaw doesn't work out), and have Sam Travis possibly ready to fill in at 1b should something happen to Hanley. Shields can take Rodriguez' spot in the rotation for the time being, which gives them, what, a month, to figure it all out. Something will happen such that they'd probably need six legit starters anyway.

Shields vs. Porcello, FWIW...

Career era+, whip, k/9
Shields: 109, 1.23, 7.8
Porcello: 96, 1.36, 5.8

Last three seasons era+, whip, k/9
Shields: 115, 1.25, 8.1
Porcello: 98, 1.29, 6.8

Last season era+, whip, k/9
Shields: 93, 1.33, 9.6
Porcello: 87, 1.36, 7.8

In other words, in no world is Rick Porcello better than James Shields, even with Shields' down year last year. The only real argument to be made for Porcello is that Shields is at a point age-wise where he may be experiencing the big decline, while Porcello is young enough still to expect improvement. But based on track record, it's not really close. Even last year Shields, while not good by his usual standards, was still better than Porcello.