Now take another breath and repeat this: minor league batting stats do have predictive power. Bill James showed this long ago and later researchers have built on it. Of course, this doesn't deny your larger point that Gordon should not be written off. Indeed I suspect a competent stats analysis will classify Gordon as having a very high ceiling. He's putting up the stats at age 19, as you said. That's what a critic would be overlooking, that the age differential is huge. He's got miles of room to grow as a player. Brett Doe, a catcher on the same team, is putting up better numbers. But he's 25 years old, playing single-A ball. He's surprised people, but does anyone suppose him to be a legitimate prospect? I know we're on the same side of this question. I'm just suggesting there's a better way to express it. Unless Gordon decides to stop improving at age 22, he's got a chance to arrive in the majors as a productive player and then keep improving.