Fabregas is a very interesting case for me, mainly because of how people try and rewrite his legacy in the PL. I've noticed the same thing with Gerrard too, perhaps its something to do with not winning a league title at Arsenal.
While his style of football changed towards the end of his time at Arsenal, in his first four years, he was very much like Xavi, he controlled midfields whether he was in a 2 or 3 man midfield but also have the legs to win the ball and get scrappy in midfield. He also performed in the big games, he had notable midfield dominating performances vs us, Juventus, Real Madrid and AC Milan. Whenever he was fit he dominated passing stats in the league and that was while Scholes was still in the PL. People forget but in Ronaldo's unbelievable 2007/08 season, Fabregas was just as good as Ronaldo for two thirds of the season until Arsenal fell apart.
Barcelona was a bad career move and the main reason why I feel he doesn't get the respect he deserves, because of the comparisons to Xavi and Iniesta. Even when his legs were gone he came to Chelsea and had two great seasons and got the silverware his performances in England deserved.
In response to the OP, yes and no. His trophy haul is elite and played for big clubs but at 17/18, the thought was he would have been what Xavi/Inesta became.
I still say he's the best passer in PL history. Only player who could make the Scholes/Alonso passes but also the Ozil/Silva kind, while maintaining high pass completion percentages.