In one word: no. First there is no standard for running power. As mentioned in an other thread garmin measures 1/3 more watt than Stryd. And this is not only because Stryd seems to be a 2d and Garmin a 3d powermeter.
The first is best no matter how much watt he needs. Easy. You cant compare cycling power with running power. If you generate more power on a bicycle you ~will be faster. If you jump higher at every step (higher vertical oszilation) you generate more power but run slower.
Power is not some kind of index that can be compared. It also doesn't change with the distance of a run. It is an indication of energy expenditure (power is expressed in Watts which is defined as Joules per Second) and will depend on your pace, weight and running efficiency in addition to environmental factors (slope, wind).
Find out what power somebody does for say 32 for a man or a sub 36 for a woman then you would have a good idea of what a very good amateur athlete can do. Look at sub 28 or 32 if you want to make a living out of the sport.
Alternatively continue to judge how good an athlete is by their times in races!!!
The difference between a 2d and a 3d powermeter is not the accelerometer. If Stryd would use a 2d accelerometer the adjustment of the foot pod would be nearly impossible and a turn of your foot would have big influence. The difference is if the power value is only for two directions (direction of movement and up/down) or if it includes 3rd direction (left/right).
