None of them were thrown into the deep at the age of 20. They were already established and well taught defenders. It feels kind of premature to compare their careers to Holding’s. And despite Wenger’s shortcomings, more so due to the lesser competition at the time, they were always part of the 3rd/4th best team in England.
Holding is part of a fully dilapidated team, that even average players of Chamberlain or Walcott’s ability consider below their level and want out. A team that is certainly lacking in quality in every department compared to it’s rivals. Completely disorganized, different set up every game, unreliable and error-prone midfield defensive unit, players played out of position all the time, no one to look up to or learn from because everyone is made a fool every now and then despite their experience, age or quality and everyone looks out of place and confused at least once in 5 games. He did get a great few games at the beginning of last season and I don’t feel he got undeserved credit for it. Since then he has had to swim through shit and I feel there is a manager in a boat near him using a paddle to keep him in the shit.
Stones wasn’t at all all that impressive at Everton as well as last season at City, he was very error prone and ill-disciplined tactically, giving the ball away at critical areas and making shocking decisions. I’ll reserve judgement on him too until he first-teams throughout a season or two for City.
Again, I’m not comparing Holding to Stones. One of them is more experienced, tested and valued. But I don’t see a whole lot of talent setting them apart and it’s the circumstances, tuition and opportunities for growth that will make one of them much better and successful than the other.