While I understand the logic some apply to not wanting or providing stats for "official" named characters, there's one thing about them having stats that I've found tremendously helpful at times: it provides a benchmark frame of reference should you need to give an example the players can relate to. For instance, being able to say, "About the same proficiency with the Force as Luke on Hoth." If you have those stats of Luke's available, that parallel can be drawn to the stats of a PC or NPC.
The simplest answer is there is no such benchmark. Mostly this is due to the way the game is designed, it's completely open-ended. In theory you could play until you had every spec and power, which runs into thousands of XP. Meanwhile, some prefer to stat, say, Obiwan as a starting character, accounting for his on-screen abilities as good rolls on a minimum of dice; while others might give him hundreds or thousands of XP.
Also, the cap of playability depends on how you play the game. You can easily set up a combat god that will max out in short order and leave little room to grow in that regard; or you can keep a PC at the baseline stats, spending only on skills and talents.
So if FFG provided stats, they'd be putting a straight jacket on their open-ended, play it as you like it system. I can't see why they'd want to do that.