I don't see why you should count games when we're comparing many different schedules. Seasons makes more sense.
Loob played 13 years in Europe at ages 17-22 and 29-35, and 6 in the NHL at ages 23-38.
Naslund played 10 years in Europe at ages 17-22, and 31-34, and 9 in the NHL at ages 23-30, and 35.
Kamensky played 10 years in Europe at ages 17-24 and 37-38, and 11 in the NHL at ages 25-35.
- Kamensky seems like an easy exclude candidate for me. Yes it looks like he spent an even amount of time in Europe and the NHL, but this includes three pretty meaningless seasons: 20GP as a 17 year old, 12 points as an 18 year old, 23GP as a 37 year old. Throw in two more seasons early in his career when was outside of the top 20 scorers and the 11 straight years in the NHL look a little more compelling.
- Loob and Naslund returned him earlier than Kamensky, but they also left earlier.
Leaves for NHL: Loob and Naslund 23, Kamensky 25
Returns to Europe: Loob 29, Naslund 31, Kamensky 37
I believe Loob and Naslund's abilities to add meaningful seasons to their Europe-only career after their time in North American is more important than Kamensky getting an extra two seasons in Europe at ages 24 and 25.
I counted second division seasons for Loob and Naslund. Effectively, Loob returned home two years before Naslund did and didn't return for a final year in the NHL. Do the two extra seasons during Naslund's prime years make enough of a difference to exclude him, but include Loob? Personally, I'm interested in exploring Loob's SHL career so my answer to that question is biased.