Outside of everything else that i disagree with you on - the one huge flaw in your playoff analogy that you don't seem to consider is that - more games played for player 1 is a net benefit for that player, and too bad for the other guy.
Not all opportunities are created equal in the playoffs. Those who play on better teams (for top players - often they are major contributors to those better teams to begin with, and some of that merit falls on them accordingly) and end up playing more playoff games and more playoff rounds - well it will be a differentiator vs those who play less games/less rounds by virtue of playing on weaker teams/teams who don't succeed as much.
So basically - Crosby, and Malkin, both easily have better overall playoff resumes than Ovechkin. You can't and shouldn't try to ignore games played in the playoffs.
Games played (and wins) is a huge reason why Patrick Roy is in conversation for top playoff player ever. Yes he had some good teams - but was also a huge part in making those teams good.
So ~40 more playoff games + ~60 more playoff points for Crosby vs Ovechkin is obviously advantage Crosby.
You'd probably get farther in your Ovi > Crosby argument if you didn't waste time trying to spin every single point to Ovechkin's favor, some of which are ridiculous. It's almost surprising i've yet to see you say that Ovechkin > Crosby at being a center in the playoffs since he's won 71% of his faceoffs, vs 51% for Crosby..
We differ in that I think players should only get credit for things that are inside their control or otherwise attributable to their individual characteristics.
Crosby is lucky to have Malkin - the third best player of the generation - on his team. It is a huge advantage that is outside Crosby's control, and it has contributed significantly to Crosby's postseason games played.
A forward has some control over whether or not their team advances, but that control is limited - far more limited than most hockey fans realize. Hopefully we are in agreement on this. There is a mountain of evidence. Therefore, the credit they get for additional games played in the postseason should also be limited, and per game stats become more telling relative to the regular season where every player has an opportunity to play 82 games.
So yes I agree players deserve credit for additional playoff games played - but IMO it's limited to the extent that their per game contributions are superior when comparing players.
Over the course of their playoff careers, Crosby's team has scored significantly more than Ovechkin's when they are not on the ice.
There are instances where Crosby was a passenger and his teammates carried him to a playoff series win. There are zero instances where Ovechkin was a passenger and his teammates carried him to a playoff series win. Crosby's teams have advanced in 5 playoff series where Crosby had 3 or fewer primary points, including 1 series win where he had 2 primary points and another series win where he had zero primary points. That is just luck. Crosby had very little control over that. Crediting him because he got to play more games in those instances is too arbitrary.
For Ovechkin, that number is 1 - a series win where he had 3 goals. He never had a third line like HBK or anything close to that except for 2018 when the third and fourth lines contributed a good bit.
