You could take a season in say the 1980's where Gretzky might get 205 points and then the next 10 guys have between 108 and 99 points. The 5th,6th and 7th place guy could be tied at 103 points and the 8th and and 9th guys have 102 and 101 points. It seems silly to rate the guys with 1 more point as being so much more dominant. Especially if some of the guys had huge playoffs other did not. One guy might be an elite defensive forward as well as getting 102 or 103 points while another guy is horrible defensively. If Rob Brown and Ron Francis and Steve Yzerman get the same number of points clearly one of them is not the 2-way player the others are.
It'd be incredibly difficult to do, but it'd be interesting to factor in the standard deviation of the top-x number of players. For example, coming in second when two players are far ahead of the pack would be worth more than coming in second when there are five guys who are close together.