In the 5 or 6 season stretch, Charlie Conacher other than AST honours received only a 2nd and 4th place Hart consideration.
Indication that he was viewed by 1930s voters as prolific but not key.
As peak point producers he and Apps were approximately equal. But there's something not captured in the point totals that the Hart voters of the time could see. Defensemen and goalies removed, Apps finished 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd in Hart voting. Conacher was 1st and 3rd.
I know Apps wasn't great defensively - he said so himself. It doesn't look like Conacher was, either. Conacher wasn't exceptionally punishing or a "everywhere at once" wrecking ball like a Bill Cook, yet he had a reputation for toughness. Apps was a leader and gentleman and had a Beliveau-like Aura to him. Did he get Hart votes for the mythical "stud factor" that some HF posters have complained Messier received too often? It's really hard to say.
Was it the team success he enjoyed? Conacher enjoyed just one cup in 7 seasons, with three finals losses and a semifinal loss. Apps lost three finals too, but he won four cups, serving as captain for all four of them.
Was it playoff production? Off the top of most people's heads they'd say Conacher was an underwhelming playoff scorer and Apps a playoff stud. That overrates Apps while underrating Conacher. In a 20-game minimum sample, during Conacher's 7-year Toronto career, his 26 pts are 1st and his 0.63 PPG is 93% as high as the #2 guy. With Apps, it's not apples to apples. He's got the 2nd most playoff points from 37-48, and 7th in PPG (just 56% of #2) but this includes three WW2 seasons in which he didn't play, and the guys who did (who were ahead of him in PPG) had a combined 98 points in 78 games (1.25 PPG) in those playoffs, in which Apps was unable to play.
Was it performance relative to team? Doesn't seem likely. Conacher had 1.03 PPG in his Leaf career, to Jackson's 0.87 and Primeau's 0.83 over the same time. Apps had 1.02 in his career, with the next highest who didn't feast during WW2 being Drillon at 0.93 (in a sample half the size).
Was it due to a better player at another position getting the credit? Conacher had an elite puck moving defenseman getting him pucks in King Clancy. The Leafs had Pratt who exploded for a few years, but Apps missed basically that entire burst. He had no one of note. He may have had an easier time being seen as the "it" guy on the team than Conacher did, and his team was far more successful despite his teammate disadvantage.
It's hard to show exactly why it happened the way it did, but Apps should definitely be seen as the better all-time Leaf because his Hart voting record is too comparatively strong to ignore. It would be revisionist to put Conacher ahead. And I'm not even sure that I want Apps in this round.