We are not really trying to be absolutely fair when evaluating fameness, people playing on good team are advantaged, people that could shine because of lower competition some year and get an Art Ross will be advantaged and so on. If someone prime is timed to make him look good and participated into how famous it ended up to be, so be it.
The 98 and after being so different than 96 and before in scoring make that method also quite less than ideal. that the good side of comparing the same bunch of year's, you compare them playing in the same nhl environment.
That type of work, clearly seem the best at least in what is attempted:
Reference - VsX comprehensive summary (1927 to 2018)
For their seven best year's
Oates: 86.2
Reechi: 84.3
Francis: 84.2
Fleury: 82
Roenick: 81.2
Sundin: 79.9
H. Sedin: 79.5
Turgeon: 78.9
kariya: 78.6
Modano: 77.7
Federov/Gilmour: 77.1
Career point:
Modano: 1,286
Sundin: 1,284
Oates: 1,282
Turgeon: 1,200
Roenick: 1,128
Fleury: 1,011
For some of the names that came up.
Really similar, Sundin/Modano/Turgeon is basically a tie offensively for their 7 year's prime, career the 2 other have about one more good season, Oates had a higher prime according to this.
Looking at those VsX, Turgeon certainly has a case.