I really hope one season doesn't decide that.
For all of the Connor vs. Ehlers talk there is really no comparison between the two.
Connor is more durable, scores more, racks up more points, and is more effective in the playoffs.
Outside a weird outlier in the back half of the season before last, Connor is a machine. He's not without his flaws, and we know what they are, but for a guy who is paid to produce he rarely disappoints. If you're investing in a player, do you select the model of consistency that plays practically every game every year, or the guy who has really good narrow stats but is oft injured, goes into long slumps, and disappears in the playoffs?
If you're picking Ehlers, you're showing your bias (which is fine).