The fact is that nobody cares. Career points are longevity/durability measure, that's all they are good for.
If you are trying to argue that Crosby is somehow durable without being all that durable, that's a strange argument to make.
Both Ovechkin and Crosby provided about the same amount of offense over the course of their careers. If one looks at goals/primary points, Ovechkin provided maybe 7% more.
Neither one seems up to something incredible like beating Jagr in career points and starting chasing Gretzky. Both look to be on their way to making top10 ever in career points, which means both played for a long, long time and stayed pretty good.
In the end though, no one cares that Dionne has more career points and a higher career ppg than Lafleur. Well, yeah, we know Lafleur declined faster, and career points/ppg reflect that, but that's not what defines their comparison.
Unless the edge in longevity is massive (e.g., Selanne vs. Bure) or someone's longevity is out of this world (see Jagr/Howe), longevity is not that big of a deal.