To be fair, I did read your article and even actually linked it within the discussion thread. The votes were done blindly, so nobody knew what anyone else had voted when they voted. We all came to the conclusion of Mars individually.
@Renomitsu I appreciate what you're saying and I didn't mean to say that efficiency should either be the only thing considered or thrown out entirely, merely that I ranked it very low on my personal set of criteria. A big reason for this is that having someone taking on a bigger role and therefore more minutes is actually a big bonus in my mind, even if they didn't take on the linearly related amount of points.
For instance, take the NHL Calder race this year into consideration. Pettersson won, as he should have, but Andreas Johnsson actually finished 2nd place in points/60 among rookies, while being relatively close to people like Tkachuk, Dahlin, Heiskanen, etc in scoring, he finished something like 7th in voting for the Calder, in large part due to his reduced role on the team. Tkachuk and Dahlin received extra votes because of the amplified roles that they played on their team, resulting in lower efficiency but higher minutes played. Jaguar was very tight to Mars for me in my decision making, but in the end, I didn't think that the difference in minutes was enough to overturn the difference in goals for me, and the minutes played was actually a benefit to Mars' candidacy in my mind, because he obviously was required to take on a more important role on his team.
Please remember, the grand majority of these awards are subjective, so while you may disagree upon the criteria that someone used to evaluate other players, but it doesn't make them idiotic just because they don't think the same way you do.