Very interesting post! I have suggested that chess.com should offer some easy access collection of canonical games. I think you're on the right track suggesting different game collections for different rating levels.
Another interesting ideas would be to try to annotate the games and to save the notes.
Example: study the games of Morphy/Andersson as a 12-1400 player and "revisit" those games and your own notes when you reach the hights of, say 1653.
I belive in feedback loopes.
Just as one would not tell a beginner to do a deep-dive into a Dvoretsky book, thought it might be helpful to ask which flavor/era of Master games are worth going over at different levels?
For example ... I'm a 1700 USCF player and can really get a lot of value from the 1900-1950s era of games but am completely lost with the subtleties (and oodles of theory) involved in any GM game from the last decade.
If I were to take a stab at mapping the era to the "rating level", I would say :
The Morphy/Andersson era for 1200-1400 level players, anything upto the 1980s would help sub-1800 players, and perhaps every decade thereafter would serve as instructional for subsequent classes of players, given that the availability of theory seems to have exploded since computers arrived at the scene.
Hoping for a better educated opinion from the hive!
Thanks in advance!