HRE-I think the exercise has value even if the actual prospects are not the same. Having outlined my reasons for Tunsil as my pick, I then ask myself, do the factors that drove this pick translate down to actual prospects available at our pick at #27? I think it does. While I see DT as a need, when I go back to the question, who would I take if I could have anyone, and why, then I see our need for a solid and flexible option at OL outweighs our need at DL. The hinge point I believe in my particular selection is whether the pick is an instant upgrade or not. I believe Tunsil is. However, if this doesn't translate down to who might be left when we actually pick, then the equation then changes as well.
For instance, if I get all that benefit from Tunsil, would the 2nd, 3rd or even 4th option provide the same benefits as he, if at a lower level of expectation. If not, does this then mean I get more return if I pick a DT at that point.
I think there is plenty of DL options in this draft to wait to get solid contributors where I don't see that same depth at OT. After last year's exposure of this weakness, and next year's coming lineage of OL FA's, I see this as a more critical need, now and long term and I think we can secure someone solid in Rd. 1 where it's more of a roll of the dice later on.
So no matter what your pick would be, the reasoning behind it should translate down to the actual prospects available, or at least, have a good chance of doing so.