I wouldn't... but some would...

Question is, "How much of the ratings drop-off from RG to Tannehill is attributable to inexperience; his thin resume?" Physically he's close on the measurable. I'm guessing the same is true of the Wunderlich.

Point is when we have no idea how the final rating is derived, it's hard to figure how far a ten-point gap should drop draft position.

@ballpeen said:

Fair enough.....my point is he isn't worth the 4th selection.

What I took away from those rankings 'Peen is Tannehill is a huge reach at #4.

I realize the guy isn't Megatron but come on...

2nd round we g0 receiver....maybe Sanu....Hill may drop to that spot.

I think a RT is high on the list. Even higher if we go back in round 1, and I don't see any way we take Blackmon over Richardson.

My reasoning is this. Richardson might be the top back of any back in the last 10 years. That could be challenged, I agree, but he is up there with any and all.

Blackmon might possibly be a 2nd round pick in some receiver classes over the last 10 years. He may be the best this year, but he isn't a #4 overall pick. I'd take a lot of players before I'd take him.

@louisville-slugger said:

If we got Richardson, J. Martin, and S. Hill I would assume the world was coming to an end. That just looks too good to be true.

I would prefer Randle to Hill. He seems to be a better fit for the WCO. Hill seems like a deep threat we will not be able to utilize

@dawginit said:

Just to correct some of you logic... But if Martin is ranked 22nd and the Browns take him at 22, that's not a value pick. That's the correct pick. If he was ranked 10th and they got him at 22, then that's a value pick. Good stuff though.

OK, yes, I may have said "good" meaning "correct". Not a reach at least, per these grades.

#4 Richardson, #22 Martin and #37 Randle or Hill would make me very happy.