I think value over replacement comes into play, especially for teams like St. Louis, Washington, and Cleveland. If you're sitting there with a top 10 pick and you've got NOTHING at WR, is it a reach to take a guy who looks like the next Nicks or Boldin? I don't think so.
Agreed. The bolded is absolutely my point.In STL's/CLE cases specifically, sitting at #2/#4 I would absolutely take the far rarer prospect in Griffin (CLE), Claiborne or Kalil at positions that are arguably just as big a need as WR.
At #6, I'd probably say the same thing and apply it to Tannehill, Reiff, or Kirkpatrick.
Just think those positions and prospects are more foundational needs for the respective teams and would prefer to pair them with a later WR vs. Blackmon and a later prospect at those positions.
Additionally your observation would read much differently if it read "a guy who looks like the next Crabtree/Bowe/Bryant/Britt" who, again, I personally think are better comps than Nicks. Boldin, who outside height/weight I see as a very different type of WR, would be debatable.
Lots of different ways to skin a cat. Personally, I just don't see his value being in that top 15 range, doesn't mean he's not a good player.