I'm still assuming that we traded back up to #6 to take a Receiver. That is the conventional wisdom and I agree with it, even though I would NOT have made this move. I would have stayed @12 and only traded up if it looked like I was going to miss out on Parsons, Pitts AND Sewell. I would have kept the extra #1 and rolled the dice, just like I counseled that we should do with Tua last year when so many wanted us to trade up to make sure that we got him.
I still think there is an outside chance that Parsons falls down to 12 and that would have been my play. If I would have missed out on all three, then I would have moved on to Chase, Waddle, or Paye. As you can see, I have players ranked in tiers and I am comfortable taking players from different positions in different spots.
Many fans here say, we have to take a receiver first... we neeeeed it. I completely reject that sort of thinking. This approach causes teams to reach, and to overpay. Yes, we need a receiver, but there are different kinds of receivers available and this is a very deep group. If my top remaining tier has only defensive players and O-Linemen in it, then I'm going to take one of those and come back to receiver later. Heck, we have 4 picks in the first 2 rounds... it isn't like the draft is gonna run out of talented guys.
Oh... and I think Detroit will go WR.