Parsing through that long-winded screed,
First, don't talk down to me about "long-winded" when it lies with you that you wanted to pursue the topic. And, at least I respect you enough to think you're intelligent enough to engage.
Some people like you prefer conclusions and very scant reasoning to support the conclusion. The more people we have in the world like that, that becomes a problem... flimsy conclusions come from shallow rationale... good conclusions come from solid rationale... and rationale? I regret to inform you since you appear to have an allergy to it, requires word count.
Aside from any of that, that's a dead giveaway that a person feels a rhetorical need to attack the person (for being long-winded or otherwise) because they don't feel their rationale on its own can stand the test. I don't make the rules. That's just how it gets perceived among the intelligent readership.
Parsing through that long-winded screed, you made one actual point "we're studying something that is by its nature inherently subjective."
I'll grant you this much of that... I have no clue what credentials any single one of those sites' person(s) who built the rankings brings to the discussion. They could be just another Joe Schmo, or they could have be people who have been or are so well-regarded that a team has employed them as a scout.
Silly and lazy?
My opinion, those are silly and lazy terms one uses when s/he is not so much interested in a genuine dialogue as s/he is to demagogue a discussion.
So, "silly," no, but it is accurate as I've just said that all we really know about all of them as a group is that they all appear to be very invested in offering such an intelligent perspective on the NFL draft that they can build up some following... and, additionally, that they have indeed built-up some following, otherwise the Google algorithm wouldn't push the sites to the top.
"Lazy?" Well, crucify me, but I'm a Joe Schmo whose opinion has never been so highly regarded that others would pay me for my scouting reports... and secondly, a Joe Schmo for whom this is a recreational/entertainment pursuit, and "draft expert" is not barely close to something I desire to be discussed about me at my funeral.
So, technically, I suppose "lazy" fits. But it's not as-if I feel any desire to apologize for that. To the contrary, I would feel more inclined to apologize if I were investing the limited amount of time I have on this earth trying to make a name for myself as a scout. Nothing against scouts at all... I appreciate that they're there because it serves my entertainment interests, and if that's how they feel compelled to use their time, that's for them to decide, not me.
What is preventing you from doing your own analysis?
I'm going to answer this straight up, but in a couple of ways, okay?
First, I could do that, and it would probably be somewhat satisfying to say that I did so, and that everyone here including yourself should listen to my opinion.
But then, would you?
First, would you take me for my word that I did that? Maybe, maybe not. Second... and most saliently... should you care about my opinion? Maybe... depending on my, um, credentials... ie, my background/history that would establish why my opinion should have any regard. So, you might want to know... very legitimately so... what is that background/history???
Have I been employed as a scout... ie, did someone else think so highly of my capacity to study and analyze players that they actually offered to pay me for my opinions? Or, failing that, is there empirical evidence that I have poured myself into that kind of study and work, and am not merely barking some conclusions arrived at based on a YouTube highlights clip, but rather, several hours of film study of entire games???
So, no, actually, since I can't claim any of that, it's less about being lazy or silly, and more about using the resources already given to me at my disposal, and allowing the power (in the precise statistical term sense of that term) of sheer number of people online who have attained some degree of following to help me assess what the value of player X is relative to what the other players in the draft are.
And wrapping up, EVEN IF I DID perform my own analysis, and EVEN IF I DID have some gravitas and credentials that would compel you and others to give a damn what I think... I'm a humble enough soul that I STILL would want to compare my own assessment of the value of the players to what others had surmised.
Why is there anything wrong with that?
I mean, other than the fact it doesn't appear to serve your evidently desired conclusion that we shouldn't even care about assessing value of players X versus Y versus Z since you so like player X and/or have complete confidence that player X was the best option at #19?
And tying that back to my original question, we just inherently disagree if you REALLY think it's invalid to even pursue the question. I'm suspicious that's not actually how you think about it, but you just can't figure out any other options other than the "silly and lazy" one that I chose to evaluate the question... but that, by seemingly your own admission, should be a smarter approach to assessing value than using mock drafts to come to a solid conclusion.
With that, today is both a moving day for me and the wife, and Day 3 of the draft... pardon me that I'll leave the last word to you and/or others. This is all the time I have for this discussion, unfortunately.