I just don't understand the questioning of who should be drafted. You take the highest player on your board.
Highest player on the board is the question, based upon evaulation.
My board would have evaluation of player 1-100, plus position 0-20, plus intellingence 0-20, plus injury history 0-20, plus intangibles 0-? all of this minus the number of the person in the position that I currently have on the team.
Ex. Joe Burrow might be graded a 90 plus 20 for position plus 20 for intelligence, plus 20 for no injuries ever, plus 20 on intangibles. so he gets a 170. Minus Dak that I will rate a 80 --- so Burrow goes on my board as 90.
Chase Young might rate a 85 plus 18 for position plus 15 for intelligence (no clue), plus 20 for no injuries and 20 on intangibles. So he gets for 158. Minus Gregory/Smith/Crawford/Armstrong/Jackson/Jelks -- which the top score is 35 so Young hits my board at 123.
So Burrow might be the better player, but Young better for the team as constructed, and much higher on the board. If done for enough of these, you just take them off the board as they fall, but remember that if you draft one and it is a larger number than the current player, then you have to put the draftees number in instead of the current player. IE in the above scenario, if you drafted Young, that number to subtract on the next DE would be 85 and not 35.
Done my way, you only have to worry with the evaluation of the players both current and draftable. How well you evaluate both your team and the draftees determines how much gain you have on the team. It also allows for more important positions like QB and DE to be more important than K.
How you weight position, intelligence, injury history, etc determine how good the your board really is.
In the end, you always take the top player on the board, as you have already taken into account position and need.