Age/mesaurement/longevity/Consistency/physical tools/ injuries all matter. I feel Tua would be a better fit for us simply because his age would make it more viable to surive through a rebuild.
You can move the score card all you want, but they come about pretty even. One cost significantly more than he is worth. The other is more viable, younger, have an elite oline to cancel out his injury concern, and been performing close to Burrow level for 2 years vs. 1 year of Burrow They are the top two prospects by miles with their own pros and cons.
It's not matter of homerism. It's simply grading the prospect, viability and the fit. The main reason why Burrow is 2B... Is because we can't get him and Tua would cost half his cost.