I've nearly completed my introductory Eastern Front Reading List.
Deathride is the only one of the five that I wouldn't recommend reading. The author's argument is that it's nothing short of a miracle that the Wehrmacht was defeated by the Red Army, that Hitler's strategic assessment of the Eastern Front was entirely rational, and that the war didn't begin to turn against Germany until the 6th Army's surrender at Stalingrad. His argument would be compelling if it didn't omit the most salient argument against Barbarossa: logistics. He focuses far too much on raw casualty figures and fails to recognize the complete inability of the Wehrmacht to sustain those operations in Soviet territory.
Operation Barbarossa makes a much, much more compelling argument that Barbarossa was always a total fantasy.
Stalingrad and
Leningrad are by far the most readable, and I would recommend them to anyone. I think there's a real value to reading the firsthand experiences of people who suffered in the manner these folks did.
Leningrad was truly heartbreaking at times. Like a mother describing in her journal how she killed her 1-year-old child to feed her 2-years-old child. Also, apparently there is a level of hunger where you're totally willing to boil wallpaper to separate the glue and eat it. No thanks; I'll just die.
Stalin is actually the first proper biography I've ever read. I enjoyed it, but I enjoy memoirs more I think. Stalin was an interesting figure. Not what I expected. The juxtaposition between total brilliance and completely irrational narcissism is something.