No, there isn't any logic to it.
There's zero reason to believe you need to draft a WR round 1 AT ALL much less to be your WR3.
In fact over the past 5 seasons rounds 2 and 3 have provided BETTER WRs than round 1.
You didn't even get marginally better players, you actually got worse players in round 1.
There are also a glut of vet options in free agency right now.
The Pats just added Marqise Lee a few minutes ago but others will be there after the draft.
WR doesn't run dry.
WR3 in the NFL does NOT have round 1 value.
Not even close.
2019 Pro Bowlers:
DeAndre Hopkins* (1, 27), Houston Texans;
Tyreek Hill*(5,165), Kansas City Chiefs;
Antonio Brown (6, 195), Pittsburgh Steelers;
Keenan Allen (3, 76), Los Angeles Chargers;
JuJu Smith-Schuster (2, 62),
Pittsburgh Steelers (sub for Brown) ;
Jarvis Landry (2, 63),
Cleveland Browns (sub for Hopkins),
Julio Jones (1, 6)*, Atlanta Falcons;
Michael Thomas* (2, 47), New Orleans Saints;
Adam Thielen (UNDRAFTED), Minnesota Vikings;
Davante Adams (2, 53) , Green Bay Packers;
Mike Evans (1, 7),
Tampa Bay Buccaneers (sub for Jones);
Amari Cooper (1, 4),
Dallas Cowboys (sub for Thomas)
DAL ALREADY has the highest drafted WR in the 2019 Pro Bowl. They gave up R1 last year for him.
The Pro Bowl is littered with non R1 picks.
You got 1000 yards from W3 last year (that cost you nothing but 4M) and missed the playoffs.
So, no, there is NO logic suggesting you need to draft WR3 at 17 unless you are a goofball.
Anyone wanting to replace a 4M WR3 with one drafted at 17 because 1000 yards receiving wasn't good enough for this team to make the playoffs has ZERO idea how to team build.
They are the kinda dumb you gotta put on ignore.