You could also argue that trading for Deebo makes sense because he's a known commodity. A good example is the Bills trading for Diggs. That move instantly raised Josh Allen's game and in short order they were conference contenders. Now, that wasn't the ONLY move that got them there, but it was a big part of it - they spent a lot of capital on a known #1 WR for their QB still on a rookie deal to elevate his game and the whole team. That type of WR doesn't hit free agency all that often. Logically, saying "just draft one" seems to make way more sense, but the draft's a crapshoot too - the guy(s) you draft may be the next Harry, you've blown your high pick(s) and you're no better off, when you could've used the high pick(s) on a trade for a known commodity. Yeah there's a financial impact, but that's the price of taking most of the risk out of the equation.
Speaking personally, I wouldn't make the move, but I can see the argument either direction. I don't buy into the "MUST HAVE TRUE #1 WR OR ELSE" mindset and would prefer a more balanced overall roster with better depth but that's just my opinion.