Really? Then why does every single NFL team have these charts that provide value for different picks and they trade accordingly? Are they all deluded? To me, that's evidence that pretty much every single team would far rather pick at 5 than 8, 11 or 14. I would bet all the money I have (so around $50) that you'd never get a response that is contrary to that from anyone who knows what they're talking about. This isn't Fantasy Football where indeed you may get better value picking at #7 than you would at #1. But that's of course in a "snake" draft, the opposite would be true if it were similar to an NFL draft. So what NFL teams do in the real world tells you that you're completely wrong.
And no, I'm not going to attempt to "prove" your nonsensical proposition - if you make it, the onus is upon you to prove it.
Having dispensed with your first line, the rest of your post is reasonable. I don't think that they should deliberately tank for the #1 pick unless we were in need of a QB since those are the only positions worth that sort of a tank. I'm not even of the opinion that they should deliberately "tank", it's just the reality we face when we're this weak on the OL and up the middle of the Offense and Defense due to injuries and felonies.
My main point is "let's play Maye but when the OL is at least going to provide some level or protection and we're not up against the monsters on defense who could potentially injure our QB or destroy his confidence". I'm all for that happening in London, for example, if the OL can keep Jacoby relatively upright on Sunday. How Brissett performs is irrelevant to my thinking. Whether we win or lose is not a major consideration. Insert Jim Mora "PLAYOFFS!?!?!" video.