That’s because you are drastically overrating Bateman. I am generous by saying if you look at every teams roster he would be in the bottom 1/3 for a WR2. WR3 is a giant game of “well maybe him” but that part isn’t that unusual.
Most teams have a Bateman. That guy who can make a couple plays but is too inconsistent to really be relied on. For most teams though that is WR3 not WR2.
Correct, most teams do have a Bateman. And for most teams, he's their #2 WR.
Where are the names? Who's the #2 WR (or even the #1) on the Bills, Patriots or Chiefs, and what metric did you use to determine they were better or worse than Bateman? Same exercise for the Steelers, the Texans, etc.
In the AFC alone (as of today):
Jets, Dolphins, Patriots, Browns, Titans, Colts, Raiders for certain don't have a second WR better than Bateman on their roster. And I'd easily suggest the Bills and Chiefs are basically "on par" in that area. So that's 9 out of possible 15 comparables where the #2 WR on that team is equal to or worse than Bateman.
The only teams that would definitively be better are the Chargers, Broncos, Steelers, Jaguars, Bengals and Texans. And I think the Texans are fringe because their second best WR is Tank Dell, who missed all of last season basically, so no idea if he's even still good or not.
In case it wasn't clear to people, the AFC is pretty weak from a WR perspective. The NFC has a ton of teams with loaded receiving cores, which largely doesn't matter for the Ravens, because they're only playing those teams once every four years, roughly.