Actually, conceptually it is not bad.
You can hit homeruns with anything as long as it is well executed, as long as the basics are respected: simple, easily identifiable and unique. In fact, it could be a nice source to start designing a stylized, minimalist, abstract figures that could end up becoming a nice logo at the end of such process.
A good example that I like for its simplicity is Kraken.com’s logo, these kind of designs are deceptively simple, but are the hardest ones to come about. That seemingly stupid looking logo, must have gone through several iterations to get to that point. Also, it must be highlighted the creativeness of going away from the “Bit-something” unintentional naming convention that inundates the space due to lack of creativity.
Choosing “Kraken” as the name of a bitcoin exchange is something totally unrelated and yet catchy, this is a great example of lateral thinking, which is also not easy to do.
In fact one of the most recognizable logos is Twitter’s bird, or the Space Invader’s arcade logos.
Animal based logos/mascots can be very effective as it elicits empathy.
As I said, it is not a bad idea at all to move away from the obviousness, as long as it can be easily recognizable and unique.
It is very common to get stuck on the linearity of thoughts and be logically trapped. Most if not all Bitcoin Exchange must have brainstormed about their brand names, and they most definitely threw words that are related to that space: “finance, bitcoin, economy, exchange, technology, blockchain, coin, money, payment” and its values “safe, fast, secure, decentralized, etc…”
And very fast it became saturated with boring names: COINbase, BITpay, itBIT, BITstamp, BTC-e, COINdesk, BITgo, BITreserve, etc…
It is really not bad at all to try to think outside of the box, in fact it is more likely to hit homeruns thinking out of the box.